Covington perks/benefits Forum

[spicysalmonroll]

Can someone share the employee perks/benefits at Covington?
I'm interested specifically in gym membership (up to how much $, etc) and also mobile phone support. I know most firms pay for your phone bills, but will covington also pay for your actual literal phone? (I know some firms in NY will give you $1000 every 15 or so months so you can upgrade)

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Begrudgingly giving raises only after being dragged kicking and screaming.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone share the employee perks/benefits at Covington?
I'm interested specifically in gym membership (up to how much $, etc) and also mobile phone support. I know most firms pay for your phone bills, but will covington also pay for your actual literal phone? (I know some firms in NY will give you $1000 every 15 or so months so you can upgrade)

Cov perks/benefits are not good. Gym benefit is basically useless; no they won’t pay for your phone (at least that I know of!). I mean, it’s a firm with under $1.5m ppp last I checked that pays the same salaries and bonuses as firms with double that, so, that’s the deal. Also, in NY, there is legitimately no bonus minimum, in other offices there is (both in policy and reality) no max amount of pro bono that counts toward the minimum, and bonuses are truly lockstep with rare small exceptions.

To me, it’s been well worth it and an awesome place to work. The story they tell about how all the partners are collaborative and cross-sell each other instead of compete, and people are pretty gentle and respectful, is imo very accurate. But you’re going to get a bit nickel and dimed on the smaller stuff.

[QContinuum]

Begrudgingly giving raises only after being dragged kicking and screaming.

To be fair, last year they went to 190 (in all offices) in a very timely fashion.

And even back during the raise to 180, they only resisted the raise in D.C. They raised NY to 180 while attempting to hold the line in D.C., before they finally caved and also raised D.C. (Kind of flies in the face of Cov D.C. being more prestigious than Cov N.Y., but there you have it.)

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Idk I don’t think we should forget CovingTTTon being the first firm to proactively try and stop raises during the $160k hike, much like we don’t forget Lathaming. And they tried to stop it everywhere outside of NY, not just DC.

At this point, our view is that this increase in New York salaries does not reflect the prevailing market in Washington or other cities outside New York. Traditionally, associate salaries in New York have been somewhat higher than in other markets around the country.

A weak statement after firms like Weil, Milbank, etc. had ALREADY raised in all US offices. Bad look.

[Wild Card]

. . . much like we don’t forget Lathaming.

Latham is V5 now. How could "we" let this happen?

[Anonymous User]

Idk I don’t think we should forget CovingTTTon being the first firm to proactively try and stop raises during the $160k hike, much like we don’t forget Lathaming. And they tried to stop it everywhere outside of NY, not just DC.

At this point, our view is that this increase in New York salaries does not reflect the prevailing market in Washington or other cities outside New York. Traditionally, associate salaries in New York have been somewhat higher than in other markets around the country.

A weak statement after firms like Weil, Milbank, etc. had ALREADY raised in all US offices. Bad look.

People definitely don't bring this up enough. I'm in TX and 190k is sweet here, but if CovingTTTon successfully held the line on compressing non-NY compensation, it may have never happened for me and even I forgot about it until this post. CovingTTTon obviously does some cool shit in DC, but what a rancid TTT move that was to try to stem the tide.

[Anonymous User]

Covington anon from above. Agree the 180k move was awful, and I’m all for everyone shaming them as long as possible as a disincentive to anyone trying anything like again. (Indeed, they already seem a bit chastened in that they went to 190 without a fuss and were one of the few not hugely profitable firms to give summer bonuses to all associates, without hours limits or anything else, last year.)

As someone who really likes the firm, I’ll say I do think it’s slightly different than Latham: while they deserve all the shame you can heap on them, it’s not something I think should stop anyone from taking a job at Covington. I would legitimately be concerned about being a young associate at Latham when another recession hits, but I wouldn’t have similar worries about being at Covington. I suppose on the margins, you might be better off taking Wilmer because of the higher PPP.

That said, if I were really clear I wanted to be a litigator, and I had the credentials for Covington DC, I’d definitely try to go to somewhere that pays better. Covington has a good culture and a great mix of interesting work that a lot of other firms don’t do because it’s not that profitable (hence the being cheap). But if you just want to litigate, you will probably work your ass off at Covington, and will get paid way less than you would for the same hours at a place like Boies.

[Anonymous User]

Speaking as a young associate at Latham, Covington OP above is absolutely right. There's a clear difference between potentially not getting summer bonus/ going to 190, and having your career get destroyed by getting Lathamed.

At least in my office, they still fairly aggressively fire people. Even though the economy is good and people are busy, they still fire one or two associates a year per class, starting with the first years. Given that we don't have huge classes to begin with, it winds up being a material number of associates getting fired every year.

[QContinuum]

At least in my office, they still fairly aggressively fire people. Even though the economy is good and people are busy, they still fire one or two associates a year per class, starting with the first years. Given that we don't have huge classes to begin with, it winds up being a material number of associates getting fired every year.

Wait really? That's awful. Do you know if it's solely hours-based or is it also about working for the "right" (or "wrong," I guess) seniors?

[Anonymous User]

At least in my office, they still fairly aggressively fire people. Even though the economy is good and people are busy, they still fire one or two associates a year per class, starting with the first years. Given that we don't have huge classes to begin with, it winds up being a material number of associates getting fired every year.

Wait really? That's awful. Do you know if it's solely hours-based or is it also about working for the "right" (or "wrong," I guess) seniors?

It may be that the associate isn't up to Latham's snuff. I've never been across or co-defense counsel with Latham, but the experiences I have had with other firms makes me think they really aren't all created equal. Probably good and bad lawyers at every firm, but some places do seem to have better averages/deeper benches, and it's easier for an associate at one of these more competitive places to get shown the door if they really just aren't very good.

Note that getting fired from Latham in a good economy probably sucks and is inconvenient, but it won't be the end of the fired associate's career. Latham is probably high enough up that plenty of V100s will take a young Latham lateral. Bad economy or fired from lower V100 would be much worse story.