shoeshine wrote:rayiner wrote:shoeshine wrote:Does a first year associate ever do anything truly worth his/her $160k salary?
When a first-year is billed out at $250+, you can probably write off 60% of his hours and still turn a smal profit.
Also, again, salary is a first order function of supply/demand for associates with the desired credentials. It's only a second order function of how much they contribute to the bottom line.
So by this same logic, wouldn't the fact that there is a glut of qualified lawyers graduating from T-14s without jobs, and a decrease in the actual amount of big law positions available dictate that salaries should stay the same or decrease?
(I am referring to the trends over the last several years)
You have to consider the stratification of the legal market. At the end of the day, S&C isn't competing with lower-V100 for below-median T-14 grads. It's getting back to pre-ITE hiring levels, and competing with the other V10 which are also getting back to pre-ITE levels. The lower-V100 haven't bounced back, so there is still a glut of unemployed T-14 lawyers who would've been employed pre-ITE, but that doesn't really affect S&C's hiring. As long as they're not willing to go any deeper into the class than they used to, they need to steal people away from CSM/STB/DPW/etc. With their PPP back up at $3m, and the cost of bumping all associate salaries by $10k equating to just 1% of their PPP, if the lateral competition becomes fierce enough they very well could decide that bumping salaries would make them more profitable in the long run.