2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.

Bonuses will be _____ from last year

Up
62
61%
Unchanged
34
33%
Down
6
6%
 
Total votes: 102

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Old Gregg » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:16 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:


IMO the most important match will be the first firm with a PPP under $2M.



Not really

run26.2
Posts: 896
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:35 am

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby run26.2 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:24 pm

WhirledWorld wrote:Firms that currently match the STB associate compensation structure will be expected to fall in line or admit not being peers with STB or PW.

I think it is not as much an admission as it is being willing to run the risk of being thought of as not being a compensation leader. Cravath not matching Skadden in 2008 is the prime example. Also, some of the top Vault firms do not pay the highest bonus to clerks which, though different than regular bonuses, lends support to the notion that they believe their reputation is in some ways divorced from their bonuses.

User avatar
B.B. Homemaker
Posts: 3452
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:00 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby B.B. Homemaker » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:24 pm

zweitbester wrote:
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:


IMO the most important match will be the first firm with a PPP under $2M.



Not really

Care to expand a bit? I'd be interested to hear your theory on that.

User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Monochromatic Oeuvre » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:56 pm

zweitbester wrote:
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:


IMO the most important match will be the first firm with a PPP under $2M.



Not really


If not, you're suggesting it's a foregone conclusion that everybody is matching this.

KM2016
Posts: 198
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:20 am

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby KM2016 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:58 pm

Safe to say that most (maybe even all) firms with $2mil + PPP will match? Maybe even start a bidding war?

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Old Gregg » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:13 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
zweitbester wrote:
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:


IMO the most important match will be the first firm with a PPP under $2M.



Not really


If not, you're suggesting it's a foregone conclusion that everybody is matching this.


I don't think me denying your original conclusion necessitates this. Think harder.

User avatar
B.B. Homemaker
Posts: 3452
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:00 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby B.B. Homemaker » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:16 pm

Oh, so Cravath.

User avatar
Desert Fox
Progressively loosing literacy
Posts: 14411
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Desert Fox » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:19 pm

B.B. Homemaker wrote:Oh, so Cravath.


I'd assume he means 2M PPP is an arbitrary line and many firms below it can afford and will pay it.

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby 2014 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:19 pm

How do y'all think the conversation at Paul Weiss went down? Like Simpson clearly had the chance to talk this out at a partners meeting but given the timeline from PW and it being a Friday, the odds of them being able to get a physically present quorum has to be not great right? Wonder if they have a list of firms they have a standing agreement to match, whether the compensation/management committee just made the unilateral call that they were sure would be made anyway, or whether there was like an urgent email/phone campaign saying "you have 10 min to object" or something.

Probably the only one curious about this shit lol

User avatar
Desert Fox
Progressively loosing literacy
Posts: 14411
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Desert Fox » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:20 pm

2014 wrote:How do y'all think the conversation at Paul Weiss went down? Like Simpson clearly had the chance to talk this out at a partners meeting but given the timeline from PW and it being a Friday, the odds of them being able to get a physically present quorum has to be not great right? Wonder if they have a list of firms they have a standing agreement to match, whether the compensation/management committee just made the unilateral call that they were sure would be made anyway, or whether there was like an urgent email/phone campaign saying "you have 10 min to object" or something.

Probably the only one curious about this shit lol


I doubt they have every partner vote on it.

User avatar
B.B. Homemaker
Posts: 3452
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:00 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby B.B. Homemaker » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:21 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
B.B. Homemaker wrote:Oh, so Cravath.


I'd assume he means 2M PPP is an arbitrary line and many firms below it can afford and will pay it.

See, this is better than the whole socratic "figure it out for yourself" method of posting.

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby sinfiery » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:26 pm

Do bonuses get added onto a paycheck (aggregate method - marginal tax rate) or are they their own check? (Percentage method tax - 25%)?

http://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/2013/11 ... alculator/

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Old Gregg » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:38 pm

B.B. Homemaker wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
B.B. Homemaker wrote:Oh, so Cravath.


I'd assume he means 2M PPP is an arbitrary line and many firms below it can afford and will pay it.

See, this is better than the whole socratic "figure it out for yourself" method of posting.


Sorry. I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm just too busy to type a long post about this only to have someone come back and argue with like three lines, and then for me to go back and do the same. But DF was getting at it (and there are a whole host of other reasons too, I think). Overall, his statement is just wrong. It's also dumb. But it's bonus season and we're all emotional, so everyone gets a bye.

run26.2
Posts: 896
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:35 am

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby run26.2 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:51 pm

2014 wrote:How do y'all think the conversation at Paul Weiss went down? Like Simpson clearly had the chance to talk this out at a partners meeting but given the timeline from PW and it being a Friday, the odds of them being able to get a physically present quorum has to be not great right? Wonder if they have a list of firms they have a standing agreement to match, whether the compensation/management committee just made the unilateral call that they were sure would be made anyway, or whether there was like an urgent email/phone campaign saying "you have 10 min to object" or something.

Probably the only one curious about this shit lol

You think the partners at the different firms don't talk to one another?

User avatar
Desert Fox
Progressively loosing literacy
Posts: 14411
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Desert Fox » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:53 pm

run26.2 wrote:
2014 wrote:How do y'all think the conversation at Paul Weiss went down? Like Simpson clearly had the chance to talk this out at a partners meeting but given the timeline from PW and it being a Friday, the odds of them being able to get a physically present quorum has to be not great right? Wonder if they have a list of firms they have a standing agreement to match, whether the compensation/management committee just made the unilateral call that they were sure would be made anyway, or whether there was like an urgent email/phone campaign saying "you have 10 min to object" or something.

Probably the only one curious about this shit lol

You think the partners at the different firms don't talk to one another?


Colluding on compensation sounds pretty risky.

mvp99
Posts: 1384
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:00 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby mvp99 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:06 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
run26.2 wrote:
2014 wrote:How do y'all think the conversation at Paul Weiss went down? Like Simpson clearly had the chance to talk this out at a partners meeting but given the timeline from PW and it being a Friday, the odds of them being able to get a physically present quorum has to be not great right? Wonder if they have a list of firms they have a standing agreement to match, whether the compensation/management committee just made the unilateral call that they were sure would be made anyway, or whether there was like an urgent email/phone campaign saying "you have 10 min to object" or something.

Probably the only one curious about this shit lol

You think the partners at the different firms don't talk to one another?


Colluding on compensation sounds pretty risky.
Last edited by mvp99 on Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

run26.2
Posts: 896
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:35 am

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby run26.2 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:07 pm

It need not even be mentioned that many biglaw firms already set compensation at the same level: 160. They could easily set up structures in advance to deal with an early mover, e.g., voting in advance to approve a match of any other firm's announced bonuses up to a certain amount. Doing this would make sense for a firm that was having a great year, but was perhaps not mentioned among the very top firms and were hoping to improve their reputation in that regard. Not saying this is what happened, but it's one way it could have.

mvp99
Posts: 1384
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:00 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby mvp99 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:14 pm


Hutz_and_Goodman
Posts: 1413
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:42 am

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Hutz_and_Goodman » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:18 pm



This is such great news. Even if the firms are desperately clutching at $160k starting this kind of bonus structure makes a difference.

mvp99
Posts: 1384
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:00 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby mvp99 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:21 pm

and I think Cleary's hasn't been doing extremely well this past couple of years

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Old Gregg » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:32 pm

It has nothing to do with doing well. Biglaw firms don't act like businesses.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:35 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
2014 wrote:How do y'all think the conversation at Paul Weiss went down? Like Simpson clearly had the chance to talk this out at a partners meeting but given the timeline from PW and it being a Friday, the odds of them being able to get a physically present quorum has to be not great right? Wonder if they have a list of firms they have a standing agreement to match, whether the compensation/management committee just made the unilateral call that they were sure would be made anyway, or whether there was like an urgent email/phone campaign saying "you have 10 min to object" or something.

Probably the only one curious about this shit lol


I doubt they have every partner vote on it.


Firms have comp committees. They mostly deal with partner comp but also determine associate salaries, bonuses, etc. Presumably the PW comp committee met (perhaps in an "emergency" meeting or just a phone call) and decided to match. It's also possible that they knew STB was going to increase bonuses beforehand, but I agree that's unlikely.

patagonia93
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2014 6:46 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby patagonia93 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:36 pm

Awesome. Pretty much guarantees every major New York player will follow. WILL CRAVATH, SKADDEN, S&C OR DPW TOP IT?!!!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:39 pm

sinfiery wrote:Do bonuses get added onto a paycheck (aggregate method - marginal tax rate) or are they their own check? (Percentage method tax - 25%)?

http://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/2013/11 ... alculator/


Separate check, at least at STB. Probably true at most firms.

User avatar
ExBiglawAssociate
Posts: 2089
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm

Re: 2014 Biglaw Bonus Thread

Postby ExBiglawAssociate » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:42 pm

patagonia93 wrote:Awesome. Pretty much guarantees every major New York player will follow. WILL CRAVATH, SKADDEN, S&C OR DPW TOP IT?!!!


No one will top it. Pump the breaks there, champ.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.