NYC to 200k Forum

[Anonymous User]

NY/SF/LA/DC- 190
Boston/Chicago/Houston/Dallas - 180
ATL/Denver/Seattle - 170
Philly/Charlotte/Miami - 160

Seriously just shut the fuck up and stop giving markets excuses not to move. Nobody cares about what you think the pay should be.

[Anonymous User]

NY/SF/LA/DC- 190
Boston/Chicago/Houston/Dallas - 180
ATL/Denver/Seattle - 170
Philly/Charlotte/Miami - 160

Seriously just shut the fuck up and stop giving markets excuses not to move. Nobody cares about what you think the pay should be.

Didn't realize managing partners are browsing TLS, checking out what anons think before deciding whether or not to dish out a raise

[jbagelboy]

Im finishing my clerkship soon and starting at a firm that hasnt matched yet, and its v frustrating

Anyone have thoughts on why clerkship bonuses have remained stagnant for awhile (minus a few firms) even though base salaries continue to rise?

They haven't. Some firms are paying more for CAFC and some firms offer larger bonuses.

If by “some firms” you mean a handful of extreme outliers, then sure. But beyond Quinn, Susman, and Kellogg Hansen, none come to mind. For nearly every clerk navigating the market, bonuses have remained stagnant at 50/70 for years

[Anonymous User]

My sense is firms don’t think clerks actually bring much value, and they’re probably right. If clerks leave around year four-five anyway, that’s just one or two years you weren’t able to bill them out

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User]

NY/SF/LA/DC- 190
Boston/Chicago/Houston/Dallas - 180
ATL/Denver/Seattle - 170
Philly/Charlotte/Miami - 160[/quote]

No. Boston is arguably more expensive to live in than LA and DC (those three cities are essentially equal). And Boston is significantly more expensive than Chicago/Houston/Dallas

But, all cities matter, so all cities should get 190k.

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User]

NY/SF/LA/DC- 190
Boston/Chicago/Houston/Dallas - 180
ATL/Denver/Seattle - 170
Philly/Charlotte/Miami - 160

No. Boston is arguably more expensive to live in than LA and DC (those three cities are essentially equal). And Boston is significantly more expensive than Chicago/Houston/Dallas

But, all cities matter, so all cities should get 190k.[/quote][/quote]

1) why have you not shut the fuck up?

2) why do you suck at quoting?

[Anonymous User]

Here's to hoping the rest of the top firms that haven't matched yet so so on Monday and without being cheap by putting up hurdles to the bonuses. Associates and summer associates at my firm are growing more dissatisfied.

Yeah and they better get their act together fast. Morale here is sinking and it just feels like the firm doesn’t value the associates.

As someone whose firm didn't match until way later than necessary (last day or two of this past week), I 100% feel you. But I also guarantee you, when the memo hits inboxes, morale problems disappear in a heartbeat and everyone feels plenty valued.

Stay strong (and/or keep bitching, which is what I did), and good luck!

[Anonymous User]

As someone whose firm didn't match until way later than necessary (last day or two of this past week), I 100% feel you. But I also guarantee you, when the memo hits inboxes, morale problems disappear in a heartbeat and everyone feels plenty valued.

That's not the way to do it. Harness and remember that discontent. Don't be like an abused girlfriend, who when the partner finally says sorry the next day, all is well in the world.

[Anonymous User]

As someone whose firm didn't match until way later than necessary (last day or two of this past week), I 100% feel you. But I also guarantee you, when the memo hits inboxes, morale problems disappear in a heartbeat and everyone feels plenty valued.

That's not the way to do it. Harness and remember that discontent. Don't be like an abused girlfriend, who when the partner finally says sorry the next day, all is well in the world.

Yeah, I definitely have not forgotten how long it took my firm to match.

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User]

NY/SF/LA/DC- 190
Boston/Chicago/Houston/Dallas - 180
ATL/Denver/Seattle - 170
Philly/Charlotte/Miami - 160

No. Boston is arguably more expensive to live in than LA and DC (those three cities are essentially equal). And Boston is significantly more expensive than Chicago/Houston/Dallas

But, all cities matter, so all cities should get 190k.

[/quote]

1) why have you not shut the fuck up?

2) why do you suck at quoting?[/quote][/quote][/quote]

1) if you’re going to be an asswipe and talk shit, how about you stop posting anon.

2) it’s saturday. You can avoid this thread. No one is going to announce today.

Stop getting angry over people talking about pointless shit on a forum. Sorry if your firm hasn’t raised, but you should just check Monday if you’re going to throw a temper tantrum.

[Anonymous User]

It’s not Chicago’s fault your cities have archaic regulations that don’t let new high rises get built. There are new buildings being constructed every day it seems.

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User]

NY/SF/LA/DC- 190
Boston/Chicago/Houston/Dallas - 180
ATL/Denver/Seattle - 170
Philly/Charlotte/Miami - 160

No. Boston is arguably more expensive to live in than LA and DC (those three cities are essentially equal). And Boston is significantly more expensive than Chicago/Houston/Dallas

But, all cities matter, so all cities should get 190k.

1) why have you not shut the fuck up?

2) why do you suck at quoting?[/quote][/quote][/quote]

1) if you’re going to be an asswipe and talk shit, how about you stop posting anon.

2) it’s saturday. You can avoid this thread. No one is going to announce today.

Stop getting angry over people talking about pointless shit on a forum. Sorry if your firm hasn’t raised, but you should just check Monday if you’re going to throw a temper tantrum.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

1) With language like that you may want to look in the mirror

2) Thread hijacking happens every day and it must be stopped. You're obviously not arguing that you're on topic so just take it somewhere else. Also people did announce over the weekend (Greenberg Gross last Saturday and Gunderson last Sunday). If you can't even get your facts straight how are we supposed to trust your opinion of what the Atlanta market should pay?

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User]

NY/SF/LA/DC- 190
Boston/Chicago/Houston/Dallas - 180
ATL/Denver/Seattle - 170
Philly/Charlotte/Miami - 160

No. Boston is arguably more expensive to live in than LA and DC (those three cities are essentially equal). And Boston is significantly more expensive than Chicago/Houston/Dallas

But, all cities matter, so all cities should get 190k.[/quote][/quote]
Pretty sure Boston is not more expensive to live in than LA. According to Zillow, you can get a 2 bedroom apartment for less than $1000 in Boston and a rather nice one for less than $1500. You’d be hard pressed to find a 2 bedroom in LA that isn’t a total piece of crap for less than $2000.

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User]

NY/SF/LA/DC- 190
Boston/Chicago/Houston/Dallas - 180
ATL/Denver/Seattle - 170
Philly/Charlotte/Miami - 160

No. Boston is arguably more expensive to live in than LA and DC (those three cities are essentially equal). And Boston is significantly more expensive than Chicago/Houston/Dallas

But, all cities matter, so all cities should get 190k.

[/quote]
Pretty sure Boston is not more expensive to live in than LA. According to Zillow, you can get a 2 bedroom apartment for less than $1000 in Boston and a rather nice one for less than $1500. You’d be hard pressed to find a 2 bedroom in LA that isn’t a total piece of crap for less than $2000.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

Where are you looking? Even in suburbs like 45 minutes outside of Boston you can’t find a 2 bedroom for under $1500 (and I’m not talking f about nice/safe areas).

An average studio in the seaport (where Goodwin is) is $2500 for like 400 sq ft. They range from like 2100 to 3500.

Edit: https://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental-ma ... pril-2018/

Obviously there are a ton of sites that rank rent. But Boston and LA are similar in most. I said Boston is arguably more expensive than LA, not definitively.

[Anonymous User]

Love how this thread has degenerated into an asinine comparison of costs of living when, even with a pay raise, associates are paid less than 1/5 of the $1M+ of revenue they're billed out for. Anyone earnestly arguing for less pay can suck it.

[Anonymous User]

Love how this thread has degenerated into an asinine comparison of costs of living when, even with a pay raise, associates are paid less than 1/5 of the $1M+ of revenue they're billed out for. Anyone earnestly arguing for less pay can suck it.

You wouldn’t collect a fraction of that if you weren’t at a biglaw firm. Good luck convincing F500 companies to pay $600 an hour for your “services”

[Anonymous User]

Love how this thread has degenerated into an asinine comparison of costs of living when, even with a pay raise, associates are paid less than 1/5 of the $1M+ of revenue they're billed out for. Anyone earnestly arguing for less pay can suck it.

You wouldn’t collect a fraction of that if you weren’t at a biglaw firm. Good luck convincing F500 companies to pay $600 an hour for your “services”

But we are in biglaw.

120

[nealric]

As to Shearman, open up your Vault rankings, click rankings history to see older rankings and click 2007 or 2008, they used to be ranked in the top 20. They used to be ranked even in the top 10 back in late 90s or early 20s.

Wow you weren't kidding, recession must've hit them hard

Yeah, people used to say "Shearman" in the same breath as S&C or Cravath. They seem to be going the way of Dewy Ballentine- a former white shoe firm that rested on its laurels.

The comparison to Dewey is misplaced. Dewey had financial difficulties and became bankrupt. Shearman incurred a damage to its reputation after the dotcom bubble burst and that's when the decline started.

Looking at the firm's performance over the past year as well as the perception changes, it seems like they stopped declining any further. It would be interesting to see if they can get back up to where they used to be.

I’m talking Dewy pre-merger. Dewy wasn’t in financial stress before the Lebeuf merger. They were a has-been firm with a still white shoe name and stagnating business, but not one in immediate distress (so far as we know). Lebeuf was a second tier firm specializing in utility companies that succumbed to delusions of grandeur. They thought they could buy a white shoe name and make it big time. What killed the firm is leveraging themselves to the moon in the attempt.

[Anonymous User]

Susman announced over the weekend. On salaries, going above the Cravath scale by $5k for all classes. No summer bonuses, but don't think that was ever really something associates seriously expected. Will likely be kept in mind at the end of the year, though.

[Anonymous User]

Susman announced over the weekend. On salaries, going above the Cravath scale by $5k for all classes. No summer bonuses, but don't think that was ever really something associates seriously expected. Will likely be kept in mind at the end of the year, though.

So now Susman is effectively below market for salary since its “first year associates” are all clerks.

[Anonymous User]

Susman announced over the weekend. On salaries, going above the Cravath scale by $5k for all classes. No summer bonuses, but don't think that was ever really something associates seriously expected. Will likely be kept in mind at the end of the year, though.

So now Susman is effectively below market for salary since its “first year associates” are all clerks.

Uh, no. A "first year" there is paid at what a second-year is at most firms. And to the extent you clerk for multiple years, salary is based on your law school class year even though you're still called a "first year" for partnership.

[jbagelboy]

Susman announced over the weekend. On salaries, going above the Cravath scale by $5k for all classes. No summer bonuses, but don't think that was ever really something associates seriously expected. Will likely be kept in mind at the end of the year, though.

So now Susman is effectively below market for salary since its “first year associates” are all clerks.

No

[Anonymous User]

So the new Susman scale starts "first years"* with one year of clerking at 205?

*Knowing that a Susman first year would be a second year anywhere else, but Susman won't give a year of class credit for clerking.

[Anonymous User]

So the new Susman scale starts "first years"* with one year of clerking at 205?

*Knowing that a Susman first year would be a second year anywhere else, but Susman won't give a year of class credit for clerking.

Yes, should be

[Anonymous User]

So the new Susman scale starts "first years"* with one year of clerking at 205?

*Knowing that a Susman first year would be a second year anywhere else, but Susman won't give a year of class credit for clerking.

Yes, should be

So what's a typical bonus for a Susman "first-year" associate? If their total year-end pay is just $5K more than typical Biglaw at a place like S&C or DPW, seems not worth it for all that extra work they have to do!