NYC to 200k

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:53 am

Anonymous User wrote:some columbia grad used "columbia/yale" unironically as a way to refer elite law schools.


I would like a link to this thread if possible

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:54 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:It is unbelievable that Gibson and Latham--two of the best, most profitable, and most prestigious firms in the country--have not matched, while firms like Morgan Lewis have. Associates at Gibson, Latham, and similarly profitable firms that have not matched must be quite perturbed.


Perturbed...you must have gone to Columbia/Yale.


Because Columbia and Yale have so much in common.


Can someone explain this "Columbia/Yale" thing I keep seeing on TLS these days?

jbagelboy, a Columbia alum who thinks Top 6 prestige matters a lot while also thinking CCN is essentially equal to HYS, claimed “Yale/Columbia” alums have better exit options than everyone else in Big Law. viewtopic.php?p=10314226#p10314226
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:55 am

Anonymous User wrote:I'm a former feeder clerk who is in DC and I find all this posturing by legacy DC firm-people ridiculous. Kirkland and Gibson are probably the best places to go in DC of you want to do actual litigation. Lol @ picking Covington over either unless you really want regulatory work and lol @ signing up for undercompensation at W&C. Also avoid Kellogg unless you're eyeballs deep in debt and want to make a deal with the devil to get out of it. Total sweatshop.


I'm at one of those legacy DC firms, agree with you, and think most people agree with you. Kirkland and Gibson are probably on par with W&C when it comes to litigation, and Covington and Hogan are both a (small) step down. I aimed for Cov/HL/AP because of perceived "quality of life" of being in HQ and not working for a NY firm. So far the stereotype has proven true--I have it pretty good.

But if Cov/HL/AP had been paying less when I was doing OCI I would've low-bid them if at all. No question the extra money would've made the difference. At my T10, the DC shops of Gibson, Latham, S&C, even Paul Weiss were all considered just as good and just as competitive as Cov/HL/AP. They competed for (and got) all the same students. There were other people who picked a "DC firm" because of perceived quality of life but I cannot think of a single lawyer I know who thinks their legacy/prestige is worth $$$.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:09 am

Seems odd that Brown Rudnick supposedly matched but no one on here has confirmed it and ATL has not posted about it.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:10 am

if the DC legacy firms actually don't match then this "prestige" thing will sort itself out immediately, because every 2L in OCI will know that a classmate who took an Arnold & Porter or Hogan offer at 180 didn't get one from the 190 Skadden/Kirkland/etc. crew in DC and the new hierarchy will set up real quick. T-13 2Ls are the most prestige conscious people on the planet with the possible exception of T-13-bound 0Ls. They will set the order based on cash.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:11 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I'm a former feeder clerk who is in DC and I find all this posturing by legacy DC firm-people ridiculous. Kirkland and Gibson are probably the best places to go in DC of you want to do actual litigation. Lol @ picking Covington over either unless you really want regulatory work and lol @ signing up for undercompensation at W&C. Also avoid Kellogg unless you're eyeballs deep in debt and want to make a deal with the devil to get out of it. Total sweatshop.


I'm at one of those legacy DC firms, agree with you, and think most people agree with you. Kirkland and Gibson are probably on par with W&C when it comes to litigation, and Covington and Hogan are both a (small) step down. I aimed for Cov/HL/AP because of perceived "quality of life" of being in HQ and not working for a NY firm. So far the stereotype has proven true--I have it pretty good.

But if Cov/HL/AP had been paying less when I was doing OCI I would've low-bid them if at all. No question the extra money would've made the difference. At my T10, the DC shops of Gibson, Latham, S&C, even Paul Weiss were all considered just as good and just as competitive as Cov/HL/AP. They competed for (and got) all the same students. There were other people who picked a "DC firm" because of perceived quality of life but I cannot think of a single lawyer I know who thinks their legacy/prestige is worth $$$.


Exactly. And the partnerships at these top DC firms must know that. Even if they want to believe that there are meaningful differences between DC-based firms and firms in DC that are based elsewhere, the partnerships must know that their perceived prestige will only take them so far at OCI, with laterals, and with their current associates.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:15 am

Part of the deal in big law is that you work very hard for very long and often unpredictable hours. In exchange, you don't have to concern yourself with lateraling for salary reasons, because your firm pays you well and equal to the top of the market.

Millbank's first move was almost two weeks ago. And yet some top firms have not matched, though their associates continue to work those long, unpredictable hours.


Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:19 am

LaTTTham is officially a V5 firm and still hasn't matched associate salaries LOL

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... ?sRankID=2

User avatar
jbagelboy

Diamond
Posts: 10256
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby jbagelboy » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:24 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:It is unbelievable that Gibson and Latham--two of the best, most profitable, and most prestigious firms in the country--have not matched, while firms like Morgan Lewis have. Associates at Gibson, Latham, and similarly profitable firms that have not matched must be quite perturbed.


Perturbed...you must have gone to Columbia/Yale.


Because Columbia and Yale have so much in common.


Can someone explain this "Columbia/Yale" thing I keep seeing on TLS these days?

jbagelboy, a Columbia alum who thinks Top 6 prestige matters a lot while also thinking CCN is essentially equal to HYS, claimed “Yale/Columbia” alums have better exit options than everyone else in Big Law.


Thanks for this admirably shameless distortion of an unobjectionable point about the lateral market from a very brave anon. It should be painfully obvious that in no way are two top schools offered as illustrative examples exclusive of others

Ps. In what sense did this post “reveal[] sensitive employment related information about a firm” or constitute anything vaguely resembling appropriate anon use

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:29 am

Anonymous User wrote:LaTTTham is officially a V5 firm and still hasn't matched associate salaries LOL

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... ?sRankID=2


Wow. With the exception of the non-conformers (Wachtell, W&C, etc.) every top 25 firm that hasn't matched is based in Cali (#5 Latham, #9 Gibson, #22 Paul Hastings, #24 MoFo) or DC (#15 Covington, #20 WilmerHale, #25 Hogan Lovells). I think I get DC, it's been discussed here ad nauseam. But where the hell is Cali?!

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:31 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:LaTTTham is officially a V5 firm and still hasn't matched associate salaries LOL

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... ?sRankID=2


Wow. With the exception of the non-conformers (Wachtell, W&C, etc.) every top 25 firm that hasn't matched is based in Cali (#5 Latham, #9 Gibson, #22 Paul Hastings, #24 MoFo) or DC (#15 Covington, #20 WilmerHale, #25 Hogan Lovells). I think I get DC, it's been discussed here ad nauseam. But where the hell is Cali?!


the munger move will push gibson/latham, which will push DC

User avatar
hoos89

Gold
Posts: 2044
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:09 pm

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby hoos89 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:32 am

Anonymous User wrote:Seems odd that Brown Rudnick supposedly matched but no one on here has confirmed it and ATL has not posted about it.


Probably because they no offered anyone suspected of posting on TLS.

Right2BearArms

Bronze
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 3:48 pm

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Right2BearArms » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:34 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:LaTTTham is officially a V5 firm and still hasn't matched associate salaries LOL

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... ?sRankID=2


Wow. With the exception of the non-conformers (Wachtell, W&C, etc.) every top 25 firm that hasn't matched is based in Cali (#5 Latham, #9 Gibson, #22 Paul Hastings, #24 MoFo) or DC (#15 Covington, #20 WilmerHale, #25 Hogan Lovells). I think I get DC, it's been discussed here ad nauseam. But where the hell is Cali?!


the munger move will push gibson/latham, which will push DC


Munger had 0 effect on Gibson/Latham. They were both going to move as soon as STB matched.

No idea about Gibson, but Latham has to have a firm wide vote on crap like this, and is currently without a chair person. Anyone surprised they are being this slow doesn't work there. Both firms will match by the end of the week.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:06 pm

Very interesting that the only holdouts in the Vault 25 are all DC or California based, particularly because all of those firms have offices in locations where the market has already moved and because there are firms headquartered outside of DC and California that have matched in their DC and California offices.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:09 pm

Right2BearArms wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:LaTTTham is officially a V5 firm and still hasn't matched associate salaries LOL

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... ?sRankID=2


Wow. With the exception of the non-conformers (Wachtell, W&C, etc.) every top 25 firm that hasn't matched is based in Cali (#5 Latham, #9 Gibson, #22 Paul Hastings, #24 MoFo) or DC (#15 Covington, #20 WilmerHale, #25 Hogan Lovells). I think I get DC, it's been discussed here ad nauseam. But where the hell is Cali?!


the munger move will push gibson/latham, which will push DC


Munger had 0 effect on Gibson/Latham. They were both going to move as soon as STB matched.

No idea about Gibson, but Latham has to have a firm wide vote on crap like this, and is currently without a chair person. Anyone surprised they are being this slow doesn't work there. Both firms will match by the end of the week.


Chair person or not, how hard is it for Latham to convene a conference call to vote on something this obvious? No way they don't match.

User avatar
NakedPowerOrgan

Bronze
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby NakedPowerOrgan » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:32 pm

NakedPowerOrgan wrote:Wall of Shame for Firms Yet to Announce:

    Fried Frank ($2.94MM PPP, 55.3% L5Y PPP growth, 2.9 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    1. Latham ($3.25MM PPP, 24.8% L5Y PPP growth, 3.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    2. Paul Hastings ($2.91MM PPP, 28.4% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    3. Akin Gump ($2.39MM PPP, 35.5% L5Y PPP growth, 2.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    4. King & Spalding ($2.61MM PPP, 23.8% L5Y PPP growth, 2.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    5. Shearman & Sterling ($2.32MM PPP, 34.4% L5Y PPP growth, 2.6 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    Vinson & Elkins ($2.36MM PPP, 37.7% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    6. Gibson Dunn ($3.24MM PPP, 13.3% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    6. Schulte ($2.56MM PPP, 17.7% L5Y PPP growth, 2.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    8. Dechert ($2.68MM PPP, 21.7% L5Y PPP growth, 3.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    8. Wilmer ($2.12MM PPP, 31.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    Cooley ($2.08MM PPP, 28.3% L5Y PPP growth, 2.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    10. Baker Botts ($1.84MM PPP, 26.0% L5Y PPP growth, 1.9 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    11. Alston & Bird ($1.93MM PPP, 11.0% L5Y PPP growth, 1.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    Kramer Levin ($2.15MM PPP, 22.2% L5Y PPP growth, 3.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    12. Sheppard Mullin ($1.71MM PPP, 26.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    13. Cadwalader ($2.51MM PPP, 5.6% L5Y PPP decrease, 4.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    14. McDermott ($1.71MM PPP, 14.8% L5Y PPP growth, 1.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    14. Mayer Brown ($1.58MM PPP, 27.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    16. Fragomen ($1.98MM PPP, 23.9% L5Y PPP growth, 4.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    17. Katten ($1.57MM PPP, 16.6% L5Y PPP growth, 1.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    18. Greenberg ($1.63MM PPP, 16.8% L5Y PPP growth, 2.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    18. MoFo ($1.74MM PPP, 15.3% L5Y PPP growth, 2.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    18. O'Melveny ($2.01MM PPP, 2.6% L5Y PPP decrease, 3.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    18. Orrick ($1.86MM PPP, 12.5% L5Y PPP growth, 3.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    22. Fish & Richardson ($1.63MM PPP, 8.9% L5Y PPP growth, 1.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    22. Covington ($1.54MM PPP, 18.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    24. Fenwick ($1.51MM PPP, 23.7% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
    25. Jenner ($1.42MM PPP, 5.2% L5Y PPP decrease, 1.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)


A new day for some more shame.

User avatar
NakedPowerOrgan

Bronze
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby NakedPowerOrgan » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Very interesting that the only holdouts in the Vault 25 are all DC or California based, particularly because all of those firms have offices in locations where the market has already moved and because there are firms headquartered outside of DC and California that have matched in their DC and California offices.


Yeah, although there are still NYC firms (Shearman, Schulte, and Dechert) and firms in smaller markets (King & Spalding, Baker Botts, and Alston & Bird) that are profitable enough where matching should be a no-brainer.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:53 pm

NakedPowerOrgan wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Very interesting that the only holdouts in the Vault 25 are all DC or California based, particularly because all of those firms have offices in locations where the market has already moved and because there are firms headquartered outside of DC and California that have matched in their DC and California offices.


Yeah, although there are still NYC firms (Shearman, Schulte, and Dechert) and firms in smaller markets (King & Spalding, Baker Botts, and Alston & Bird) that are profitable enough where matching should be a no-brainer.


Isn't Dechert a Philly firm?

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:56 pm

does anyone have information on whether firms are imposing any criteria for the mid-summer bonuses? IE are these related to your pace?


User avatar
NakedPowerOrgan

Bronze
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby NakedPowerOrgan » Wed Jun 20, 2018 1:01 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
NakedPowerOrgan wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Very interesting that the only holdouts in the Vault 25 are all DC or California based, particularly because all of those firms have offices in locations where the market has already moved and because there are firms headquartered outside of DC and California that have matched in their DC and California offices.


Yeah, although there are still NYC firms (Shearman, Schulte, and Dechert) and firms in smaller markets (King & Spalding, Baker Botts, and Alston & Bird) that are profitable enough where matching should be a no-brainer.


Isn't Dechert a Philly firm?


Yeah, maybe. I thought they were historically a Philly firm but have since rebranded themselves as an "international firm with no headquarters." They listed their NYC address on their Vault form, and NYC is now their largest office, by a sizable amount.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 1:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:does anyone have information on whether firms are imposing any criteria for the mid-summer bonuses? IE are these related to your pace?

My firm is imposing an hours requirement that is calculated using the same calculation for prorating hours of someone who joined mid-year. It's generally a little more than 2x your billable + pro bono hours (since by the end of June there will have been 181 days elapsed). You get some credit for client development and working on firm publications, but they aren't prorated. The prorated minimum is 1950.


Anonymous User
Posts: 316303
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 20, 2018 1:57 pm

Only one question remains: wtf are Latham and Gibson doing? Hard to fault other firms when they haven't moved.



Return to “Legal Employment?

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.