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: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 23, 2018 3:49 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:[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.[/quote][/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.[/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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:22 pm

Anonymous User wrote:[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.[/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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:[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.[/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.[/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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:18 pm

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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:26 pm

Anonymous User wrote: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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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

User avatar
nealric

Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:53 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby nealric » Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:17 am

Anonymous User wrote:
nealric wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:09 am

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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:22 am

Anonymous User wrote: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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:29 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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.

User avatar
jbagelboy

Diamond
Posts: 10276
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby jbagelboy » Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:37 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 11:03 am

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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote: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
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 2:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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!

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 2:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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!


Susman bonus is 1.5-2x market on average. Its above market, but not wildly so. But its not really about compensation; Susman offers trial experience to its litigators in a way that’s inaccessible from Davis Polk/ect., so if you want to be a real trial lawyer, Susman is boss

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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!


Depends on the year, but last year the Cravath bonus for a second-year (what Susman calls a typical first year) was $25,000. At Susman, the median for last year was $45,000. And the differential is better as you go higher. For example, last year class of 2013 on Cravath scale was at $65k and Susman class of 2013 was $100k median. Bonuses are almost always much higher than the market. Now add in the extra $5k in salary and the other "soft" factors that make working there pretty nice and I'd say it's worth it.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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!


Obviously rare, but I thought a first year got like a $150k bonus last year.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:12 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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!


Obviously rare, but I thought a first year got like a $150k bonus last year.


No, not quite that high unless you're somehow including the clerkship bonus in that.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:32 pm

Vault's Verdict wrote:Susman is incredibly selective in its hiring-incoming associates all have at least one federal clerkship-and many have two-under their belts. . . . Cases are extremely leanly staffed-generally there will be a single associate on any given case-and the associates will be expected to do work that would be reserved only for partners at most BigLaw shops. With this great responsibility, however, comes ridiculously long hours. There is no hours expectation, but many associates said the unspoken level is 2,500 hours and associates have no problem hitting that mark, though they are happy to have the flexibility and autonomy to work those hours largely when and where they want to.


Associate's Quote on Hours, per Vault wrote:There is no official [hours] requirement, but everyone works a ton (like 2,500+/year). A limited number of training hours count during your first few months at the firm. Travel and pro bono count.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:15 pm

Speaking of places where attorneys bill a lot of hours, does anyone on this board work at BSF and have insight onto if/when/how they are adjusting the formula to reflect the new market base compensation? If so please share!

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 24, 2018 11:38 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Vault's Verdict wrote:Susman is incredibly selective in its hiring-incoming associates all have at least one federal clerkship-and many have two-under their belts. . . . Cases are extremely leanly staffed-generally there will be a single associate on any given case-and the associates will be expected to do work that would be reserved only for partners at most BigLaw shops. With this great responsibility, however, comes ridiculously long hours. There is no hours expectation, but many associates said the unspoken level is 2,500 hours and associates have no problem hitting that mark, though they are happy to have the flexibility and autonomy to work those hours largely when and where they want to.


Associate's Quote on Hours, per Vault wrote:There is no official [hours] requirement, but everyone works a ton (like 2,500+/year). A limited number of training hours count during your first few months at the firm. Travel and pro bono count.


This sounds like a nightmare. Literally. In this case, my time would be worth far more than prestige. No way would I work like this. NO WAY!

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:28 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Vault's Verdict wrote:Susman is incredibly selective in its hiring-incoming associates all have at least one federal clerkship-and many have two-under their belts. . . . Cases are extremely leanly staffed-generally there will be a single associate on any given case-and the associates will be expected to do work that would be reserved only for partners at most BigLaw shops. With this great responsibility, however, comes ridiculously long hours. There is no hours expectation, but many associates said the unspoken level is 2,500 hours and associates have no problem hitting that mark, though they are happy to have the flexibility and autonomy to work those hours largely when and where they want to.


Associate's Quote on Hours, per Vault wrote:There is no official [hours] requirement, but everyone works a ton (like 2,500+/year). A limited number of training hours count during your first few months at the firm. Travel and pro bono count.


This sounds like a nightmare. Literally. In this case, my time would be worth far more than prestige. No way would I work like this. NO WAY!

People generally don't go for the prestige; they go for the ability to actually try cases early early in their career. Susman (and, for that matter, its peer firms) attracts a specific type of person--entrepreneurial, confident, and hard working. Some thrive, while others don't.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:27 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Vault's Verdict wrote:Susman is incredibly selective in its hiring-incoming associates all have at least one federal clerkship-and many have two-under their belts. . . . Cases are extremely leanly staffed-generally there will be a single associate on any given case-and the associates will be expected to do work that would be reserved only for partners at most BigLaw shops. With this great responsibility, however, comes ridiculously long hours. There is no hours expectation, but many associates said the unspoken level is 2,500 hours and associates have no problem hitting that mark, though they are happy to have the flexibility and autonomy to work those hours largely when and where they want to.


Associate's Quote on Hours, per Vault wrote:There is no official [hours] requirement, but everyone works a ton (like 2,500+/year). A limited number of training hours count during your first few months at the firm. Travel and pro bono count.


This sounds like a nightmare. Literally. In this case, my time would be worth far more than prestige. No way would I work like this. NO WAY!

People generally don't go for the prestige; they go for the ability to actually try cases early early in their career. Susman (and, for that matter, its peer firms) attracts a specific type of person--entrepreneurial, confident, and hard working. Some thrive, while others don't.


And there are plenty of people who are all of those things as well as attentive, loving, and devoted....meaning giving this much time to their career means neglecting other things in their lives (e.g. children, spouses, friends, etc.). The people who thrive are probably those who have nothing else to live for and/or don't care enough about other areas of their lives. If they are married and/or have kids, I'd love to see what they think about their choices, 5, 10, and 15 years from the day they chose that path.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:00 am

Let's get back to the important things in life like what CA firms are matching this week.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324649
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NYC to 200k

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:02 am

And which DC/Boston merger firms are matching today.



Return to “Legal Employment?

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.