JD v. Hogan (both DC) Forum

[Anonymous User]

I don't think that's right. You'd have to look up their bios on linked and stuff, which I don't have time to do.

Good thing I did it for you! Here we go:

• Brittany B. (joined administration in 2017) - made $180k at JD (1st year - market was ~$185k ($180k plus prorated $15k bonus))
• Annie D. (2017) - made $260k at JD (6th year - market was $370k ($280k plus $90k bonus))
• James U. (2017) - made $170k at JD (3rd year - market was $260k ($210k plus $50k bonus))
• Stephen V. (2017) - made $315k at JD (9th year - market for 8th years was $415k ($315k plus $100k bonus))

In four cases outta four (or four outta five, including the $810k guy), JD pays under market. It starts out paying a teensy bit under market (as seen in Brittany's case), but the difference balloons as associates get more senior. Unless you're the $810k guy, JD pays, at most, equal market (Brittany and Stephen), excluding the bonus.

Thanks for doing this work.

Market = 185+370+260+415+370 (6th year $810 guy) = $1.6 million, divided by 5 = $320,000 average.

JD = 180+260+170+315+810 = $1.735 million, divided by 5 = $347,000.

So using this sample, Jones Day pays 9% more than market. Another advantage is that everyone at Jones Day knows they're worth what they earn. No superstars bitter because they're underpaid. Other associates not paranoid and looking over their shoulders, because they don't deserve their salaries.

Thanks again your numbers really drove the point home.

[I edited this to correct a math error.]

I actually laughed out loud at this one. At best, you can fairly (if not wisely) extrapolate this to say that JD pays above market for one in every five associates. Not to hijack this thread anymore than it already has been, but an $810K outlier does absolutely nothing for those of us that are trying to evaluate whether we might want to lateral to JD in a secondary market where JD at least starts well ahead of the top regional firms and is rumored to still crush the market at the mid and senior levels. Could we expect anything near the market increases for JD offices on the $170K scale? I feel like I keep shouting questions into a void.

[QContinuum]

I don't think that's right. You'd have to look up their bios on linked and stuff, which I don't have time to do.

Good thing I did it for you! Here we go:

• Brittany B. (joined administration in 2017) - made $180k at JD (1st year - market was ~$185k ($180k plus prorated $15k bonus))
• Annie D. (2017) - made $260k at JD (6th year - market was $370k ($280k plus $90k bonus))
• James U. (2017) - made $170k at JD (3rd year - market was $260k ($210k plus $50k bonus))
• Stephen V. (2017) - made $315k at JD (9th year - market for 8th years was $415k ($315k plus $100k bonus))

In four cases outta four (or four outta five, including the $810k guy), JD pays under market. It starts out paying a teensy bit under market (as seen in Brittany's case), but the difference balloons as associates get more senior. Unless you're the $810k guy, JD pays, at most, equal market (Brittany and Stephen), excluding the bonus.

Thanks for doing this work.

Market = 185+370+260+415+370 (6th year $810 guy) = $1.6 million, divided by 5 = $320,000 average.

JD = 180+260+170+315+810 = $1.735 million, divided by 5 = $347,000.

So using this sample, Jones Day pays 9% more than market. Another advantage is that everyone at Jones Day knows they're worth what they earn. No superstars bitter because they're underpaid. Other associates not paranoid and looking over their shoulders, because they don't deserve their salaries.

Thanks again your numbers really drove the point home.

[I edited this to correct a math error.]

Firstly, the "average associate" at JD does not make 9% over market. As seen in the data above, the average associate - somewhere in the 80% - makes substantially below market. It looks like salaries at JD are bimodal: The vast majority (80%) are substantially undermarket, with a small number of extreme outliers that drag the average up. This is just like law schools that report an "average salary" in the low six figures, when in fact salaries are bimodal and there are hardly any positions that actually pay the average. So saying "9% over market!" is deeply misleading because it suggests the average JD associate will make over market, when in fact the exact opposite is true.

Secondly, the "average associate" at a market-paying firm is not "paranoid and looking over their shoulders, because they don't deserve their salaries." Those salaries were set by the free market - the "average associate" did not somehow scam their way into being paid that amount.

[d3909615]

Firstly, the "average associate" at JD does not make 9% over market. As seen in the data above, the average associate - somewhere in the 80% - makes substantially below market. It looks like salaries at JD are bimodal: The vast majority (80%) are substantially undermarket, with a small number of extreme outliers that drag the average up. This is just like law schools that report an "average salary" in the low six figures, when in fact salaries are bimodal and there are hardly any positions that actually pay the average. So saying "9% over market!" is deeply misleading because it suggests the average JD associate will make over market, when in fact the exact opposite is true.

Secondly, the "average associate" at a market-paying firm is not "paranoid and looking over their shoulders, because they don't deserve their salaries." Those salaries were set by the free market - the "average associate" did not somehow scam their way into being paid that amount.

I agree with everything you wrote, except for two things:
1. Your claim that the other 80% of JD associates are paid "substantially under market." The beauty of the free market system, and at will employment, is that you can switch jobs with 2 weeks notice.
2. Your claim that senior associates in lockstep firms are not paranoid and looking over their shoulders. I don't want to go off topic into a discussion of "up or out" (or "up then out") but I trust everyone understands how this works. Being paid the same as everyone else in your class is not the same thing as being as valuable to the firm, as everyone else in your class. Those who are overpaid know who they are and it takes a psychic toll.

[rahulg91]

Firstly, the "average associate" at JD does not make 9% over market. As seen in the data above, the average associate - somewhere in the 80% - makes substantially below market. It looks like salaries at JD are bimodal: The vast majority (80%) are substantially undermarket, with a small number of extreme outliers that drag the average up. This is just like law schools that report an "average salary" in the low six figures, when in fact salaries are bimodal and there are hardly any positions that actually pay the average. So saying "9% over market!" is deeply misleading because it suggests the average JD associate will make over market, when in fact the exact opposite is true.

Secondly, the "average associate" at a market-paying firm is not "paranoid and looking over their shoulders, because they don't deserve their salaries." Those salaries were set by the free market - the "average associate" did not somehow scam their way into being paid that amount.

I agree with everything you wrote, except for two things:
1. Your claim that the other 80% of JD associates are paid "substantially under market." The beauty of the free market system, and at will employment, is that you can switch jobs with 2 weeks notice.
2. Your claim that senior associates in lockstep firms are not paranoid and looking over their shoulders. I don't want to go off topic into a discussion of "up or out" (or "up then out") but I trust everyone understands how this works. Being paid the same as everyone else in your class is not the same thing as being as valuable to the firm, as everyone else in your class. Those who are overpaid know who they are and it takes a psychic toll.

Lol you are so unhinged.

1. OP, you heard it from a Jones Day shill him/herself, if you go JD you can always quit and try to lateral within the first 2 weeks after you find out you'll be making less than a hogan lovells associate.

2. Jones Day is up or out too.

3. Most associates leave after 3-4 years (EVEN AT JONES DAY) so the only difference between being at JD and a peer firm is that you leave JD with LESS MONEY. Your quote about a "psychic toll" is absurd, I'm sure all these other associates are feeling terrible that they are paid commensurate with the market rate.

This person is a shameless JD shill that refuses to concede even basic truths (or basic math lmao). OP, Jones Day has a respectable litigation department. But they pay their associates below-market. You will take home more money at Hogan and the type of work you'll get will not be materially different.

[Anonymous User]

OP it seems like you're made for JD, so just go there lol. They want people like you who'll buy into the black box

[Anonymous User]

Is it confirmed/well known that they pay former clerks at market rate?

[Anonymous User]

Lol you are so unhinged.

1. OP, you heard it from a Jones Day shill him/herself, if you go JD you can always quit and try to lateral within the first 2 weeks after you find out you'll be making less than a Hogan Lovells associate.

2. Jones Day is up or out too.

3. Most associates leave after 3-4 years (EVEN AT JONES DAY) so the only difference between being at JD and a peer firm is that you leave JD with LESS MONEY. Your quote about a "psychic toll" is absurd, I'm sure all these other associates are feeling terrible that they are paid commensurate with the market rate.

This person is a shameless JD shill that refuses to concede even basic truths (or basic math lmao). OP, Jones Day has a respectable litigation department. But they pay their associates below-market. You will take home more money at Hogan and the type of work you'll get will not be materially different.

I hope by now it's clear that there are multiple possibilities at Hogan. You could get bigger raises at Hogan, you could get smaller raises at Hogan, or you could get pushed out earlier at Hogan if they don't think you deserve lockstep (JD wouldn't push you out, they would just give you a smaller raise, one that you can be sure you deserve.) It all depends on how well you perform, and how valuable you are to the firms.

I don't work at Jones Day and I really don't want to waste any more time conversing with such desperately money-starved and broken people, so I'm off.

Edit: By d3909615

[Anonymous User]

Former JD DC associate here who was very happy with the compensation, the quality of the work, the quality of the people, the cordiality of the office and the firm overall. When partners that I had been the source of 99% of my hours left, I elected to stay because it is a great place to work with great people. JD totally supported keeping me around to forge my own path. JD takes the long view and kept me around to bridge the gap between the time to bring in laterals and build their internal networks. I only left for family reasons back home.

Don’t know how it plays into the calculus, but two of the examples of below market associates who went to government were laterals who came from small boutiques, not those who started out at market as 1Ls. They had only been at JD for a year or two.

I enjoyed the confidential compensation system. But I was one of its beneficiaries and was above market including accounting for bonuses elsewhere. I didn’t do a clerkship and hadno more than 2150 hours in any given year. The year the partners left I barely cracked 1500 and and I didn’t get chopped as a result. My raise that year was smaller but a) I still got a raise and b) was still market.

If your only criterion is being assured that in the short term you will make lock step market, go elsewhere. You won’t be happy at JD. But if you’re confident in your abilities and want the opportunity to be rewarded accordingly, go JD. (Anecdotally I disagree that attrition is the same at JD as peers. Class of 2012 had 50% still in the firm after 5 years. And it seems to have more home grown partners than other firms).

Critics rail at all the folks who’ve drunk the JD kool-aid, but did you ever wonder why there are so many (like me) who have? It’s a great place to be.

[Anonymous User]

I enjoyed the confidential compensation system. But I was one of its beneficiaries and was above market including accounting for bonuses elsewhere. I didn’t do a clerkship and hadno more than 2150 hours in any given year.

• Great that you were paid above market. Still, the available data - from the gov. data, ATL's 2016 study, and the partner lawsuit - indicates that the average JD'er does not make market.
• You should have made market anyway at 2150 hours. Most firms with hours reqs. set them somewhere between 1800-2000.

[linear59]

This thread shows the depressing quality of college graduates entering law school these days. Law school is where the not-so-intelligent, not idealistic but money-grubbing go. And not for serious money mind you. Associates don't really make much if you look at upper class jobs. They try to pressure firms with threads like this, cravenly and without having the courage to put their name on it, small-mindedly unaware that that when you force someone to give you something, instead of earning it by merit, another shoe will drop.

If going to Jones Day will let you avoid such people, I'd run there.

[Anonymous User]

Ignoring the money part, I've just heard better things about Hogan's culture/quality of life.

[OneTwoThreeFour]

This thread shows the depressing quality of college graduates entering law school these days. Law school is where the not-so-intelligent, not idealistic but money-grubbing go. And not for serious money mind you. Associates don't really make much if you look at upper class jobs. They try to pressure firms with threads like this, cravenly and without having the courage to put their name on it, small-mindedly unaware that that when you force someone to give you something, instead of earning it by merit, another shoe will drop.

If going to Jones Day will let you avoid such people, I'd run there.

lol what is up with all this shitboomer-type mentality coming out of the woodwork, it's not like millennial invented the lockstep compensation system. it has been around for decades. there is very little "pressure" and associates have NO leverage. firms pay us money because the hours are intense and there are other legal jobs for lower pay and lower hours that a significant portion could probably shift to and take the pay cut.

your logic fails, hopefully you employ better reasoning in your legal practice

[linear59]

This thread shows the depressing quality of college graduates entering law school these days. Law school is where the not-so-intelligent, not idealistic but money-grubbing go. And not for serious money mind you. Associates don't really make much if you look at upper class jobs. They try to pressure firms with threads like this, cravenly and without having the courage to put their name on it, small-mindedly unaware that that when you force someone to give you something, instead of earning it by merit, another shoe will drop.

If going to Jones Day will let you avoid such people, I'd run there.

lol what is up with all this shitboomer-type mentality coming out of the woodwork, it's not like millennial invented the lockstep compensation system. it has been around for decades. there is very little "pressure" and associates have NO leverage. firms pay us money because the hours are intense and there are other legal jobs for lower pay and lower hours that a significant portion could probably shift to and take the pay cut.

your logic fails, hopefully you employ better reasoning in your legal practice

If you want to avoid a person like this, go to Jones Day.

[Anonymous User]

If you want to avoid a person like this, go to Jones Day.

Where do I go to avoid you?

MODERATOR NOTE: User outed as BRAINSYK for anon abuse.

[Anonymous User]

If you want to avoid a person like this, go to Jones Day.

Where do I go to avoid you?

Anywhere but Jones Day.

[QContinuum]

This thread shows the depressing quality of college graduates entering law school these days. Law school is where the not-so-intelligent, not idealistic but money-grubbing go. And not for serious money mind you. Associates don't really make much if you look at upper class jobs. They try to pressure firms with threads like this, cravenly and without having the courage to put their name on it, small-mindedly unaware that that when you force someone to give you something, instead of earning it by merit, another shoe will drop.

If going to Jones Day will let you avoid such people, I'd run there.

lol what is up with all this shitboomer-type mentality coming out of the woodwork, it's not like millennial invented the lockstep compensation system. it has been around for decades. there is very little "pressure" and associates have NO leverage. firms pay us money because the hours are intense and there are other legal jobs for lower pay and lower hours that a significant portion could probably shift to and take the pay cut.

your logic fails, hopefully you employ better reasoning in your legal practice

Seconding this. linear59 fails to acknowledge that associates don't get to decide their own salaries. Associate salaries (and bonuses and lockstep/non-lockstep compensation structures) are determined by law firm partners, with reference to what the free market requires. Law firm partners are not somehow being "forced" by anonymous TLSers into giving their associates raises.

[linear59]

Seconding this. linear59 fails to acknowledge that associates don't get to decide their own salaries. Associate salaries (and bonuses and lockstep/non-lockstep compensation structures) are determined by law firm partners, with reference to what the free market requires. Law firm partners are not somehow being "forced" by anonymous TLSers into giving their associates raises.

I shouldn't have to explain such a simple concept to law school students, but your employer determines your salary based on your performance, and how valuable you are to them. They will not pay you a penny more. If someone else values you more, then you should go there. That's how the free market works. If your employer doesn't value you enough to give you the raise you want, and you try to anonymously pressure them via a thread on the internet, you are exposing yourself as a fool and a coward. Firms like Hogan do not give undeserved raises either. If lockstep forces them to pay you beyond your abilities, they start planning your departure. Debevoise is known to have a secret spreadsheet with a list of such overpaid associates, and all firms have such a list.

Again, I encourage readers to read the replies to this thread, notice the desperation for money, the fear, the desire to manipulate cravenly, and notice their lack of upbringing. If this is the sort of person you want to avoid, go to Jones Day.

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Seconding this. linear59 fails to acknowledge that associates don't get to decide their own salaries. Associate salaries (and bonuses and lockstep/non-lockstep compensation structures) are determined by law firm partners, with reference to what the free market requires. Law firm partners are not somehow being "forced" by anonymous TLSers into giving their associates raises.

I shouldn't have to explain such a simple concept to law school students, but your employer determines your salary based on your performance, and how valuable you are to them. They will not pay you a penny more. If someone else values you more, then you should go there. That's how the free market works. If your employer doesn't value you enough to give you the raise you want, and you try to anonymously pressure them via a thread on the internet, you are exposing yourself as a fool and a coward. Firms like Hogan do not give undeserved raises either. If lockstep forces them to pay you beyond your abilities, they start planning your departure. Debevoise is known to have a secret spreadsheet with a list of such overpaid associates, and all firms have such a list.

Again, I encourage readers to read the replies to this thread, notice the desperation for money, the fear, the desire to manipulate cravenly, and notice their lack of upbringing. If this is the sort of person you want to avoid, go to Jones Day.

lmao this is your best quote yet, you heard it here folks, if you want transparent compensation you clearly were not raised in accordance with good Christian values like this dude, the rest of us are plebs who CRAVE MONEY to LUXURIOUSLY pay off our student loans and live in our DECADENT STUDIO APARTMENTS, please keep posting you are so very ridiculous it's hilarious and very entertaining



P.S. Just noticed this guy has 3 posts, clearly is a Jones Day associate (I hope? maybe a partner by the whole "lack of upbringing" bit, that's a line I feel like an old dude would use) who is wildly insecure, I'm here for it.

[Elston Gunn]

Did you just call the Debevoise spreadsheet of black associates a spreadsheet of “overpaid associates” or am I missing something?

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Did you just call the Debevoise spreadsheet of black associates a spreadsheet of “overpaid associates” or am I missing something?

Yep, he also said we had a "lack of upbringing" because we care about transparent compensation so this dude is a paragon of enlightened thought clearly

[linear59]

Did you just call the Debevoise spreadsheet of black associates a spreadsheet of “overpaid associates” or am I missing something?

Abovethelaw explained that it was a list of associates who are to be pushed out. Some years It contained black associates, some years associates of other races. Firms have such lists. Force a firm to give you a raise you don't deserve, and you'll be on it. The question of whether firms discriminate by race is a separate question, and noble issues like discrimination are not on the radar of unprincipled and desperate types such as yourselves, at least in my experience.

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Did you just call the Debevoise spreadsheet of black associates a spreadsheet of “overpaid associates” or am I missing something?

Abovethelaw explained that it was a list of associates who are to be pushed out. Some years It contained black associates, some years associates of other races. Firms have such lists. Force a firm to give you a raise you don't deserve, and you'll be on it. The question of whether firms discriminate by race is a separate question, and noble issues like discrimination are not on the radar of unprincipled and desperate types such as yourselves, at least in my experience.

yep we are just negotiating hardball with firm management here at our law firms lmao do you have a twitter

[Elston Gunn]

Did you just call the Debevoise spreadsheet of black associates a spreadsheet of “overpaid associates” or am I missing something?

Abovethelaw explained that it was a list of associates who are to be pushed out. Some years It contained black associates, some years associates of other races. Firms have such lists. Force a firm to give you a raise you don't deserve, and you'll be on it. The question of whether firms discriminate by race is a separate question, and noble issues like discrimination are not on the radar of unprincipled and desperate types such as yourselves, at least in my experience.

Not for nothing, but my biggest objection to JD’s black box + forbid salary discussion policy is that set up is extremely likely to lead to systematic racial and gender biases in salary. There have been credible allegations that this is in fact the case at JD as well.

[Elston Gunn]

Former JD DC associate here who was very happy with the compensation, the quality of the work, the quality of the people, the cordiality of the office and the firm overall. When partners that I had been the source of 99% of my hours left, I elected to stay because it is a great place to work with great people. JD totally supported keeping me around to forge my own path. JD takes the long view and kept me around to bridge the gap between the time to bring in laterals and build their internal networks. I only left for family reasons back home.

Don’t know how it plays into the calculus, but two of the examples of below market associates who went to government were laterals who came from small boutiques, not those who started out at market as 1Ls. They had only been at JD for a year or two.

I enjoyed the confidential compensation system. But I was one of its beneficiaries and was above market including accounting for bonuses elsewhere. I didn’t do a clerkship and hadno more than 2150 hours in any given year. The year the partners left I barely cracked 1500 and and I didn’t get chopped as a result. My raise that year was smaller but a) I still got a raise and b) was still market.

If your only criterion is being assured that in the short term you will make lock step market, go elsewhere. You won’t be happy at JD. But if you’re confident in your abilities and want the opportunity to be rewarded accordingly, go JD. (Anecdotally I disagree that attrition is the same at JD as peers. Class of 2012 had 50% still in the firm after 5 years. And it seems to have more home grown partners than other firms).

Critics rail at all the folks who’ve drunk the JD kool-aid, but did you ever wonder why there are so many (like me) who have? It’s a great place to be.

This was helpful by the way. Thanks.

[QContinuum]

If someone else values you more, then you should go there. That's how the free market works.

You've hit the nail on the head: Candidates should go where they're most highly valued. This is exactly why many ITT are advising folks choosing between offers from JD and market-paying firms to go to the market-paying firm. All publicly available data suggests the average JD associate is paid below market, whereas the average associate at a market-paying firm is (obviously) paid market.

If your employer doesn't value you enough to give you the raise you want, and you try to anonymously pressure them via a thread on the internet, you are exposing yourself as a fool and a coward.

Where do you get the idea that my employer (or the other posters' employers) don't "value us enough to give us the raises we want"? How are we pressuring our firms when the only firms being discussed ITT are JD and Hogan? And even assuming arguendo that we are somehow pressuring our firms via this thread, do you seriously think our firms' partners are going to respond to the alleged pressure by raising our salaries above market?

Debevoise is known to have a secret spreadsheet with a list of such overpaid associates, and all firms have such a list.

Debevoise has denied maintaining an official spreadsheet for that purpose.

notice the desperation for money, the fear, the desire to manipulate cravenly, and notice their lack of upbringing. If this is the sort of person you want to avoid, go to Jones Day.

Where do you get the idea that I (or the other posters ITT) are "desperate" for money, "fearful" (of what?) or "cravenly manipulative"?