When will we see NY to 190? Forum

[dabird122]

It's been at 160 for a while, the midlevel lateral market is super hot, and entery level hiring is way up vis-a-vis OCI 2009. When will we see NY to 190, TLS?

[lawloser22]

It's been at 160 for a while, the midlevel lateral market is super hot, and entery level hiring is way up vis-a-vis OCI 2009. When will we see NY to 190, TLS?

Why wouldn't it go to 175?

[vexion]

Law firms only went from $145k-$160k in 2007. Then they watched as the bottom dropped out, and yet they all have more than enough talent knocking down their doors for a job at 160. Meanwhile, clients have sliced their legal budgets and are refusing to pay through the nose for busywork done by unskilled first-years. Consequently, law firms have tightened the purse strings a lot.

TL;DR First-year associate salaries won't go up again for a long, long time.

[Big Shrimpin]

It's been at 160 for a while, the midlevel lateral market is super hot, and entery level hiring is way up vis-a-vis OCI 2009. When will we see NY to 190, TLS?

Nevar, unfortunately.

[KMaine]

Yawn.

[sunynp]

It's been at 160 for a while, the mid-level lateral market is super hot, and entery level hiring is way up vis-a-vis OCI 2009. When will we see NY to 190, TLS?

If you are correct and the mid-level market is hot- wouldn't that be in large part because of reductions in staff (ie lathaming) a few short years ago. I see no correlation between the mid-level market and the assumption that firms, some of whom still have deferred associates waiting to start, will be raising starting salaries any time soon.

Also when supply >>>>>> demand, there is no pressure for salaries to rise (other than the pressure associates feel from increasing living costs in NYC, which I don't think firms are that concerned about.)

And, even if firms cared about paying associates more, the clients won't accept paying more and the partners won't accept making less.

[swc65]

It's been at 160 for a while, the mid-level lateral market is super hot, and entery level hiring is way up vis-a-vis OCI 2009. When will we see NY to 190, TLS?

If you are correct and the mid-level market is hot- wouldn't that be in large part because of reductions in staff (ie lathaming) a few short years ago. I see no correlation between the mid-level market and the assumption that firms, some of whom still have deferred associates waiting to start, will be raising starting salaries any time soon.

Also when supply >>>>>> demand, there is no pressure for salaries to rise (other than the pressure associates feel from increasing living costs in NYC, which I don't think firms are that concerned about.)

And, even if firms cared about paying associates more, the clients won't accept paying more and the partners won't accept making less.

Yeah I doubt we will see entry level salaries increase much this year or next. But if the economy picks up we might get some sort of COL bump.

the market for midlevels cannot be satisfied by deferred associates unless those associates are somehow getting the right type of experience. That market is hot because there is a lot of demand for experienced lawyers. Clients will pay for lawyers the have the skills they want. The clients generally just don't want to pay to train noobs. I suspect we might see some more bulging at the 3-5 yrs salary level soon. Laterals cost a firm a ton of money because they have to pay the signing fees for another one and they let three years of training walk out the door.

[terribleperson]

175.

[waxloaf]

there is no chance that a few firms, maybe in the V10-20 range, will bump salary to increase recruiting pull, then force the top firms to match?

170-75 seems more likely than 190 though...

[Cavalier]

...

[rayiner]

The "NY to 190" saying is mostly a joke. Law firms are certainly hiring more than in 2009, and if that trend continues, I wouldn't be surprised to see first year salaries rise to 170k or 175k in the near future. But then again, big law hiring now is vastly different from what it was in 2000-07, when the massive raises occurred.

Firm profits and summer classes at the V25 are getting back towards boom levels. Some firms had record years in 2010. I wouldn't be surprised if certain firms in a group of 20 or so raise to 170 or 175k. Especially if these firms think they can really open up a persistent gap as lower-ranked firms, whose economics haven't recovered as well, decide they can't keep up with the top market rates.

It's a very weird world, where people outside a certain grade range are struggling, while others are talking about whether salaries will get bumped. But to a degree it's always been that way: during the boom as Cravath was paying huge bonuses, there were tons of people at regional T50s who would've been happy to work for a fraction of the pay. At that time, however, it wasn't so noticeable to people at T14s because the lower-ranked firms which hired from median and below were also doing well during the boom, and keeping up with the top firms in terms of starting salary. That is not happening right now.

[Tiago Splitter]

Firm profits and summer classes at the V25 are getting back towards boom levels. Some firms had record years in 2010. I wouldn't be surprised if certain firms in a group of 20 or so raise to 170 or 175k. Especially if these firms think they can really open up a persistent gap as lower-ranked firms, whose economics haven't recovered as well, decide they can't keep up with the top market rates.

John D Rockefeller says hello.

It's a great way for firms to pull away from the pack. Eventually, some of their competitors won't be able to keep up.

[sunynp]

It's just my opinion, but I don't think that firms want to be paying first years more than they already do. I'm still not sure where the pressure to raise salaries would come from. I don't think any firm that is currently paying NYC market is having trouble recruiting the level of associates they want.

[BeenDidThat]

It's just my opinion, but I don't think that firms want to be paying first years more than they already do. I'm still not sure where the pressure to raise salaries would come from. I don't think any firm that is currently paying NYC market is having trouble recruiting the level of associates they want.

The pressure comes from the competition for tip top talent, and indirectly from clients who are under pressure to hire the very best of the best of the best of the best. Whether the entry-level talent is objectively better this year than 7 years ago is besides the point. Assuming some level of inflation over the next decade, some firm is bound to be a market leader in increasing salary. Others will likely follow.

[minnbills]

The pressure comes from the competition for tip top talent

+1

A few of these recruiter threads have made allusions to firms not being able to find what they consider highly-talented new associates.