Kirkland announced 3x/week “hybrid” return to office, attorneys “expected” to be in office Tuesday-Thursday Forum

[Anonymous User]

ITT: Reasons to avoid K&E at all costs.

Oh yeah, the other v10 firms only have kind, gentle and agreeable lawyers. It will be great.

God damn why are the KE people on here always so thin of the skin? I'm at KE too and this type of shit makes me cringe.

"Oh yeah I'm sure we're the only firm that has sweatshop hours right?"

"Oh yeah associates at other firms must be so kindhearted and never have bad days right!?!"

"Oh yeah and I bet partners at other firms CARE SO MUCH about their associates uh huh"

Jfc. Grow up. It's the internet, we work at a firm with a huge number of attorneys and many of them are active here and it naturally leads to KE being discussed more commonly. Yes, sometimes there are generalizations. Such is the nature of a forum dedicated to discussing life in big law. I'd rather our reputation (even if undeserved) be for having aggressive attorneys than thin skinned, whiny woe-mes.

It is the typical KE inferiority complex. They know that the culture is terrible and recruiting is bottom of the barrel, and so desperately try to make themselves feel on par with DPW/Cravath, which they never will be.

And for all the people pretending that GPAs, pedigree, etc... don't matter, keep dreaming. There is a reason DPW is full of Harvard grads and not Hofstra goods, and you can sure as heck bet that on a bet the company corporate deal I want the attorney with 50 more IQ points and not 50 fewer IQ points.

Bottom of the barrel? Lmao. I agree with the point that KE people on here are annoying but brother, you sound bitter and like someone that was rejected by KE and works at Baker Mckenzie. Sit down.

Seriously, what an embarrassing comment. Harvard vs. Hofstra, 50 IQ points? LMAO

[Anonymous User]

ITT: Reasons to avoid K&E at all costs.

Oh yeah, the other v10 firms only have kind, gentle and agreeable lawyers. It will be great.

God damn why are the KE people on here always so thin of the skin? I'm at KE too and this type of shit makes me cringe.

"Oh yeah I'm sure we're the only firm that has sweatshop hours right?"

"Oh yeah associates at other firms must be so kindhearted and never have bad days right!?!"

"Oh yeah and I bet partners at other firms CARE SO MUCH about their associates uh huh"

Jfc. Grow up. It's the internet, we work at a firm with a huge number of attorneys and many of them are active here and it naturally leads to KE being discussed more commonly. Yes, sometimes there are generalizations. Such is the nature of a forum dedicated to discussing life in big law. I'd rather our reputation (even if undeserved) be for having aggressive attorneys than thin skinned, whiny woe-mes.

It is the typical KE inferiority complex. They know that the culture is terrible and recruiting is bottom of the barrel, and so desperately try to make themselves feel on par with DPW/Cravath, which they never will be.

And for all the people pretending that GPAs, pedigree, etc... don't matter, keep dreaming. There is a reason DPW is full of Harvard grads and not Hofstra goods, and you can sure as heck bet that on a bet the company corporate deal I want the attorney with 50 more IQ points and not 50 fewer IQ points.

Bottom of the barrel? Lmao. I agree with the point that KE people on here are annoying but brother, you sound bitter and like someone that was rejected by KE and works at Baker Mckenzie. Sit down.

Seriously, what an embarrassing comment. Harvard vs. Hofstra, 50 IQ points? LMAO

At least. A lot of US Supreme Court clerks coming out of Hofstra these days? A lot of people turning down HLS for Hofstra?

Kirkland's hire anyone with a pulse strategy is starting to have serious, serious consequences. I am across from them on deals and it has just gotten embarrassing how poorly their associates are performing (not to mention the 6th years with fake partner titles).

Using outlandish signing bonuses and guaranteed comp to poach rainmakers may be a way to grow your topline revenue, but the rank and file Kirkland attorneys just don't have the complete skillset to do the work the way CSM/DPW attorneys can, and Kirkland's eat what you kill model is terrible for the type of mentoring you need to build that complete skillset. I mean look, if it is Stroock or Kirkland then sure, go with Kirkland. But you would be pretty batty at this point to be turning down DPW/CSM for Kirkland.

[Anonymous User]

ITT: Reasons to avoid K&E at all costs.

Oh yeah, the other v10 firms only have kind, gentle and agreeable lawyers. It will be great.

God damn why are the KE people on here always so thin of the skin? I'm at KE too and this type of shit makes me cringe.

"Oh yeah I'm sure we're the only firm that has sweatshop hours right?"

"Oh yeah associates at other firms must be so kindhearted and never have bad days right!?!"

"Oh yeah and I bet partners at other firms CARE SO MUCH about their associates uh huh"

Jfc. Grow up. It's the internet, we work at a firm with a huge number of attorneys and many of them are active here and it naturally leads to KE being discussed more commonly. Yes, sometimes there are generalizations. Such is the nature of a forum dedicated to discussing life in big law. I'd rather our reputation (even if undeserved) be for having aggressive attorneys than thin skinned, whiny woe-mes.

It is the typical KE inferiority complex. They know that the culture is terrible and recruiting is bottom of the barrel, and so desperately try to make themselves feel on par with DPW/Cravath, which they never will be.

And for all the people pretending that GPAs, pedigree, etc... don't matter, keep dreaming. There is a reason DPW is full of Harvard grads and not Hofstra goods, and you can sure as heck bet that on a bet the company corporate deal I want the attorney with 50 more IQ points and not 50 fewer IQ points.

Bottom of the barrel? Lmao. I agree with the point that KE people on here are annoying but brother, you sound bitter and like someone that was rejected by KE and works at Baker Mckenzie. Sit down.

Seriously, what an embarrassing comment. Harvard vs. Hofstra, 50 IQ points? LMAO

At least. A lot of US Supreme Court clerks coming out of Hofstra these days? A lot of people turning down HLS for Hofstra?

Kirkland's hire anyone with a pulse strategy is starting to have serious, serious consequences. I am across from them on deals and it has just gotten embarrassing how poorly their associates are performing (not to mention the 6th years with fake partner titles).

Using outlandish signing bonuses and guaranteed comp to poach rainmakers may be a way to grow your topline revenue, but the rank and file Kirkland attorneys just don't have the complete skillset to do the work the way CSM/DPW attorneys can, and Kirkland's eat what you kill model is terrible for the type of mentoring you need to build that complete skillset. I mean look, if it is Stroock or Kirkland then sure, go with Kirkland. But you would be pretty batty at this point to be turning down DPW/CSM for Kirkland.

What you don't understand from your myopic view of the world as a gunner law student obsessed with prestige is that nobody gives a shit about these things once you're in the working world. We hire "anybody with a pulse" because we have that much business from clients who CHOOSE to use us on very profitable matters.

[Anonymous User]

Oh yeah, the other v10 firms only have kind, gentle and agreeable lawyers. It will be great.

God damn why are the KE people on here always so thin of the skin? I'm at KE too and this type of shit makes me cringe.

"Oh yeah I'm sure we're the only firm that has sweatshop hours right?"

"Oh yeah associates at other firms must be so kindhearted and never have bad days right!?!"

"Oh yeah and I bet partners at other firms CARE SO MUCH about their associates uh huh"

Jfc. Grow up. It's the internet, we work at a firm with a huge number of attorneys and many of them are active here and it naturally leads to KE being discussed more commonly. Yes, sometimes there are generalizations. Such is the nature of a forum dedicated to discussing life in big law. I'd rather our reputation (even if undeserved) be for having aggressive attorneys than thin skinned, whiny woe-mes.

It is the typical KE inferiority complex. They know that the culture is terrible and recruiting is bottom of the barrel, and so desperately try to make themselves feel on par with DPW/Cravath, which they never will be.

And for all the people pretending that GPAs, pedigree, etc... don't matter, keep dreaming. There is a reason DPW is full of Harvard grads and not Hofstra goods, and you can sure as heck bet that on a bet the company corporate deal I want the attorney with 50 more IQ points and not 50 fewer IQ points.

Bottom of the barrel? Lmao. I agree with the point that KE people on here are annoying but brother, you sound bitter and like someone that was rejected by KE and works at Baker Mckenzie. Sit down.

Seriously, what an embarrassing comment. Harvard vs. Hofstra, 50 IQ points? LMAO

At least. A lot of US Supreme Court clerks coming out of Hofstra these days? A lot of people turning down HLS for Hofstra?

Kirkland's hire anyone with a pulse strategy is starting to have serious, serious consequences. I am across from them on deals and it has just gotten embarrassing how poorly their associates are performing (not to mention the 6th years with fake partner titles).

Using outlandish signing bonuses and guaranteed comp to poach rainmakers may be a way to grow your topline revenue, but the rank and file Kirkland attorneys just don't have the complete skillset to do the work the way CSM/DPW attorneys can, and Kirkland's eat what you kill model is terrible for the type of mentoring you need to build that complete skillset. I mean look, if it is Stroock or Kirkland then sure, go with Kirkland. But you would be pretty batty at this point to be turning down DPW/CSM for Kirkland.

What you don't understand from your myopic view of the world as a gunner law student obsessed with prestige is that nobody gives a shit about these things once you're in the working world. We hire "anybody with a pulse" because we have that much business from clients who CHOOSE to use us on very profitable matters.

Give me a break - those matters are great profit for the rainmakers. But the Kirkland experience is uniformly miserable for the rank and file associates, who slave away with significantly worse hours than the rest of biglaw, with a much smaller chance of every making "shares". But hey, at least you get a fake partner title at 6th year and a 1.1x bonus multiple. At this rate the next step is going to be Kirkland setting up a remedial law school program for all the law school dropouts so they can now graduate and work for Kirkland.

[Anonymous User]

You’ll make more money at KE than at DPW/CSM. Everybody makes their own choices; mine is taking that extra cash to the Amalfi Coast while others think about their prestige having to say no to the bacon cheese fries during their monthly splurge at Shake Shack.

[Anonymous User]

You’ll make more money at KE than at DPW/CSM. Everybody makes their own choices; mine is taking that extra cash to the Amalfi Coast while others think about their prestige having to say no to the bacon cheese fries during their monthly splurge at Shake Shack.

Marginally more in exchange for a longer partnership track, a much worse version of equity partnership, much less compete colleagues and significantly worse exit options. To each their own, I suppose.

[Anonymous User]

The obsession that non KE people have with KE is neverending. Says it all.

[lurkinassociate]

As someone who lateraled into the K&E machine, I don’t get why either side gets so fired up. If you haven’t worked at K&E, maybe don’t pretend like you’re an expert in its recruiting and associate quality based off your anecdata. If you work here, maybe chill and enjoy the marginal extra money. I personally made over $500,000 more than my friends at V5s by lateraling in and making a bit extra on bonuses and as an NSP. It’s not for everyone, but that’s pretty sweet to me.

[Anonymous User]

God damn why are the KE people on here always so thin of the skin? I'm at KE too and this type of shit makes me cringe.

"Oh yeah I'm sure we're the only firm that has sweatshop hours right?"

"Oh yeah associates at other firms must be so kindhearted and never have bad days right!?!"

"Oh yeah and I bet partners at other firms CARE SO MUCH about their associates uh huh"

Jfc. Grow up. It's the internet, we work at a firm with a huge number of attorneys and many of them are active here and it naturally leads to KE being discussed more commonly. Yes, sometimes there are generalizations. Such is the nature of a forum dedicated to discussing life in big law. I'd rather our reputation (even if undeserved) be for having aggressive attorneys than thin skinned, whiny woe-mes.

It is the typical KE inferiority complex. They know that the culture is terrible and recruiting is bottom of the barrel, and so desperately try to make themselves feel on par with DPW/Cravath, which they never will be.

And for all the people pretending that GPAs, pedigree, etc... don't matter, keep dreaming. There is a reason DPW is full of Harvard grads and not Hofstra goods, and you can sure as heck bet that on a bet the company corporate deal I want the attorney with 50 more IQ points and not 50 fewer IQ points.

Bottom of the barrel? Lmao. I agree with the point that KE people on here are annoying but brother, you sound bitter and like someone that was rejected by KE and works at Baker Mckenzie. Sit down.

Seriously, what an embarrassing comment. Harvard vs. Hofstra, 50 IQ points? LMAO

At least. A lot of US Supreme Court clerks coming out of Hofstra these days? A lot of people turning down HLS for Hofstra?

Kirkland's hire anyone with a pulse strategy is starting to have serious, serious consequences. I am across from them on deals and it has just gotten embarrassing how poorly their associates are performing (not to mention the 6th years with fake partner titles).

Using outlandish signing bonuses and guaranteed comp to poach rainmakers may be a way to grow your topline revenue, but the rank and file Kirkland attorneys just don't have the complete skillset to do the work the way CSM/DPW attorneys can, and Kirkland's eat what you kill model is terrible for the type of mentoring you need to build that complete skillset. I mean look, if it is Stroock or Kirkland then sure, go with Kirkland. But you would be pretty batty at this point to be turning down DPW/CSM for Kirkland.

What you don't understand from your myopic view of the world as a gunner law student obsessed with prestige is that nobody gives a shit about these things once you're in the working world. We hire "anybody with a pulse" because we have that much business from clients who CHOOSE to use us on very profitable matters.

Give me a break - those matters are great profit for the rainmakers. But the Kirkland experience is uniformly miserable for the rank and file associates, who slave away with significantly worse hours than the rest of biglaw, with a much smaller chance of every making "shares". But hey, at least you get a fake partner title at 6th year and a 1.1x bonus multiple. At this rate the next step is going to be Kirkland setting up a remedial law school program for all the law school dropouts so they can now graduate and work for Kirkland.

LOL yes go ahead and repeat all the negative K&E stereotypes you hear on TLS as a complete non-sequitur to your stupid assertions getting crushed. I feel terrible that your co-workers at DPW/CSM have to deal with somebody as miserable as you on a daily basis.

[Anonymous User]

You’ll make more money at KE than at DPW/CSM. Everybody makes their own choices; mine is taking that extra cash to the Amalfi Coast while others think about their prestige having to say no to the bacon cheese fries during their monthly splurge at Shake Shack.

Marginally more in exchange for a longer partnership track, a much worse version of equity partnership, much less compete colleagues and significantly worse exit options. To each their own, I suppose.

Hate to break it to you but neither of us are making partner and the exit opps in my group are the same as at any V10. I do make more money than you though.

[Anonymous User]

You’ll make more money at KE than at DPW/CSM. Everybody makes their own choices; mine is taking that extra cash to the Amalfi Coast while others think about their prestige having to say no to the bacon cheese fries during their monthly splurge at Shake Shack.

Marginally more in exchange for a longer partnership track, a much worse version of equity partnership, much less compete colleagues and significantly worse exit options. To each their own, I suppose.

Hate to break it to you but neither of us are making partner and the exit opps in my group are the same as at any V10. I do make more money than you though.

Is a 9-year track actually longer than many firms these days? I know some still have 8 year tracks, but I thought the standard was 9 or 10.

No idea what this person means about a "much worse version of equity partnership." Some other thread awhile back said new "actual" share partners are at $2M the first year and the "quasi share partners" that they just introduced are at $1.5M. I mean, it's not WLRK money. And there is stratification for sure, but there is only one lockstep firm (plus WLRK) left, so every firm is like that now.

[Anonymous User]

You’ll make more money at KE than at DPW/CSM. Everybody makes their own choices; mine is taking that extra cash to the Amalfi Coast while others think about their prestige having to say no to the bacon cheese fries during their monthly splurge at Shake Shack.

Marginally more in exchange for a longer partnership track, a much worse version of equity partnership, much less compete colleagues and significantly worse exit options. To each their own, I suppose.

Hate to break it to you but neither of us are making partner and the exit opps in my group are the same as at any V10. I do make more money than you though.

Is a 9-year track actually longer than many firms these days? I know some still have 8 year tracks, but I thought the standard was 9 or 10.

No idea what this person means about a "much worse version of equity partnership." Some other thread awhile back said new "actual" share partners are at $2M the first year and the "quasi share partners" that they just introduced are at $1.5M. I mean, it's not WLRK money. And there is stratification for sure, but there is only one lockstep firm (plus WLRK) left, so every firm is like that now.

Definitely longer than DPW and peer firms. Key isn't the starting number but the growth, and pure lockstep is not the relevant metric. More important is the degree of dispersion between top and bottom, and Kirkland has a number of people making $10 million plus that other top firms don't have, at the expense of those on the bottom.

[Anonymous User]

You’ll make more money at KE than at DPW/CSM. Everybody makes their own choices; mine is taking that extra cash to the Amalfi Coast while others think about their prestige having to say no to the bacon cheese fries during their monthly splurge at Shake Shack.

Marginally more in exchange for a longer partnership track, a much worse version of equity partnership, much less compete colleagues and significantly worse exit options. To each their own, I suppose.

Hate to break it to you but neither of us are making partner and the exit opps in my group are the same as at any V10. I do make more money than you though.

Is a 9-year track actually longer than many firms these days? I know some still have 8 year tracks, but I thought the standard was 9 or 10.

No idea what this person means about a "much worse version of equity partnership." Some other thread awhile back said new "actual" share partners are at $2M the first year and the "quasi share partners" that they just introduced are at $1.5M. I mean, it's not WLRK money. And there is stratification for sure, but there is only one lockstep firm (plus WLRK) left, so every firm is like that now.

Definitely longer than DPW and peer firms. Key isn't the starting number but the growth, and pure lockstep is not the relevant metric. More important is the degree of dispersion between top and bottom, and Kirkland has a number of people making $10 million plus that other top firms don't have, at the expense of those on the bottom.

At what "expense?" This is such fake and unfounded news. What other firm starts its equity class at $2.5m or better? KE, WLRK and ....? The $10m+ partners are not stealing from Peter to pay Paul--they're helping to get everyone rich by growing the business. I'm shaking my head at some of the biased statements being thrown around in this discussion. Like, if you don't like Kirkland, good for you, but the firm is minting money (and making a significant number of lawyers very rich in the process) at an unprecedented rate.

[Anonymous User]

Nonsense. DPW is north of $2.5m, and I would guess PW as well. And those numbers are going to grow at a much faster rate year over year than KE. And you are going to know pretty quickly in those places whether you make equity partner or not, not be strung out for years and years in NSP purgatory like KE.

Kirkland is definitely minting money and making a few SPs really rich, but the rank and file is being thoroughly abused and underpaid relative to billables.

And don't forgot the absolutely toxic partners you will be working for, who would never make it at a normal firm. https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... ne-at-all/

[Anonymous User]

We get so much hate

I know everybody here is corporate and nobody cares, but FWIW -- I am actually somewhat proud to be a KE litigator. The firm is truly excellent in that practice area (this isn't to say everyone is amazing -- certainly there are some mediocre lawyers at every firm) -- but from share partners through midlevel associates the bench is really deep and I would put the top end against anybody. That's not true of all firms (I say this having dealt with many purportedly renowned other firms over the years).

[Anonymous User]

Nonsense. DPW is north of $2.5m, and I would guess PW as well. And those numbers are going to grow at a much faster rate year over year than KE. And you are going to know pretty quickly in those places whether you make equity partner or not, not be strung out for years and years in NSP purgatory like KE.

Kirkland is definitely minting money and making a few SPs really rich, but the rank and file is being thoroughly abused and underpaid relative to billables.

And don't forgot the absolutely toxic partners you will be working for, who would never make it at a normal firm. https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... ne-at-all/

FYI, these numbers and projections you are spitting out are completely fabricated and wrong. It's a bit disturbing how much you hate K&E. Are you a former associate who was shown the door?

[Anonymous User]

Nonsense. DPW is north of $2.5m, and I would guess PW as well. And those numbers are going to grow at a much faster rate year over year than KE. And you are going to know pretty quickly in those places whether you make equity partner or not, not be strung out for years and years in NSP purgatory like KE.

Kirkland is definitely minting money and making a few SPs really rich, but the rank and file is being thoroughly abused and underpaid relative to billables.

And don't forgot the absolutely toxic partners you will be working for, who would never make it at a normal firm. https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... ne-at-all/

FYI, these numbers and projections you are spitting out are completely fabricated and wrong. It's a bit disturbing how much you hate K&E. Are you a former associate who was shown the door?

Fabricated, eh? DPW has only a 4:1 ratio of top equity to bottom equity. The numbers don't work if 1st year equity is under $2.5m (and I know for a fact that first year equity is over that).

You work for KE HR?

[ChairmanKaga]

Fabricated, eh? DPW has only a 4:1 ratio of top equity to bottom equity. The numbers don't work if 1st year equity is under $2.5m (and I know for a fact that first year equity is over that).

You work for KE HR?

Serious question: how do the numbers not work? It's not possible to reverse engineer what first year equity is by knowing the PEP and the top/bottom ratio, is it?

[Anonymous User]

Fabricated, eh? DPW has only a 4:1 ratio of top equity to bottom equity. The numbers don't work if 1st year equity is under $2.5m (and I know for a fact that first year equity is over that).

You work for KE HR?

Serious question: how do the numbers not work? It's not possible to reverse engineer what first year equity is by knowing the PEP and the top/bottom ratio, is it?

What I meant is that the numbers don't work out if 1st year comp is under $2.5 million given the relatively narrow DPW spread.

[Anonymous User]

Nonsense. DPW is north of $2.5m, and I would guess PW as well. And those numbers are going to grow at a much faster rate year over year than KE. And you are going to know pretty quickly in those places whether you make equity partner or not, not be strung out for years and years in NSP purgatory like KE.

Kirkland is definitely minting money and making a few SPs really rich, but the rank and file is being thoroughly abused and underpaid relative to billables.

And don't forgot the absolutely toxic partners you will be working for, who would never make it at a normal firm. https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... ne-at-all/

FYI, these numbers and projections you are spitting out are completely fabricated and wrong. It's a bit disturbing how much you hate K&E. Are you a former associate who was shown the door?

Fabricated, eh? DPW has only a 4:1 ratio of top equity to bottom equity. The numbers don't work if 1st year equity is under $2.5m (and I know for a fact that first year equity is over that).

You work for KE HR?

As a junior partner at a DPW competitor, I find it very hard to believe that their first year partners are starting at north of $2.5 million. If that's true, though, huge kudos to them and I clearly made the wrong choice years ago when deciding on firms.

[Anonymous User]

Nonsense. DPW is north of $2.5m, and I would guess PW as well. And those numbers are going to grow at a much faster rate year over year than KE. And you are going to know pretty quickly in those places whether you make equity partner or not, not be strung out for years and years in NSP purgatory like KE.

Kirkland is definitely minting money and making a few SPs really rich, but the rank and file is being thoroughly abused and underpaid relative to billables.

And don't forgot the absolutely toxic partners you will be working for, who would never make it at a normal firm. https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/partner ... ne-at-all/

FYI, these numbers and projections you are spitting out are completely fabricated and wrong. It's a bit disturbing how much you hate K&E. Are you a former associate who was shown the door?

Fabricated, eh? DPW has only a 4:1 ratio of top equity to bottom equity. The numbers don't work if 1st year equity is under $2.5m (and I know for a fact that first year equity is over that).

You work for KE HR?

As a junior partner at a DPW competitor, I find it very hard to believe that their first year partners are starting at north of $2.5 million. If that's true, though, huge kudos to them and I clearly made the wrong choice years ago when deciding on firms.

They are. And they guy above is clearly some bitter KE LA reject or whatever. The hate KE gets on this place is incredible even as it has come to dominate the industry.

[ChairmanKaga]

Fabricated, eh? DPW has only a 4:1 ratio of top equity to bottom equity. The numbers don't work if 1st year equity is under $2.5m (and I know for a fact that first year equity is over that).

You work for KE HR?

Serious question: how do the numbers not work? It's not possible to reverse engineer what first year equity is by knowing the PEP and the top/bottom ratio, is it?

What I meant is that the numbers don't work out if 1st year comp is under $2.5 million given the relatively narrow DPW spread.

This still doesn't make sense, does it? You have no idea how many people are at the top or bottom of the equity. Bottom of equity could be $1.7m, top of equity could be $6.8m and PEP could still be $6.35m.

[Anonymous User]

There’s only three things certain in life: death, taxes, and any discussion about KE involving some side argument about their partner salary.

[Anonymous User]

Fabricated, eh? DPW has only a 4:1 ratio of top equity to bottom equity. The numbers don't work if 1st year equity is under $2.5m (and I know for a fact that first year equity is over that).

You work for KE HR?

Serious question: how do the numbers not work? It's not possible to reverse engineer what first year equity is by knowing the PEP and the top/bottom ratio, is it?

What I meant is that the numbers don't work out if 1st year comp is under $2.5 million given the relatively narrow DPW spread.

This still doesn't make sense, does it? You have no idea how many people are at the top or bottom of the equity. Bottom of equity could be $1.7m, top of equity could be $6.8m and PEP could still be $6.35m.

Senior DPW partners who transitioned to the government reported ~12 million in comp.

[Anonymous User]

Fabricated, eh? DPW has only a 4:1 ratio of top equity to bottom equity. The numbers don't work if 1st year equity is under $2.5m (and I know for a fact that first year equity is over that).

You work for KE HR?

Serious question: how do the numbers not work? It's not possible to reverse engineer what first year equity is by knowing the PEP and the top/bottom ratio, is it?

What I meant is that the numbers don't work out if 1st year comp is under $2.5 million given the relatively narrow DPW spread.

This still doesn't make sense, does it? You have no idea how many people are at the top or bottom of the equity. Bottom of equity could be $1.7m, top of equity could be $6.8m and PEP could still be $6.35m.

Senior DPW partners who transitioned to the government reported ~12 million in comp.

Maybe an outlier? This reports otherwise (though it's a year behind), but unless we get a DPW partner on here, I suppose we're all just guessing:

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business- ... -arms-race

Edited to add that it also depends on when the disclosure was made. The disclosures sometimes will include the prior calendar year, as well as YTD of the year of disclosure, so if the majority of partner comp comes in January (which is how most firms do it), the disclosure may include two consecutive January pays (e.g., Jan. 2020 and Jan. 2021) and thus overstate a yearly compensation by quite a lot.

See, e.g., https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindu ... 021-06-21/ (disclosure included prior calendar year as well as current year up to date of disclosure).