DF Thread Forum

[JamMasterJ]

Venable moved all offices to 160 from 150.

This whole business of trying to predict if firms will throw us a few crumbs is kind of making me sad. Another $5,000 or whatever isn't going to change anyone's life at this level. Seems like what everyone really wants is recognition/respect but fat chance of that, so we'll argue over whatever token amount that might come our way and be embittered when it doesn't happen. I guess I'd rather just take my paycheck and not think about the rest of this.

This is really dumb. If you live in NYC with sticker debt, you take home 105K, pay 25K in rent 30-35K in loans, and have 45K left. There's a very real standard of living difference between this number and 18K after tax more on top

[Old Gregg]

This is really dumb. If you live in NYC with sticker debt, you take home 105K, pay 25K in rent 30-35K in loans, and have 45K left. There's a very real standard of living difference between this number and 18K after tax more on top

Since when does an extra $5k a year translate into $18k extra a year after tax? Are you insider trading at your big law firm?


I think a first year raise to $190k would have a material impact on associate lifestyles in any market where the previous first year salary was $160k.

But I don't even know where $190k as a number came from. There's no guarantee that, if firms raise, the raise will go to $190k. I could see $175k, but then that goes to dixie's post, which I agree with.

[JamMasterJ]

This is really dumb. If you live in NYC with sticker debt, you take home 105K, pay 25K in rent 30-35K in loans, and have 45K left. There's a very real standard of living difference between this number and 18K after tax more on top

Since when does an extra $5k a year translate into $18k extra a year after tax? Are you insider trading at your big law firm?


I think a first year raise to $190k would have a material impact on associate lifestyles in any market where the previous first year salary was $160k.

But I don't even know where $190k as a number came from. There's no guarantee that, if firms raise, the raise will go to $190k. I could see $175k, but then that goes to dixie's post, which I agree with.

OK, I didn't know where Dixie's number came from, tbf. I was assuming that between raises and bonuses, it would hit 30K more. I still do think another 5K is a real difference maker if you're NYC-biglaw-sticker-debt-pwnd

[Old Gregg]

OK, I didn't know where Dixie's number came from, tbf. I was assuming that between raises and bonuses, it would hit 30K more. I still do think another 5K is a real difference maker if you're NYC-biglaw-sticker-debt-pwnd

It's funny you say that, because you get a $10k raise after your first year... and yet your first pay check in the new year is lower than the last paycheck of the previous year (because social security has being withheld again)...


...seriously, it's not a difference maker.

[Old Gregg]

So... trying to piece together salary increases here:

1999: Gunderson Dettmer raises salaries to $125k
200X: Some law firm raises salaries to $145k
2007: Simpson raises salaries to $160k

$35k over 8 years... I guess we are "on track" for another salary bump, with $30,000 being a reasonable ballpark. I guess $190k isn't unfathomable.

[dixiecupdrinking]

This whole business of trying to predict if firms will throw us a few crumbs is kind of making me sad. Another $5,000 or whatever isn't going to change anyone's life at this level. Seems like what everyone really wants is recognition/respect but fat chance of that, so we'll argue over whatever token amount that might come our way and be embittered when it doesn't happen. I guess I'd rather just take my paycheck and not think about the rest of this.

Based on this post, I can definitively say you should not be a lawyer.

go on

[dixiecupdrinking]

This is really dumb. If you live in NYC with sticker debt, you take home 105K, pay 25K in rent 30-35K in loans, and have 45K left. There's a very real standard of living difference between this number and 18K after tax more on top

Since when does an extra $5k a year translate into $18k extra a year after tax? Are you insider trading at your big law firm?


I think a first year raise to $190k would have a material impact on associate lifestyles in any market where the previous first year salary was $160k.

But I don't even know where $190k as a number came from. There's no guarantee that, if firms raise, the raise will go to $190k. I could see $175k, but then that goes to dixie's post, which I agree with.

OK, I didn't know where Dixie's number came from, tbf. I was assuming that between raises and bonuses, it would hit 30K more. I still do think another 5K is a real difference maker if you're NYC-biglaw-sticker-debt-pwnd

It's not. It's literally like the difference between going to a firm that gives a bar stipend instead of an advance. I wouldn't say no to an extra few grand but I'm not going to give myself an aneurysm over not getting it. Or at least, I'm going to try not to.

The more fundamental point is that all this navel gazing is toxic and silly. You can look at 2007 compensation and convince yourself that you deserve more than you're getting, or you can look at your classmates working for 1/4 your salary and feel lucky, or you can think about the wide range of other circumstances that other people are in both in this industry and in others and realize compensation is ultimately pretty arbitrary. No one owes us shit and any one of us can go do something else if we decide the indignity of biglaw is worth $160k. Someone else will be next in line.

[dixiecupdrinking]

And NO ONE IS GOING TO $190k.

[sideroxylon]

And NY ONE IS GOING TO $190k.

!!!

[dixiecupdrinking]

And NY ONE IS GOING TO $190k.

!!!

lol heard it here first millionth

[Old Gregg]

lets face it. the only real reason 90% of people posting ITT are in biglaw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZHCVyllnck

[Anonymous User]

I think big law salary would have to go up at some point. HP is apparently paying their first year lawyers with no experience 150K. I researched what my company is paying lawyers with two years of experience and I was surprised that it's btw 150-160K, plus I think corporate benefits are extremely better than most law firms. I would think that firms would have to start compensating their talented junior associates better or risk losing them.

[BenJ]

So... trying to piece together salary increases here:

1999: Gunderson Dettmer raises salaries to $125k
200X: Some law firm raises salaries to $145k
2007: Simpson raises salaries to $160k

$35k over 8 years... I guess we are "on track" for another salary bump, with $30,000 being a reasonable ballpark. I guess $190k isn't unfathomable.

I don't think a boutique-ish firm like Gunderson raising salaries these days would be taken as seriously as it was in 1999. Desmarais raised base salaries to $180k a couple years ago, and nobody even blinked.

http://abovethelaw.com/2012/04/new-york ... y-serious/

[Old Gregg]

So... trying to piece together salary increases here:

1999: Gunderson Dettmer raises salaries to $125k
200X: Some law firm raises salaries to $145k
2007: Simpson raises salaries to $160k

$35k over 8 years... I guess we are "on track" for another salary bump, with $30,000 being a reasonable ballpark. I guess $190k isn't unfathomable.

I don't think a boutique-ish firm like Gunderson raising salaries these days would be taken as seriously as it was in 1999. Desmarais raised base salaries to $180k a couple years ago, and nobody even blinked.

http://abovethelaw.com/2012/04/new-york ... y-serious/

That wasn't really my contention. I was just reciting history.

Also, back when Desmarais stepped up the salary, it was way, way smaller than Gunderson. And it still is. So that's kind of a stupid comparison.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

So... trying to piece together salary increases here:

1999: Gunderson Dettmer raises salaries to $125k
200X: Some law firm raises salaries to $145k
2007: Simpson raises salaries to $160k

$35k over 8 years... I guess we are "on track" for another salary bump, with $30,000 being a reasonable ballpark. I guess $190k isn't unfathomable.

I don't think a boutique-ish firm like Gunderson raising salaries these days would be taken as seriously as it was in 1999. Desmarais raised base salaries to $180k a couple years ago, and nobody even blinked.

http://abovethelaw.com/2012/04/new-york ... y-serious/

Saying that no one would take a salary increase as seriously today is only right to the extent that salary increases are taken seriously in proportion with the competitiveness of the market, and Silicon Valley in 1999 was the single most competitive market of our lifetimes.

Gunderson is small, but it's not at all insignificant, especially fifteen years ago. Desmarais is a 20-person firm hiring only in IP. Not remotely comparable.

Duval is an interesting test case, as I can't think of another firm bigger than 50 lawyers with a $175k base except for W&C. Unconventional move, but then again, those are unconventional dudes. Interesting to see how far up the prestige ladder they can steal someone. I'm pessimistic though--Cahill has been paying above market for years now and it hasn't seemed to register in the minds of students who are all in for the bonsai tree.

[run26.2]

So... trying to piece together salary increases here:

1999: Gunderson Dettmer raises salaries to $125k
200X: Some law firm raises salaries to $145k
2007: Simpson raises salaries to $160k

$35k over 8 years... I guess we are "on track" for another salary bump, with $30,000 being a reasonable ballpark. I guess $190k isn't unfathomable.

I don't think a boutique-ish firm like Gunderson raising salaries these days would be taken as seriously as it was in 1999. Desmarais raised base salaries to $180k a couple years ago, and nobody even blinked.

http://abovethelaw.com/2012/04/new-york ... y-serious/

That wasn't really my contention. I was just reciting history.

Also, back when Desmarais stepped up the salary, it was way, way smaller than Gunderson. And it still is. So that's kind of a stupid comparison.

They are different in that Desmarais does not really compete to take away talent from the "compensation leaders." But if Sullivan or Cravath or Skadden raised their salaries to 180, a bunch of other firms would probably follow suit.

[Old Gregg]

They are different in that Desmarais does not really compete to take away talent from the "compensation leaders." But if Sullivan or Cravath or Skadden raised their salaries to 180, a bunch of other firms would probably follow suit.

The latter sentence I agree with, but the former I wouldn't. Firms like Gunderson and many of the other silicon valley law firms compete for the same law students that Cravath, S&C and Skadden compete for: http://www.nalpdirectory.com/employer_p ... rson%22%7D

Moreover, if Gunderson did raise salaries again, I bet Cooley, Fenwick and WSGR would match. MoFo would fall in line shortly thereafter. And then everyone else will.

[run26.2]

I know. I was distinguishing the scenarios on the basis of the firms (Desmarais and Gunderson) but not on the basis of the amount.

[Tiago Splitter]

Moreover, if Gunderson did raise salaries again, I bet Cooley, Fenwick and WSGR would match. MoFo would fall in line shortly thereafter. And then everyone else will.

That's pretty much what happened the last time Gunderson bumped things up. A few other SV firms had to match, then big national firms with NorCal offices had to match, and those firms felt compelled to raise their other offices, and within a few weeks every first year was making 125k. Just need someone to light that fire.

[run26.2]

I still want to know if anyone has experience or knowledge about what happens to the salaries of associates in other class years if a firm lowers first years' salaries.

[Old Gregg]

I still want to know if anyone has experience or knowledge about what happens to the salaries of associates in other class years if a firm lowers first years' salaries.

Others lower to. Firms lower the scale, not just one year.

[run26.2]

So people get pay cuts? I just assumed they stayed at the same salary for an additional year.

[84651846190]

"Associate salaries will continue to drop until morale improves." -Biglaw managing partners

[dixiecupdrinking]

I still want to know if anyone has experience or knowledge about what happens to the salaries of associates in other class years if a firm lowers first years' salaries.

Others lower to. Firms lower the scale, not just one year.

holy shit this would be demoralizing.

[Old Gregg]

I still want to know if anyone has experience or knowledge about what happens to the salaries of associates in other class years if a firm lowers first years' salaries.

Others lower to. Firms lower the scale, not just one year.

holy shit this would be demoralizing.

welcome to 2008-2009.