2021 End of Year Bonuses Forum

[Ultramar vistas]

You are dense (or you are still a law student).

The difference between 2200 hours and 2500 hours seems like a lot from the outside, but it is 42.3 hours a week vs 48 hours a week. If I knew in advance that 5.5 hrs a week was going to be important, sad to say that I could “find” those hours without anyone knowing or caring - I just don’t because I’m ethical and I’m not currently rewarded for it.

Possibly the worst thing I have read all week and clearly you have never worked a 2500 pace. 2200 is bearable. 2500 pushes you to an extreme no human being should have to suffer for any extended period of time.

I’ll bill 2500 this calendar year, but sadly not the bonus year. You sound hysterical though, it’s just been one shitty deal and where my vacation fell last year and boom, 2500 over a 12 month period.

[Anonymous User]

You are dense (or you are still a law student).

The difference between 2200 hours and 2500 hours seems like a lot from the outside, but it is 42.3 hours a week vs 48 hours a week. If I knew in advance that 5.5 hrs a week was going to be important, sad to say that I could “find” those hours without anyone knowing or caring - I just don’t because I’m ethical and I’m not currently rewarded for it.

Possibly the worst thing I have read all week and clearly you have never worked a 2500 pace. 2200 is bearable. 2500 pushes you to an extreme no human being should have to suffer for any extended period of time.

I’ll bill 2500 this calendar year, but sadly not the bonus year. You sound hysterical though, it’s just been one shitty deal and where my vacation fell last year and boom, 2500 over a 12 month period.

I hope to hell you are lying or padding like crazy but if not -- the race to the bottom is in full swing. It's clear the partners will always win.

[Joachim2017]

You are dense (or you are still a law student).

The difference between 2200 hours and 2500 hours seems like a lot from the outside, but it is 42.3 hours a week vs 48 hours a week. If I knew in advance that 5.5 hrs a week was going to be important, sad to say that I could “find” those hours without anyone knowing or caring - I just don’t because I’m ethical and I’m not currently rewarded for it.

Possibly the worst thing I have read all week and clearly you have never worked a 2500 pace. 2200 is bearable. 2500 pushes you to an extreme no human being should have to suffer for any extended period of time.

This response by the anonymous poster is so myopic it borders on the stupid. Plenty of us have worked a 2500 pace. Both litigators and transactional attorneys. I have friends at other firms that for MULTIPLE years have worked and billed 3k hours. They do it for trade-offs they knowingly make. How bearable it is, and how much suffering it involves, is entirely subjective and fact-specific.

The "clearly you have never worked...." conclusion stems from a deeper "well, everyone must be just like me, and I feel x, so x" line of thinking that is so sophomoric I don't wonder whether these anon posters are lawyers or law students, I wonder whether they were are college or high school students.

[Anonymous User]

What about pay cuts? Prefer taking a $100k pay cut and work 1/3 less.

Go away.

Not being glib, actually go in-house and you can do that exact thing.

Whenever people mention how great it'd be to take a pay cut and cut back on the hours, I roll my eyes because even if you worked less, there is still the dreaded "on call" nature of BigLaw that makes the job so terrible. E.g., you could bill only 30 hours in a week but still have an absolutely miserable week and have a chunk of those hours billed at weird hours or during the weekend.

I'm a stub year billing barely 20 hrs a week, hopefully will pick up soon (I want my bonus!) but I feel this already. Had a day where my first meeting was at 8am and last email from a partner at 11pm. I was obviously not working 15 hours but yeah, on call.

100%. Also a corporate stub in M&A. I probably bill 30-40 hours a week which isn't bad, but I often work from like 7am to 1pm and then 6pm to 10pm. The first few weeks I would sit at my computer during the afternoon but now I relax and run errands/gym.

[Anonymous User]

This response by the anonymous poster is so myopic it borders on the stupid. Plenty of us have worked a 2500 pace. Both litigators and transactional attorneys. I have friends at other firms that for MULTIPLE years have worked and billed 3k hours. They do it for trade-offs they knowingly make. How bearable it is, and how much suffering it involves, is entirely subjective and fact-specific.

The "clearly you have never worked...." conclusion stems from a deeper "well, everyone must be just like me, and I feel x, so x" line of thinking that is so sophomoric I don't wonder whether these anon posters are lawyers or law students, I wonder whether they were are college or high school students.

*Proceeds to critique personal anecdotes as a form of statistical relevance then subsequently introduces personal anecdote about an experience that isn't even their own*

Average billables at most firms is right around 1800 but go on and tell me about the relative normalcy of 3000 hours.

[malibustacy]

Paul Weiss announces discretionary black box special bonuses.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Can’t say I’d be too happy if I were a PW associate, but this format seems like a shrewd move. As with the Skadden bonuses, it’s all very personalized / high touch / and secretive. Because it’s personalized, it can be targeted to wherever you highest flight-risk is. And because it’s secretive, it’s harder for a Milbank/DPW to swoop in and one-up you (not to mention, less ATL reporting and less pressure on Milbank/DOW to do that in the first place). It will be interesting to see what other firms do with this — I suspect a lot with have cover to bury their heads in the sand and ignore this.

The problem is it increases the flight risk of every associate who doesn't get one.

I’m dense but I don’t get this. If I bill 2000 and Jim bills 2300 why am I upset Jim gets cash? Especially when we’re all getting the same EOY bonus at market. I could have worked more if I wanted to (I don’t believe me). Sure if I’m at 2150 and Jim is at 2200 and he gets a bone and I don’t then I’d be annoyed. But we don’t even know what the payout is at this point so it’s hard to be preemptively upset.

You are dense (or you are still a law student).

The difference between 2200 hours and 2500 hours seems like a lot from the outside, but it is 42.3 hours a week vs 48 hours a week. If I knew in advance that 5.5 hrs a week was going to be important, sad to say that I could “find” those hours without anyone knowing or caring - I just don’t because I’m ethical and I’m not currently rewarded for it.

People pad their hours, people procrastinate more than you, people are slower than you, and yet they get rewarded. You may have suffered through a terrible international deal that required you to work from 5pm to 2am every night, and billed less than someone with a steady workflow from 9 to 7.

Maybe you took vacation, and now you feel punished for it.

White shoe biglaw has always operated on the assumption that everyone is pulling their weight and adding value, and that the billable hour, while necessary for clients and a good thing for the financial success of the industry, is not a good way of holistically judging someone’s contribution to the firm. If someone’s not contributing, they’ll be gone soon, no need to dock their bonus in an ungentlemanly manner.

Here, PW is saying that they are no longer one big team - some contribute more than others, pad your hours and cancel your vacation to make sure you get yours too. It’s probably inevitable but it is sad. And if I were a client I’d avoid firms that incentivize over billing like this.

Several things can simultaneously be true:

1. It's bad optics to publicly announce some "high performers" will get paid more, as any child smart enough to not tell people about the birthday party they're not invited to would know.

2. Associates are petty about their relative compensation to a degree that would be comical if it weren't so sad and absurd, and many of them would be more emotionally fulfilled making $200k in a firm full of $100ks than making $250k is a firm full of $500ks, and getting mad about money that had no chance of ever being yours (if it doesn't go to high performers, it stays with the partners) is actually genuinely childike.

3. Anyone who actually believed, for a single second, that their firm was "one big team" should be required to wear a helmet in public.

[Anonymous User]

Mintz announced special bonuses. $20k for first and second heard. $40k for all other class years.

[Anonymous User]

Is the Mintz thing confirmed?

[Anonymous User]

Mintz announced special bonuses. $20k for first and second heard. $40k for all other class years.

Prob irrelevant cause they never paid it in the first instance

[Barrred]

Not sure about this. Lateraling is a pain in the ass for a lot of people. (I can attest to this). If it's targeted towards the groups that can most easily lateral (corp) then there might not be much blowback, because lit associates and such can't as easily quit and find a new job instantly like those folks can.

I'm not denying how hot the corporate lateral market is, but LOL at the bolded. Mid-level lit associates are also getting their doors broken down by recruiters, and firm are scooping up whoever they can find.

[2013]

Mintz announced special bonuses. $20k for first and second heard. $40k for all other class years.

Prob irrelevant cause they never paid it in the first instance

Apparently they paid bonuses in September too. So it is not irrelevant.

[Anonymous User]

You are dense (or you are still a law student).

The difference between 2200 hours and 2500 hours seems like a lot from the outside, but it is 42.3 hours a week vs 48 hours a week. If I knew in advance that 5.5 hrs a week was going to be important, sad to say that I could “find” those hours without anyone knowing or caring - I just don’t because I’m ethical and I’m not currently rewarded for it.

Possibly the worst thing I have read all week and clearly you have never worked a 2500 pace. 2200 is bearable. 2500 pushes you to an extreme no human being should have to suffer for any extended period of time.

I’ll bill 2500 this calendar year, but sadly not the bonus year. You sound hysterical though, it’s just been one shitty deal and where my vacation fell last year and boom, 2500 over a 12 month period.

What? This is never how it works in transactional practices. First, if all it took was billing 48 hours a week, getting 2500 would be a cakewalk.

That's just not how it works, you're constantly oscillating between 30 hour weeks and 70 hour weeks. A 70 hour week is absolutely fucking brutal. The difference between doing 2200 vs. 2500 isn't 43 hours/week vs. 48 hours/week. It's the difference of turning several of your 30 hours/week to 70 hours/week which is terrible.

[cornerstone]

Mintz announced special bonuses. $20k for first and second heard. $40k for all other class years.

Prob irrelevant cause they never paid it in the first instance

Apparently they paid bonuses in September too. So it is not irrelevant.

This is news - can someone confirm? Was that on TLS/ATL?

[Anonymous User]

Mintz announced special bonuses. $20k for first and second heard. $40k for all other class years.

Prob irrelevant cause they never paid it in the first instance

Apparently they paid bonuses in September too. So it is not irrelevant.

This is news - can someone confirm? Was that on TLS/ATL?

Yeah - is ATL behind on this? Says “no” on the special bonus section: https://abovethelaw.com/2021/06/salary- ... cker-2021/

[Anonymous User]

Their email said this special bonus was “in addition to the bonus paid in September”

(Source: nep on insta)

[Definitely Not North]

That's good and everything but, like, Mintz Levin (lol) is not setting any scales. Maybe this functions as an absolute minimum on the amount paid over top of 2019/2020 regular bonuses.

[Anonymous User]

Mintz thing aside, $20k to first and second years/$40k to all other associates is too blunt of a special bonus instrument to be where we end up. A 3rd year is not going to get the same special bonus as an 8th year.

[Anonymous User]

Mintz thing aside, $20k to first and second years/$40k to all other associates is too blunt of a special bonus instrument to be where we end up. A 3rd year is not going to get the same special bonus as an 8th year.

I don’t know — that’s how Skadden’s retention bonuses worked. And those were like three times higher than Mintz’s.

[Anonymous User]

This response by the anonymous poster is so myopic it borders on the stupid. Plenty of us have worked a 2500 pace. Both litigators and transactional attorneys. I have friends at other firms that for MULTIPLE years have worked and billed 3k hours. They do it for trade-offs they knowingly make. How bearable it is, and how much suffering it involves, is entirely subjective and fact-specific.

The "clearly you have never worked...." conclusion stems from a deeper "well, everyone must be just like me, and I feel x, so x" line of thinking that is so sophomoric I don't wonder whether these anon posters are lawyers or law students, I wonder whether they were are college or high school students.

*Proceeds to critique personal anecdotes as a form of statistical relevance then subsequently introduces personal anecdote about an experience that isn't even their own*

Average billables at most firms is right around 1800 but go on and tell me about the relative normalcy of 3000 hours.

Because they factor in people who are on leave and they count associates who billed within the trailing twelve months -- hours billed count towards the TTM number, regardless of whether an associate leaves in the year.

Anyone who genuinely believes that avgs are at 1800 in v25+ transactional practices should re-check their bar license to confirm they actually passed the bar.

Finally, if you're pissed that you're at PW or Skadden and you billed 2200 and didn't get extra while Mike down the hall billed 2400 and got an extra $50K, there is an easy answer here: lateral. Either the firm is invested in keeping you, and they'll pay to do it, or they're not, and there are numerous other V10s which will likely make you whole on the financial front.

[Anonymous User]

The smartest thing a firm could do would be to make an announcement like PW just did, then proceed to pay everybody except low performers the bonus. Then you get the best of all worlds (make people feel comparatively special, don't send anybody you don't want to leave out the door, and make it harder for others to copy).

Nobody will do this, but it would be shrewd.

[zoomzoom888]

The smartest thing a firm could do would be to make an announcement like PW just did, then proceed to pay everybody except low performers the bonus. Then you get the best of all worlds (make people feel comparatively special, don't send anybody you don't want to leave out the door, and make it harder for others to copy).

Nobody will do this, but it would be shrewd.

Firms do this...it's called having an hours requirement.

[Anonymous User]

Finally, if you're pissed that you're at PW or Skadden and you billed 2200 and didn't get extra while Mike down the hall billed 2400 and got an extra $50K, there is an easy answer here: lateral. Either the firm is invested in keeping you, and they'll pay to do it, or they're not, and there are numerous other V10s which will likely make you whole on the financial front.

I'm not sure the earlier poster is arguing with the notion that someone who works more deserves a larger bonus. I think instead the earlier poster is questioning the reliability of moving away from flat lock-step on the basis that more hours billed always correlates to working more.

As a seventh year associate who had my busiest year ever last year (b/w 2600 and 2700), I regularly review bills and see that other people's billing practices are way more "lenient" than mine. Several of my honestly billed 14-15 hour days come through as 16-17 hour days for another associate that started/ended at the same time as me and took just as many "breaks" to get a drink/go to the bathroom, etc. (I know this because I don't take breaks... so there can't be much time to be had here).

Whether it is intentional padding, or just careless recording of time on a busy day and rounding up at the end when time is inserted, the variation among billers is tangible.

The difference between 2000 and 2500 is probably that people are just working different amounts. But at 50-100 hour increments on the year, that doesn't mean much.

[Anonymous User]

You are dense (or you are still a law student).

The difference between 2200 hours and 2500 hours seems like a lot from the outside, but it is 42.3 hours a week vs 48 hours a week. If I knew in advance that 5.5 hrs a week was going to be important, sad to say that I could “find” those hours without anyone knowing or caring - I just don’t because I’m ethical and I’m not currently rewarded for it.

Possibly the worst thing I have read all week and clearly you have never worked a 2500 pace. 2200 is bearable. 2500 pushes you to an extreme no human being should have to suffer for any extended period of time.

This

[Lesion of Doom]

I don't think I've ever seen anyone here suggest that 300 hours is trivial, particularly when you get above the 2k threshold.

Tend to agree with those who suggest that facilitating a formal hierarchy among associates in the same class is a bad idea. We can all see who the stars are and who the flunkies are, too, no need to codify it tho. You create the incentive to lateral among the good, if not great associates, and there's also going to be even more profligate padding than already exists. One reason bonuses are annual and not monthly.