2021 Special Bonuses Forum

[Anonymous User]

Out of curiosity, how would people react if a firm bumped base salary to 200k (with commensurate raises down the seniority line) instead of paying out matching bonuses.

So total comp would be lower for this year, but base comp would be permanently higher on a go-forward basis.

Given the PPEP numbers coming out, there's an argument to be made that firms should do both. In a more just world.

[Buglaw]

Out of curiosity, how would people react if a firm bumped base salary to 200k (with commensurate raises down the seniority line) instead of paying out matching bonuses.

So total comp would be lower for this year, but base comp would be permanently higher on a go-forward basis.

Don't care much. People don't last that long in biglaw. Grab all the comp you can while you can.

[ithrowds]

Yeah the not-so-secret is that firms that specialize in tech like Fenwick & WSGR are absolutely killing it AND they actually have a pipeline to desirable in-house positions at cool tech companies.

(Let's just say no one dreams of being a big law attorney, let alone moving in-house to some random F500 company/financial institution that's been treading water for decades aka the typical NYC big law client)

I think it's equally sad that people dream of working at Facebook, Twitter, Uber, Google, and a great deal of other tech companies that mostly pollute our society with garbage, exploit workers, create products for the "haves," etc. Let's be real. Tech is "desirable" because tech is "sexy" and people love prefffffftige, not because it's actually meaningfully better than any of those random F500s "treading water."

Tech is desirable not just because it's "sexy," there is way more in the way of potential monetary upside of joining a high growth private startup versus your random F500 when taking into account private company stock options. In-house lawyers at Snowflake probably made between $20-200mm in the IPO earlier this year, I'm sure even their in-house paralegals are even holding multiple millions of dollars of stock at this point.

[Anonymous User]

Out of curiosity, how would people react if a firm bumped base salary to 200k (with commensurate raises down the seniority line) instead of paying out matching bonuses.

So total comp would be lower for this year, but base comp would be permanently higher on a go-forward basis.

Junior/incoming associates will be much happier with this. As would senior associates that plan on staying in biglaw long-term.

Senior associates that intend to go in-house sooner or later will not like it.

[lolwutpar]

Given that the annual bonuses were paid 2-3 months ago, firms may be doing too little too late. I know several midlevels and seniors actively interviewing right now. While it's good DPW moved up the payment timeline, ultimately it's not enough money to make people stay if they were already thinking about leaving - and certainly not to stay until the end of September.

[Anonymous User]

Given that the annual bonuses were paid 2-3 months ago, firms may be doing too little too late. I know several midlevels and seniors actively interviewing right now. While it's good DPW moved up the payment timeline, ultimately it's not enough money to make people stay if they were already thinking about leaving - and certainly not to stay until the end of September.

Would the bonuses + salary increase make a difference?

[Ultramar vistas]

Yeah the not-so-secret is that firms that specialize in tech like Fenwick & WSGR are absolutely killing it AND they actually have a pipeline to desirable in-house positions at cool tech companies.

(Let's just say no one dreams of being a big law attorney, let alone moving in-house to some random F500 company/financial institution that's been treading water for decades aka the typical NYC big law client)

I think it's equally sad that people dream of working at Facebook, Twitter, Uber, Google, and a great deal of other tech companies that mostly pollute our society with garbage, exploit workers, create products for the "haves," etc. Let's be real. Tech is "desirable" because tech is "sexy" and people love prefffffftige, not because it's actually meaningfully better than any of those random F500s "treading water."

Tech is desirable not just because it's "sexy," there is way more in the way of potential monetary upside of joining a high growth private startup versus your random F500 when taking into account private company stock options. In-house lawyers at Snowflake probably made between $20-200mm in the IPO earlier this year, I'm sure even their in-house paralegals are even holding multiple millions of dollars of stock at this point.

Lol at those numbers. Non c-suite employees at even very successful startups will be lucky to see very low seven figures in an IPO after dilution. Maybe the GC made a few million but no, regular Corp counsel was not getting that.

[lolwutpar]

Given that the annual bonuses were paid 2-3 months ago, firms may be doing too little too late. I know several midlevels and seniors actively interviewing right now. While it's good DPW moved up the payment timeline, ultimately it's not enough money to make people stay if they were already thinking about leaving - and certainly not to stay until the end of September.

Would the bonuses + salary increase make a difference?

No, not for a lot of people. We make plenty of money. If you're looking to go in-house it's because:

A: you're burnt out

B: it was always the plan

C: you want some semblance of work/life balance

Or some combination of those 3. By the time most people are looking to make a move in-house, they are already financially secure (given all the money we've made in the last several years). Comp won't move the scale too much, though for some it will, or at least delay the search. But everyone knows at some point you gotta walk away from the money.

[Anonymous User]

Uncle Milbank just matched DPW — no hours requirement attached.

[Anonymous User]

word on the street is papa milbank matched

Edit: oop ya beat me to it

[lolwutpar]

Looks like some firms are committing to potentially paying over the scale for these bonii if you are billing a lot. Hopefully that comes to fruition...I am way over pace.

[bruinfan10]

word on the street is papa milbank matched

Edit: oop ya beat me to it

if not flame, send the damn memo to ATL already!

edit: you delivered, you glorious milbastards.

[VentureMBA]

Yeah the not-so-secret is that firms that specialize in tech like Fenwick & WSGR are absolutely killing it AND they actually have a pipeline to desirable in-house positions at cool tech companies.

(Let's just say no one dreams of being a big law attorney, let alone moving in-house to some random F500 company/financial institution that's been treading water for decades aka the typical NYC big law client)

I think it's equally sad that people dream of working at Facebook, Twitter, Uber, Google, and a great deal of other tech companies that mostly pollute our society with garbage, exploit workers, create products for the "haves," etc. Let's be real. Tech is "desirable" because tech is "sexy" and people love prefffffftige, not because it's actually meaningfully better than any of those random F500s "treading water."

Tech is desirable not just because it's "sexy," there is way more in the way of potential monetary upside of joining a high growth private startup versus your random F500 when taking into account private company stock options. In-house lawyers at Snowflake probably made between $20-200mm in the IPO earlier this year, I'm sure even their in-house paralegals are even holding multiple millions of dollars of stock at this point.

Lol at those numbers. Non c-suite employees at even very successful startups will be lucky to see very low seven figures in an IPO after dilution. Maybe the GC made a few million but no, regular Corp counsel was not getting that.

I have seen a dozen+ companies pay out over $1m to 5 or more in house lawyers. I have seen multiple "Heads of/VP of Legal" (i.e., not qualified enough to be a GC) make $5m+.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah the not-so-secret is that firms that specialize in tech like Fenwick & WSGR are absolutely killing it AND they actually have a pipeline to desirable in-house positions at cool tech companies.

(Let's just say no one dreams of being a big law attorney, let alone moving in-house to some random F500 company/financial institution that's been treading water for decades aka the typical NYC big law client)

I think it's equally sad that people dream of working at Facebook, Twitter, Uber, Google, and a great deal of other tech companies that mostly pollute our society with garbage, exploit workers, create products for the "haves," etc. Let's be real. Tech is "desirable" because tech is "sexy" and people love prefffffftige, not because it's actually meaningfully better than any of those random F500s "treading water."

Tech is desirable not just because it's "sexy," there is way more in the way of potential monetary upside of joining a high growth private startup versus your random F500 when taking into account private company stock options. In-house lawyers at Snowflake probably made between $20-200mm in the IPO earlier this year, I'm sure even their in-house paralegals are even holding multiple millions of dollars of stock at this point.

Lol at those numbers. Non c-suite employees at even very successful startups will be lucky to see very low seven figures in an IPO after dilution. Maybe the GC made a few million but no, regular Corp counsel was not getting that.

I have seen a dozen+ companies pay out over $1m to 5 or more in house lawyers. I have seen multiple "Heads of/VP of Legal" (i.e., not qualified enough to be a GC) make $5m+.

wow that's pretty amazing. pls reveal the companies so i can lateral asap

[thelawyler]

Given that the annual bonuses were paid 2-3 months ago, firms may be doing too little too late. I know several midlevels and seniors actively interviewing right now. While it's good DPW moved up the payment timeline, ultimately it's not enough money to make people stay if they were already thinking about leaving - and certainly not to stay until the end of September.

To add to this, after the initial wave of departures, the remaining associates are now having no end in sight as the departing associates have now passed on their work, leading to even lower morale. The remaining mid/senior associates look around at everyone interviewing and think to themselves: I don't want to be left holding the bag. Before I exited, I was literally doing the work of a senior associate, mid level and junior associate due to staffing. Sometimes even what the junior partner had assigned himself to do.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah the not-so-secret is that firms that specialize in tech like Fenwick & WSGR are absolutely killing it AND they actually have a pipeline to desirable in-house positions at cool tech companies.

(Let's just say no one dreams of being a big law attorney, let alone moving in-house to some random F500 company/financial institution that's been treading water for decades aka the typical NYC big law client)

I think it's equally sad that people dream of working at Facebook, Twitter, Uber, Google, and a great deal of other tech companies that mostly pollute our society with garbage, exploit workers, create products for the "haves," etc. Let's be real. Tech is "desirable" because tech is "sexy" and people love prefffffftige, not because it's actually meaningfully better than any of those random F500s "treading water."

Tech is desirable not just because it's "sexy," there is way more in the way of potential monetary upside of joining a high growth private startup versus your random F500 when taking into account private company stock options. In-house lawyers at Snowflake probably made between $20-200mm in the IPO earlier this year, I'm sure even their in-house paralegals are even holding multiple millions of dollars of stock at this point.

Lol at those numbers. Non c-suite employees at even very successful startups will be lucky to see very low seven figures in an IPO after dilution. Maybe the GC made a few million but no, regular Corp counsel was not getting that.

I have seen a dozen+ companies pay out over $1m to 5 or more in house lawyers. I have seen multiple "Heads of/VP of Legal" (i.e., not qualified enough to be a GC) make $5m+.

Yeah this is accurate. Def not the 20-200mn (lol I wish...) but can reach the 1m-5m range, even if not GC, if you join at the right time. Again, why firms like Cooley, Fenwick, Gunderson, WSGR have such advantages as they take on these tech clients from an early stage and grow with them. If you join when they're at pubco status (when these tech firms might lose clients to traditional V10 firms), you're too late anyway for that type of compensation.

Obviously risky for some as not all tech companies are successful but that's where the biglaw salary presumably should provide some runway.

[Ultramar vistas]

Yeah the not-so-secret is that firms that specialize in tech like Fenwick & WSGR are absolutely killing it AND they actually have a pipeline to desirable in-house positions at cool tech companies.

(Let's just say no one dreams of being a big law attorney, let alone moving in-house to some random F500 company/financial institution that's been treading water for decades aka the typical NYC big law client)

I think it's equally sad that people dream of working at Facebook, Twitter, Uber, Google, and a great deal of other tech companies that mostly pollute our society with garbage, exploit workers, create products for the "haves," etc. Let's be real. Tech is "desirable" because tech is "sexy" and people love prefffffftige, not because it's actually meaningfully better than any of those random F500s "treading water."

Tech is desirable not just because it's "sexy," there is way more in the way of potential monetary upside of joining a high growth private startup versus your random F500 when taking into account private company stock options. In-house lawyers at Snowflake probably made between $20-200mm in the IPO earlier this year, I'm sure even their in-house paralegals are even holding multiple millions of dollars of stock at this point.

Lol at those numbers. Non c-suite employees at even very successful startups will be lucky to see very low seven figures in an IPO after dilution. Maybe the GC made a few million but no, regular Corp counsel was not getting that.

I have seen a dozen+ companies pay out over $1m to 5 or more in house lawyers. I have seen multiple "Heads of/VP of Legal" (i.e., not qualified enough to be a GC) make $5m+.

Great sounds as if you agree with me that $20 to $200 million for corporate counsel is improbable. You know of multiple situations where Heads of/VP of Legal made $5m, and there was another lawyer above them? As in, they weren’t just acting-GC without the title? Okay bud.

[lolwutpar]

lol if non-GC positions made millions of dollars in-house nobody would work at a firm

but lets not derail the topic. These bonuses should be both larger and paid sooner if they want any hope of retention. A 5th year would walk from a $20k bonus payable in a month if they're deep in the interviewing process right now.

[Anonymous User]

Skadden matched (per an insider). Payout in June and December.

[Anonymous User]

Skadden match incoming. Details to come.

Nice. Do you know if match or beat?

wow hope you're right! I haven't seen anything from Friedman today but fingers crossed

Just dropped. 50/50 in June/December, like many firm romances.

[Anonymous User]

Skadden matched (per an insider). Payout in June and December.

Confirm we matched and its 50% end of June/50% December

[lolwutpar]

Uhh what's the point of a December special bonus?

[Anonymous User]

Uhh what's the point of a December special bonus?

Possibly to try to incentivize people to stay until then, but like you mentioned earlier, likely won't make a difference for those that are already half out the door

[lolwutpar]

Uhh what's the point of a December special bonus?

Possibly to try to incentivize people to stay until then, but like you mentioned earlier, likely won't make a difference for those that are already half out the door

Does Skadden not pay annual bonuses Dec. 31/Jan. 1/Jan. 31? If so, I don't get the point of stacking a special bonus with the annual bonus. Doesn't have much of a retention effect.

[Anonymous User]

Uhh what's the point of a December special bonus?

Possibly to try to incentivize people to stay until then, but like you mentioned earlier, likely won't make a difference for those that are already half out the door

Does Skadden not pay annual bonuses Dec. 31/Jan. 1/Jan. 31? If so, I don't get the point of stacking a special bonus with the annual bonus. Doesn't have much of a retention effect.

So if I'm at a firm that pays in September could I....lateral to Skadden and get them to pay me end of year bonus as a signing bonus and double dip on the retention bonus?