Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k Forum

[Anonymous User]

If DPW doesn't call it a true up and calls it a special bonus instead, Milbank will match it. That'll put DPW in am even more u comfortable position.

[TigerIsBack]

Alright look I got an A- in law firm finance seminar at YHSCCN so I can tell you exactly what's happening. (lol)

(but seriously) Think like a managing partner for a second. If v10 matches now, then v10 will be expected to pay increased salary all year and at least one mid year special bonus. If they all collectively agree to ignore this, DPW can SHATTER the millybank scale effective April 1 or July 1, with a 3 or 6 month true up disguised as a pretty fat "special bonus" (like 2018 or whatever year that happened). And the market will follow. Final result: DPW maintains its spot as top comp dog and they nip the firehose of *actual* special bonuses. Remember, firms DO NOT want to pay us these bonuses for the rest of forever. The gravy train has to end eventually.

The one big risk is whether all firms play ball (kind of a millionaire prisoner's dilemma). A cascading match would force DPW to abandon this plan and match/raise early. Debatably this has already started with Cooley but we'll see.

And take note that no recruiting season exists between now and April/July so there is not a real risk of recruiting issues until late summer/early fall. If peer firms are playing along, then your top talent will stay. They won't leave for a temporary pay increase.

This doesn't make a lot of sense.

First of all, no chance DPW would get away with waiting until April to match the new scale and just calling their true up payment a special bonus. Morgan Lewis has already been criticized for trying this (which I don't think was their intent) in this current cycle.

Second, that true up payment would be like $5-10k for midlevels. That's nowhere near the special bonus level that midlevels are seniors are hoping for with a special bonus announcement (and definitely not "fat"). Think more in the range of $50-75k based on last year's scale plus inflation (not saying we'll get that, just that a $5k bonus would be a major let down in most people's eyes).

Third, there is nothing to suggest that if DPW doesn't announce a match until late spring/early summer that there's no recruiting season. The big special bonuses are targeting keeping midlevels and seniors. Those people are being recruited every day, and if another month goes by without a match from the v10, it may not be droves, but it also won't be zero associates that leave their v10 shops for higher paying firms like DLA, Goodwin, Cooley and Fried Frank. V10 associates already go to these firms as midlevels looking for a better lifestyle (which, lol).

Big brain anon here. Firms did this a couple years ago, so I don't think it's out of the question. For Juniors it was equivalent to a true up payment but for midlevels (maybe) and seniors it was higher (maybe 2x true up?). Not equivalent to the fat bonuses but remember, the law firms have the incentive to wean us off the special bonus teat.

And of course the firm could put a little on top if they wanted to. The point is that a true up has historically been called a special bonus and there is incentive to do that again (even in part).

And hmm, I know it goes against TLS dogma but as a pretentious YHSCCNer myself (with the student loans to show for it) I REALLY don't think the type of midlevel/senior considering v10 preftige would choose one of those "non-peer" firms based on a (presumably) temporary <6.5% salary boost, before taxes. Especially when v10 firms are throwing around fat black box signing bonuses these days.

Agree to disagree but saying this "doesn't make sense" is kind of silly when we're all literally watching DPW not match or re-raise for what seems to be no reason.

Paragraph 1 - Those were different times. The market was not nearly as hot, nor as busy as it is now and has been for 2 years, so those bonuses were viewed in a vacuum at the time because the last special bonuses came like 5 years prior or more. Not one person is going to be fooled by DPW calling its true up payment a special bonus and not one person is going to be excited by that since the DLA people will have been making that money for months (TVM).

Paragraph 3 - You're assuming people would view this as a temporary pay disparity. If this goes on for another month or longer, as the premise of your argument assumes, this no longer looks like a temporary move by DPW. If DPW is still on the old scale come May 1st, it's pretty clear at that point they have no intention of raising salaries or competing with the Milbank matching firms on salary and instead are relying on prestige to keep people around (which it will for some, but I think you and DPW will be surprised how many people choose Goodwin or Cooley for more money - again, some people already go to these firms from DPW for the same money).

Paragraph 4 - No it really just doesn't make any sense. Full stop.

[Anonymous User]

Last time special bonuses were paid pre-COVID, nobody in the market paid the corresponding base raise retroactively to January 1.

[Anonymous User]

And hmm, I know it goes against TLS dogma but as a pretentious YHSCCNer myself (with the student loans to show for it) I REALLY don't think the type of midlevel/senior considering v10 preftige would choose one of those "non-peer" firms based on a (presumably) temporary <6.5% salary boost, before taxes.

Just say CCN dog. Also, your point is stupid, you should've gotten a B+ in that law firm finance class.

[Anonymous User]

And hmm, I know it goes against TLS dogma but as a pretentious YHSCCNer myself (with the student loans to show for it) I REALLY don't think the type of midlevel/senior considering v10 preftige would choose one of those "non-peer" firms based on a (presumably) temporary <6.5% salary boost, before taxes.

Just say CCN dog. Also, your point is stupid, you should've gotten a B+ in that law firm finance class.

Literally the joke

[Anonymous User]

Associates should utilize what's their power and the tool available to them (Vault ranking survey) to make it known to the partners. Just rank all the non-matched firms low and see if they'd match quickly the next time around.

+1. Also, counseling 1L/2Ls en masse away from non-market firms like CSM and DPW. That will be an easier push once Vault rankings reflect those firms’ shittyness.

[Anonymous User]

My partner told me today is the day!

Is that a prediction or does he know for sure?

[Anonymous User]

My partner told me today is the day!

Prb just another troll; can’t understand why.

[Anonymous User]

What is going on?! Why would DPW spend the last year or so trying to one-up every firm in the name of “prestige” (and/or retention), and then a few months later refuse to not only raise but not even match, which is going to end up hurting their reputation, and in turn their prestige and retention efforts. Make it make sense

[Anonymous User]

https://www.abajournal.com/news/article ... es-in-2021

If they keep this bullshit up and don't raise...

[_PopTorts_]

Saw a truck with a giant picture of a lobster on it on the way in to work this morning. Must be carrying all the cash they're about to rain on us. It's happening today--you heard it here first.

[Anonymous User]

Are there any other V10s that would hypothetically raise? I know DPW is the trendsetter based on last year. Also know that Kirkland, Latham, and STB would never raise. What's the read on PW? Sidley (V11)?

[Anonymous User]

https://www.abajournal.com/news/article ... es-in-2021

If they keep this bullshit up and don't raise...

Headline is a bit sensationalist, I doubt the collective biglaw lost 25% of ass's. They're probably counting laterals. Which, 1/4 of associates lateralling in a years translates to about avg tenure of 4 years, which makes sense.


This part made me laugh/scream:

The report also suggested that firms should find ways to foster social engagement and camaraderie, take a flexible approach to work, and provide resources through wellness and mental health programs.

No, I don't want more wellness programs. Pay me.

[Anonymous User]

https://www.abajournal.com/news/article ... es-in-2021

If they keep this bullshit up and don't raise...

Headline is a bit sensationalist, I doubt the collective biglaw lost 25% of ass's. They're probably counting laterals. Which, 1/4 of associates lateralling in a years translates to about avg tenure of 4 years, which makes sense.


This part made me laugh/scream:

The report also suggested that firms should find ways to foster social engagement and camaraderie, take a flexible approach to work, and provide resources through wellness and mental health programs.

No, I don't want more wellness programs. Pay me.

On your last point, I don't even want more pay. If I got a guarantee (and one that I could actually trust, which tbh I don't think I ever would) that my firm was going to not match Milbank or hell even drop us down 10k-20k, but they would use all that revenue to bring in more associates and not take on any more work -- that's what I really want. But that line of thinking is less realistic than thinking we're going to get any news today.

[Anonymous User]

On your last point, I don't even want more pay. If I got a guarantee (and one that I could actually trust, which tbh I don't think I ever would) that my firm was going to not match Milbank or hell even drop us down 10k-20k, but they would use all that revenue to bring in more associates and not take on any more work -- that's what I really want. But that line of thinking is less realistic than thinking we're going to get any news today.

If there were more associates to find, they would be hiring them. Shortage is throughout the industry and a result of increase work + reduced hiring prev decade.

You're really asking them to take on less work. Which is reasonable but not gonna happen.

[Anonymous User]

Headline is a bit sensationalist, I doubt the collective biglaw lost 25% of ass's. They're probably counting laterals. Which, 1/4 of associates lateralling in a years translates to about avg tenure of 4 years, which makes sense.

Yeah, the point of my post was strictly the sensationalist headline. The actual article dives into discussing that even with more pay, associates couldn't be retained (regardless of whether it was actually 25%). Personally, I'm green enough to say just show me the money. I'm sure I'll join you in your perspective in due time (should have left your entire message in the quoted text, too lazy to change now)

[Anonymous User]

https://www.abajournal.com/news/article ... es-in-2021

If they keep this bullshit up and don't raise...

Headline is a bit sensationalist, I doubt the collective biglaw lost 25% of ass's. They're probably counting laterals. Which, 1/4 of associates lateralling in a years translates to about avg tenure of 4 years, which makes sense.


This part made me laugh/scream:

The report also suggested that firms should find ways to foster social engagement and camaraderie, take a flexible approach to work, and provide resources through wellness and mental health programs.

No, I don't want more wellness programs. Pay me.

On your last point, I don't even want more pay. If I got a guarantee (and one that I could actually trust, which tbh I don't think I ever would) that my firm was going to not match Milbank or hell even drop us down 10k-20k, but they would use all that revenue to bring in more associates and not take on any more work -- that's what I really want. But that line of thinking is less realistic than thinking we're going to get any news today.

This will never happen. People have floated an idea like this for decades and it's never been taken up at least not in biglaw. You're essentially describing a midlaw / boutique style lifetsyle firm where the partners are comfortable at a certain level of income and not looking for further growth. The model exists but it's not a biglaw model.

[AureliusCapital]

It has officially been 1 month since Milbank has destroyed the market and been the leader.

[Anonymous User]

Are there any other V10s that would hypothetically raise? I know DPW is the trendsetter based on last year. Also know that Kirkland, Latham, and STB would never raise. What's the read on PW? Sidley (V11)?

If I remember correctly, STB used to be one of the scale setters, getting us to the long held $145k ->$160k in 2007.

Sidley? SIDLEY?? I know Sidley and they would never set a trend. If they do, I'll eat my wife's lobster

[Anonymous User]

Are there any other V10s that would hypothetically raise? I know DPW is the trendsetter based on last year. Also know that Kirkland, Latham, and STB would never raise. What's the read on PW? Sidley (V11)?

If I remember correctly, STB used to be one of the scale setters, getting us to the long held $145k ->$160k in 2007.

Sidley? SIDLEY?? I know Sidley and they would never set a trend. If they do, I'll eat my wife's lobster

Sidley senior associate here. Totally agree. I'm not worried about Sidley not matching, but we'll never raise in a million years. Given the really large regulatory practice the firm has lower PEP than its peers (Sidley is V11 but is somewhere around 20-25th in PEP).

[Anonymous User]

I think DPW has its own plan and is telling Milbank/the market in general that it follows no one. There will be raises and special bonuses forthcoming, and DPW will be the talk of the town. They just don't feel the need to go tit for tat with Milbank when they have a plan in place that exceeds current market.

[Anonymous User]

I think DPW has its own plan and is telling Milbank/the market in general that it follows no one. There will be raises and special bonuses forthcoming, and DPW will be the talk of the town. They just don't feel the need to go tit for tat with Milbank when they have a plan in place that exceeds current market.

epic coping right here

[Anonymous User]

I think DPW has its own plan and is telling Milbank/the market in general that it follows no one. There will be raises and special bonuses forthcoming, and DPW will be the talk of the town. They just don't feel the need to go tit for tat with Milbank when they have a plan in place that exceeds current market.

Well, that confirms it. DPW about to come in with its big swinging PPP whenever it good and well pleases to expose Milbank’s raises for the fun-sized candy bars they are. Dee Pee Dubbers, lobster is back on the menu! Anon has confirmed it!

[Anonymous User]

I think DPW has its own plan and is telling Milbank/the market in general that it follows no one. There will be raises and special bonuses forthcoming, and DPW will be the talk of the town. They just don't feel the need to go tit for tat with Milbank when they have a plan in place that exceeds current market.

Makes no sense to me. If the plan here is to stunt on Milbank, they're doing a poor job. I'm a DPW associate and am feeling pretty stunted on atm.

Sure, blowing Milbank out of the water in a few weeks would be nice, but will it fully unscramble the eggs that are my morale right now? Probably not, especially given the tone-deaf RTO plan announced amidst the comp silence.

[Anonymous User]

I think DPW has its own plan and is telling Milbank/the market in general that it follows no one. There will be raises and special bonuses forthcoming, and DPW will be the talk of the town. They just don't feel the need to go tit for tat with Milbank when they have a plan in place that exceeds current market.

Agree with the bolded -- part of the silence is DPW ostentatiously not giving a shit about Milbank (which is somewhat surprising but maybe that's the point). The rest of this post is ...optimistic.