DF Thread Forum

[FSK]

It might be enough to distinguish firm A/B large & reasonably prestigious law firm for a 2L, when they have poorly defined interests and were split culture/personality.

Thanks for making a blindingly obvious point that everyone knew and that really doesn't address the issue.

No problem.

[patogordo]

Neat strawman is a neat meme. Sure 170k compared to 160k isn't huge, but I'd still take 170k. I'm sure you can negotiate for 160k? I don't get what's going on here, I guess?

Actually, "strawman" refers to a logical fallacy: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

So no, it's only an meme insofar as you're incapable of comprehending a life outside of the internet.

And no, in biglaw, you can't negotiate for higher pay.

Oh hey, got that. I thought we were assuming that salaries are already 160k, you know, like they are. I was saying I think most people would probably take 170k over 160k, is that a logical fallacy? Idk?

you're the one who brought 170k into this conversation for no apparent reason

[Old Gregg]

Neat strawman is a neat meme. Sure 170k compared to 160k isn't huge, but I'd still take 170k. I'm sure you can negotiate for 160k? I don't get what's going on here, I guess?

Actually, "strawman" refers to a logical fallacy: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

So no, it's only an meme insofar as you're incapable of comprehending a life outside of the internet.

And no, in biglaw, you can't negotiate for higher pay.

Oh hey, got that. I thought we were assuming that salaries are already 160k, you know, like they are. I was saying I think most people would probably take 170k over 160k, is that a logical fallacy? Idk?

I was addressing this post:

DF, you don't think 10k is a lot of money?

Seemed like poster was talking about $10k in a vacuum, in which case I'd hope that everyone here can understand that yes, $10k will feed a lot of children in Africa or that $10k can buy a shit ton of rice in India. But acknowledging those facts doesn't really get to the point of what's being discussed.

[oblig.lawl.ref]

Neat strawman is a neat meme. Sure 170k compared to 160k isn't huge, but I'd still take 170k. I'm sure you can negotiate for 160k? I don't get what's going on here, I guess?

Actually, "strawman" refers to a logical fallacy: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

So no, it's only an meme insofar as you're incapable of comprehending a life outside of the internet.

And no, in biglaw, you can't negotiate for higher pay.

Oh hey, got that. I thought we were assuming that salaries are already 160k, you know, like they are. I was saying I think most people would probably take 170k over 160k, is that a logical fallacy? Idk?

you're the one who brought 170k into this conversation for no apparent reason

Fair enough, if everyone assumes 160K + 10k doesn't = 170k?

[patogordo]

we were talking about some DC firms dropping to 150 brosef

[dixiecupdrinking]

i hate everything about this thread

[FSK]

Seemed like poster was talking about $10k in a vacuum, in which case I'd hope that everyone here can understand that yes, $10k will feed a lot of children in Africa or that $10k can buy a shit ton of rice in India. But acknowledging those facts doesn't really get to the point of what's being discussed.

Not sure what you think is being discussed. My takeaway from this thread is associates are fuckered ITE, both in boom times & bust. Your only choice is where you get taken advantage of and by what marginal difference.

[oblig.lawl.ref]

we were talking about some DC firms dropping to 150 brosef

So, ok. My bad. I assume most ppl would take 160k over 150k, what's the issue here? Whats the strawman issue?

[Old Gregg]

[jbagelboy]

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

sorry -- I know this is a stupid question, and I know you're right Gunderson et al compete for top talent (in other words I'm not questioning the substance here), but what metric are you looking at on the nalp directory page to show this? the schools the firm recruits from? I don't see information on the quality of summers or anything comparative of that nature.

[Old Gregg]

the schools the firm recruits from? I

Yes.

[wanderer]

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

sorry -- I know this is a stupid question, and I know you're right Gunderson et al compete for top talent (in other words I'm not questioning the substance here), but what metric are you looking at on the nalp directory page to show this? the schools the firm recruits from? I don't see information on the quality of summers or anything comparative of that nature.

I like that they go to Northeastern but not Cornell.

[84651846190]

Everyone in here needs to shut the fuck up immediately.

Good.

Okay, let's talk about what bonuses are going to be like this year? Same Cravath scale as last year?

[wanderer]

Everyone in here needs to shut the fuck up immediately.

Good.

Okay, let's talk about what bonuses are going to be like this year? Same Cravath scale as last year?

Chances look good bro. All our lit bros are busy as fuck on some cases. I hope they don't settle before Jan. 1. A high tide floats all boats.

[Old Gregg]

Everyone in here needs to shut the fuck up immediately.

Good.

Okay, let's talk about what bonuses are going to be like this year? Same Cravath scale as last year?

I'm actually willing to bet a little higher than last year.

[84651846190]

Everyone in here needs to shut the fuck up immediately.

Good.

Okay, let's talk about what bonuses are going to be like this year? Same Cravath scale as last year?

I'm actually willing to bet a little higher than last year.

I would hope so, but we are still talking about mostly Boomers making these decisions. I'd bet on the same Cravath scale.

[Old Gregg]

I would hope so, but we are still talking about mostly Boomers making these decisions. I'd bet on the same Cravath scale.

Keep in mind that bonuses did go up post-crisis already. Remember first year bonuses were $7,500, and they were $10,000 last year. I think another modest bump will happen.

[run26.2]

Vault reports on associates wanting salary increases because of record profitability, noting they're not in a good bargaining position. Didn't realize that.

http://www.vault.com/blog/vaults-law-bl ... aign=86898

[sinfiery]

Vault reports on associates wanting salary increases because of record profitability, noting they're not in a good bargaining position. Didn't realize that.

http://www.vault.com/blog/vaults-law-bl ... aign=86898

The $160K amount represented only 27 percent of first-year salaries reported by large firms in 2014; whereas in 2009, two-thirds of first-year salaries were at that level.

well then

[Desert Fox]

Vault reports on associates wanting salary increases because of record profitability, noting they're not in a good bargaining position. Didn't realize that.

http://www.vault.com/blog/vaults-law-bl ... aign=86898

The $160K amount represented only 27 percent of first-year salaries reported by large firms in 2014; whereas in 2009, two-thirds of first-year salaries were at that level.

well then

IIRC the change is mostly due to changing definitions of what a "large law firm" is in calculating these numbers. I can't find any firm that has dropped payscales since 2009, and there are several who have since jumped to 160k.

[sinfiery]

IIRC the change is mostly due to changing definitions of what a "large law firm" is in calculating these numbers. I can't find any firm that has dropped payscales since 2009, and there are several who have since jumped to 160k.

After reading more than 1 paragraph, I see you are right

myb

[run26.2]

The change in qualifying as a large firm doesn't have that much to do with associates' bargaining power. Salaries may begin to change when enough potential associates value things above vault prestige.

[Pulsar]

Even if some firms bump salaries in a year or two, I wouldn't expect all of them to follow this time. Run-of-the-mill vault firms with PPP of $1M or less can't just increase associate comp by 15% without really feeling it. Any move by the V5-ish might percolate down to a couple dozen firms and affect compensation at the elite boutiques they compete with for talent, but I wouldn't be surprised if salary stays in stasis for quite awhile for the rest of biglaw.

[Desert Fox]

Even if some firms bump salaries in a year or two, I wouldn't expect all of them to follow this time. Run-of-the-mill vault firms with PPP of $1M or less can't just increase associate comp by 15% without really feeling it. Any move by the V5-ish might percolate down to a couple dozen firms and affect compensation at the elite boutiques they compete with for talent, but I wouldn't be surprised if salary stays in stasis for quite awhile for the rest of biglaw.

I agree with this, and a lot of the lower V100 aren't truly paying market anyway or find tricks to work around it like not promoting people class years if they dont hit hours.

[mmelittlechicken]

Even if some firms bump salaries in a year or two, I wouldn't expect all of them to follow this time. Run-of-the-mill vault firms with PPP of $1M or less can't just increase associate comp by 15% without really feeling it. Any move by the V5-ish might percolate down to a couple dozen firms and affect compensation at the elite boutiques they compete with for talent, but I wouldn't be surprised if salary stays in stasis for quite awhile for the rest of biglaw.

I agree with this, and a lot of the lower V100 aren't truly paying market anyway or find tricks to work around it like not promoting people class years if they dont hit hours.

what?