NY GOES TO 180k! IT HAPPENED!!!! (CovingTTTon does a 180! Holder wept.) Forum

[Aeon]

For those who've never lived in the City, it's hard to appreciate the pull that it exerts on the people who live there. Even those who dislike metropolises can find themselves drawn in to New York's energy, culture, and multifarious diversions. Of course, many people make the choice to move out, especially once they start families and get the itch for the white picket fences of suburbia. But there is no shortage of people wanting to move in.

Alternative legal industry hypothesis to float by you guys:

Law firms increasingly understand that the PPP metric is toxic at the aggregate level and largely useless for partner lateraling at the micro level. Moreover, as clients increasingly demand efficient senior attorneys to handle their work instead of hordes of useless juniors, retention will be a greater issue (especially considering the heated up lateral market for associates). Lateraling partners and associates will look to firm health and viability in the "new normal" - and what better way to attract/retain clients than offer an impressive associate base who are more likely to stick around (clients vastly prefer this to having an endlessly rotating group of juniors who never spend enough time to really "get" the clients in the same way the partners do).

How are firms going to retain lawyers? Those that can afford it will bump up associate base salaries (at least midlevel pay/bonuses initially, but probably an across the board raise to attract candidates in the first place). That will initially help distance the big players from the middle of the pack - as firm consolidation takes hold and the middle players get comfortable with a lower PPP, funds will open up for these firms to follow suit in raising associate pay (arguably this is what lower AmLaw 200 firms are doing now to catch up to Simpson et. al's 2007 move to 160 by raising their secondary market associate pay to 160 finally).

Law firms will have to understand that associates are what make the wheels turn in the firms, and those firms who develop and care for their associates best will be the firms that foster happy (and loyal) client relationships, and ultimately prosper. It will be a golden age to be an associate - hours, benefits, and pay improvements will be ours for the taking. What a time to be alive!

Intriguing hypothesis, Capitol. I think it's quite possible that the "top 1%" of BigLaw firms will continue to pull away from the pack and be able to offer increased prestige, salaries, and benefits. The middle of the pack will attempt to chase after the top firms and perhaps match salaries to benefit from some of the warm glow from the leaders. Basically, the top firms will see their advantage grow, while the rest will be stuck trying to keep up with the Joneses.

I'd agree that firms would probably prefer to limit turnover in associate ranks as much as possible, especially among the more senior associates (juniors are usually treated as relatively expendable). It's possible that there might emerge a cohort of "golden" associates, with top law school and top law firm pedigrees, who'd be sought after by firms, as the BigLaw firms seek to differentiate themselves in an increasingly competitive market by attracting as many of these associates as possible.

[EzraFitz]

.

[Londonbear]

yea unfortunately that doesnt change anything wrt to the labor supply or create leverage for juniors unless T14 grads start refusing to work for certain white shoe firms.

At least at GULC, I think you're seeing that a lot with regards to NYC in general. I know a bunch of people who avoided NYC at all costs.

Yeah, I've been continually shocked how many of GULC's class of '17 are going elsewhere, whether it's DC, LA, SF/SV, Chicago, London, or other random markets. Virtually the only ones I know doing NY are going to v5's (besides one shitbird headed to Cadwalader but fuck that guy). NY def has a growing stigma.

I love that I don't know who you are, but I know who this is.

That's the first thing I thought too when I read the post.

I'm convinced every school has that one fucking guy, the clueless-weirdo-genius-but-not-really who can't stop talking; my section had its own, but he seems almost quaint compared to this dude. He's the guy whose gunning transcends the mundane attempts of lesser tryhards through constant displays of sheer intellectual aggression. Add to that an uncanny lack of self awareness about posting personal details online (like gpa) and you've got the recipe for a legend.

This is so beautifully written it almost brings tears to my eyes. While I wasn't in aforementioned gunner's section, I have had the bad luck to be in a number of his classes 2L.

Same. It is quite an... experience to be in class with him. It makes me laugh that everyone here from GULC knows who it is.

I must be pretty clueless b/c I still can't figure out who this is

[EzraFitz]

.

[5ky]

you guys really need to stop shittalking a classmate in a public online forum. it is definitely not a good look

[Johann]

yea can we get some edits or perhaps the mods can clean this up

[Glasseyes]

eh, you're right. i edited mine, though it probably too late.

to shift things back in the right direction: how long til the money train hits DC, and what are the odds that they retroactively boost all our SA salaries?

[TLSModBot]

eh, you're right. i edited mine, though it probably too late.

to shift things back in the right direction: how long til the money train hits DC, and what are the odds that they retroactively boost all our SA salaries?

DC salaries will likely be tied to NY (or very closely follow) - people want dat DC preftige but they'd go to NY in a heartbeat if the money was better.

Retroactive SA pay isn't a thing but your enhanced first year salaries (plus bonuses!) will make you feel better

[philepistemer]

what are the odds that they retroactively boost all are SA salaries?

I would say 0.5%

[Johann]

eh, you're right. i edited mine, though it probably too late.

to shift things back in the right direction: how long til the money train hits DC, and what are the odds that they retroactively boost all our SA salaries?

DC salaries will likely be tied to NY (or very closely follow) - people want dat DC preftige but they'd go to NY in a heartbeat if the money was better.

Retroactive SA pay isn't a thing but your enhanced first year salaries (plus bonuses!) will make you feel better

ehh, DC isn't really a market follower anymore.

Its 2015 Associate Salary Survey says the median pay for first-year associates at large firms in Washington remains $160,000. But that is the case at about 60 percent of D.C. firms this year. In 2009, about 90 percent of firms with more than 700 lawyers reported first-year salaries of $160,000.

http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/b ... aries.html

It's like Chicago - obviously the big dogs would move but outside the truly top of the top, doubtful.

[Mr. Blackacre]

eh, you're right. i edited mine, though it probably too late.

to shift things back in the right direction: how long til the money train hits DC, and what are the odds that they retroactively boost all our SA salaries?

DC salaries will likely be tied to NY (or very closely follow) - people want dat DC preftige but they'd go to NY in a heartbeat if the money was better.

Retroactive SA pay isn't a thing but your enhanced first year salaries (plus bonuses!) will make you feel better

For what it's worth, I'm not really sure I would (read - I wouldn't) go to NY in a heartbeat if the money was better. Even if it was, say, 190k over 160k. I know a lot of it is firm-specific, but I've heard enough from NY people who have made the transition about how much more slave-driving the big NYC-based firms are. Not only that, but from what I understand exiting to government from DC is way easier than from New York, and what else are you gonna do as a litigation attorney?
Anyway, not that any of it matters since I agree most of DC would probably prestige-match instantly. Looking forward to a no-recession, cash-heavy first year

[TheoO]

Honestly, though, have we learned anything new so far? People at T14s have been known to avoid NYC whenever they can, but this is limited by regional/satellite firms requiring (1) connections and/or (2) grades, and having vastly smaller classes. People from HLS or other schools who meet the grades and/or connections have been lured outside for a while now (whether to TX or CA, and especially DC). NY can sit on its lawrels so long as the average law student who is not a standout applicant faces NYC or strikeout.

And this is without even taking into account the whole "I want to do my 20s in NYC" or the group of people who have the view that they need to begin their careers in NYC before lateraling elsewhere for some reason or another (this is, btw, something I commonly heard OCS tell people at my school, whether right or wrong, I have no clue yet).

[2014]

yea unfortunately that doesnt change anything wrt to the labor supply or create leverage for juniors unless T14 grads start refusing to work for certain white shoe firms.

At least at GULC, I think you're seeing that a lot with regards to NYC in general. I know a bunch of people who avoided NYC at all costs.

This may sound overly douchey but for a school that is like 45% in big firm/clerkships, maybe GULC should be doing something to encourage their students not to avoid the biggest legal market at all costs.


More on topic - what we really need is HLS to boycott NY for a year, I think everyone wins in that scenario

[Mr. Blackacre]

yea unfortunately that doesnt change anything wrt to the labor supply or create leverage for juniors unless T14 grads start refusing to work for certain white shoe firms.

At least at GULC, I think you're seeing that a lot with regards to NYC in general. I know a bunch of people who avoided NYC at all costs.

This may sound overly douchey but for a school that is like 45% in big firm/clerkships, maybe GULC should be doing something to encourage their students not to avoid the biggest legal market at all costs.


More on topic - what we really need is HLS to boycott NY for a year, I think everyone wins in that scenario

You're correct, you do sound overly douchey. No one at GULC escapes the fact that NYC is the safest option for biglaw. In fact, the career services office vocally warns students against overreaching geographically, and advises everyone, including students in the top 10%, to include at least a few NYC firms as backups. But guess what, even at GULC there are students who don't end up in New York. You know, what with the school being located in DC and a majority of its students practicing in DC after graduation

HLS students not going to New York won't change a thing. New York remains the best option for anyone at a lower-ranked school to get into big law, and so as TheoO mentioned, unless something changes significantly they'll still get their pick from 1) every "average" student in the T14, and 2) all the top students below. And I don't think a top 10% student at Fordham is any different in abilities from a median student at a T14. Do carry on with the HLS elitism though.

[kcdc1]

The pro-NYC cognitive dissonance ITT is adorable. Sacrifice COL-adjusted income for access to milkbar, convince self that it's to meet "better" people.

[TLSModBot]

DC's got some pretty shitty people, reasonably certain NY is objectively better. Not too much of a stretch in my mind to think that better people would be in NY over smaller secondary cities. eta: fuck it let's not do a "X city is better than Y city" thread again.

Who the hell has time to meet/hang out with non-shitty people (read: not lawyers) anyway?

[cron1834]

yea unfortunately that doesnt change anything wrt to the labor supply or create leverage for juniors unless T14 grads start refusing to work for certain white shoe firms.

At least at GULC, I think you're seeing that a lot with regards to NYC in general. I know a bunch of people who avoided NYC at all costs.

This may sound overly douchey but for a school that is like 45% in big firm/clerkships, maybe GULC should be doing something to encourage their students not to avoid the biggest legal market at all costs.


More on topic - what we really need is HLS to boycott NY for a year, I think everyone wins in that scenario

You're correct, you do sound overly douchey. No one at GULC escapes the fact that NYC is the safest option for biglaw. In fact, the career services office vocally warns students against overreaching geographically, and advises everyone, including students in the top 10%, to include at least a few NYC firms as backups. But guess what, even at GULC there are students who don't end up in New York. You know, what with the school being located in DC and a majority of its students practicing in DC after graduation

HLS students not going to New York won't change a thing. New York remains the best option for anyone at a lower-ranked school to get into big law, and so as TheoO mentioned, unless something changes significantly they'll still get their pick from 1) every "average" student in the T14, and 2) all the top students below. And I don't think a top 10% student at Fordham is any different in abilities from a median student at a T14. Do carry on with the HLS elitism though.

This is a bizarrely over sensitive response. GULC sucks and 70% of their graduates would be lucky to get NYC biglaw. That said, NYC is crazy expensive and that's a shame.

[smaug]

yeah the NYC people are seeming AWFULLY defensive here

lmao

[Johann]

Of course there's cognitive dissonance, people in NYC are effectively making 20-30% less than other big lawyers and in some cases even 50% less per hour from some secondaries.

[mt2165]

Honestly, though, have we learned anything new so far? People at T14s have been known to avoid NYC whenever they can, but this is limited by regional/satellite firms requiring (1) connections and/or (2) grades, and having vastly smaller classes. People from HLS or other schools who meet the grades and/or connections have been lured outside for a while now (whether to TX or CA, and especially DC). NY can sit on its lawrels so long as the average law student who is not a standout applicant faces NYC or strikeout.

This isn't quite true. People at Columbia/NYU/Penn/Cornell want NYC, it's not solely because they don't want to strike out or that NYC firms are the most prevalent at OCI. A ton of top people go to NYC, and honestly, unless you've tasted all the different major cities or are from there - there just aren't that many reasons not to choose NYC. Those firms are still the most prestigious, and a ton of people don't want to go back to whatever TTT small city/region they're from.

[Glasseyes]

This is a bizarrely over sensitive response. GULC sucks and 70% of their graduates would be lucky to get NYC biglaw. That said, NYC is crazy expensive and that's a shame.

right but like half of us commenting in here go to GULC and we're not just gonna admit that our school sucks without spinning it hard. cmon now

[EzraFitz]

I still think the key is to find a shop that matches salaries across all offices, and then hunker down in a satellite with enough people for security, and enjoy the NYC rates.

[Johann]

yea unfortunately that doesnt change anything wrt to the labor supply or create leverage for juniors unless T14 grads start refusing to work for certain white shoe firms.

At least at GULC, I think you're seeing that a lot with regards to NYC in general. I know a bunch of people who avoided NYC at all costs.

This may sound overly douchey but for a school that is like 45% in big firm/clerkships, maybe GULC should be doing something to encourage their students not to avoid the biggest legal market at all costs.


More on topic - what we really need is HLS to boycott NY for a year, I think everyone wins in that scenario

You're correct, you do sound overly douchey. No one at GULC escapes the fact that NYC is the safest option for biglaw. In fact, the career services office vocally warns students against overreaching geographically, and advises everyone, including students in the top 10%, to include at least a few NYC firms as backups. But guess what, even at GULC there are students who don't end up in New York. You know, what with the school being located in DC and a majority of its students practicing in DC after graduation

HLS students not going to New York won't change a thing. New York remains the best option for anyone at a lower-ranked school to get into big law, and so as TheoO mentioned, unless something changes significantly they'll still get their pick from 1) every "average" student in the T14, and 2) all the top students below. And I don't think a top 10% student at Fordham is any different in abilities from a median student at a T14. Do carry on with the HLS elitism though.

This is a bizarrely over sensitive response. GULC sucks and 70% of their graduates would be lucky to get NYC biglaw. That said, NYC is crazy expensive and that's a shame.

People that don't do NYC usually would prefer 80-120k jobs in other places rather than NYC. I don't know what gtown people are like, but I've seen people turn down NYC market for mid law/boutique in other places and I think you'd be hard pressed to argue it's a better career move going NYC big law or financial move in those situations.

Biglaw is flame as shit other than for the fact that it provides a nice quantity of jobs. But it's not the ideal outcome.

[Mr. Blackacre]

This is a bizarrely over sensitive response. GULC sucks and 70% of their graduates would be lucky to get NYC biglaw. That said, NYC is crazy expensive and that's a shame.

right but like half of us commenting in here go to GULC and we're not just gonna admit that our school sucks without spinning it hard. cmon now

Back-up is here, thank god.
//
Everyone knows most GULC grads self-select out of big law because of public interest, guys. This is why our stats look so dismal. If people actually tried we'd easily have 65% big law + clerkships

I still think the key is to find a shop that matches salaries across all offices, and then hunker down in a satellite with enough people for security, and enjoy the NYC rates.

Barring someone wanting to work in NYC because they like the city itself, I agree this is a pretty good option. Especially if said shop has a big NYC office which is not its head office, and will match salaries without exporting the toxic work culture along with it.

[smaug]

@Johann, I think it depends on what you mean by "midlaw" or a "boutique."

Obviously a real boutique is a better job. If by "midlaw" you mean "biglaw hours for less pay" I don't understand what you're talking about, and don't understand why that makes sense long term.

I think that if you're making a rational pay/work/experience argument, obviously there are places in Chicago and Texas that make way more sense than NYC.

Once you move to secondary markets you're going to need to do some pushing for me to agree with you. I think a lot of this is difficult because it's super abstract.

Are you better off at K&L Gates or Cadwalader in Charlotte, NC than you are at DPW? If you want to do public M&A does it make sense for you to work in Chicago?

Too many variables being thrown around.