NORAISE List - ITT, the proleTTTariat of the V100 keep hoping for/commiserate lack of 180k Forum

[Anonymous User]

Checking in at one of the firms on this list

First year in major market, have heard nothing but radio silence. General office sentiment is NOMATCH

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Update on ManatTTT: Apparently there will be no match since they claim that the move from 125-150K at the beginning of the year was "generous." To any rising 2L's out there considering them, avoid like the plague. Maybe if they get zero bids at OCI's they'll start to realize how dumb they are.

99% of the reason I turned down the offer was the pay ($125k). 1% was hearing associates talking about others lateraling for what sounded like good reason.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Update on ManatTTT: Apparently there will be no match since they claim that the move from 125-150K at the beginning of the year was "generous." To any rising 2L's out there considering them, avoid like the plague. Maybe if they get zero bids at OCI's they'll start to realize how dumb they are.

What the heck's a Manatt?

Why would the guy who painted those water lillies be offering lawyers $150k?

[Anonymous User]

Update on ManatTTT: Apparently there will be no match since they claim that the move from 125-150K at the beginning of the year was "generous." To any rising 2L's out there considering them, avoid like the plague. Maybe if they get zero bids at OCI's they'll start to realize how dumb they are.

What the heck's a Manatt?

Why would the guy who painted those water lillies be offering lawyers $150k?

That's Monet, not Manatt (Sorry, art snob here).

I think Manatt not raising their salaries is a bad move, especially since they are considered to be top tier in entertainment and real estate in the area. However, that's precisely why they might not raise their salaries. At OCI, it's a lot easier for recruiters to sell the "yes we pay below market, but at Manatt you'll receive some of the best substantive experience in our practice groups." A lot of desperate rising 2Ls would certainly fall in this trap.

Additionally, I think it's inaccurate to state that Manatt will be unable to get "top talent" as a result of their action not to increase salaries. The fact is they never did get top talent. Those folks always went to the V1-30 firms. So you have the same pool of applicants that are applying to Manatt and they really don't have elsewhere to go. So it's really a take it or leave it type of situation. No rising 2L will say to themselves, "Omg, Manatt $150K? Man, hell no, here I come District Attorney's office!"

If you accept my observation to be true, then you're left with the conclusion that the only way to actually put pressure on Manatt to raise their salaries is by showcasing decrease in work moral amongst current Associates and some lateral movement taking place in the marketplace.

[bern victim]

Update on ManatTTT: Apparently there will be no match since they claim that the move from 125-150K at the beginning of the year was "generous." To any rising 2L's out there considering them, avoid like the plague. Maybe if they get zero bids at OCI's they'll start to realize how dumb they are.

What the heck's a Manatt?

Why would the guy who painted those water lillies be offering lawyers $150k?

That's Monet, not Manatt (Sorry, art snob here).

he was thinking of monet's evil twin manet

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Update on ManatTTT: Apparently there will be no match since they claim that the move from 125-150K at the beginning of the year was "generous." To any rising 2L's out there considering them, avoid like the plague. Maybe if they get zero bids at OCI's they'll start to realize how dumb they are.

What the heck's a Manatt?

Why would the guy who painted those water lillies be offering lawyers $150k?

That's Monet, not Manatt (Sorry, art snob here).

(Sharp fucking cookie)

[bern victim]

(anonymous because my incredible art knowledge uniquely identifies me in the legal profession)

[LaLiLuLeLo]

That's Monet, not Manatt (Sorry, art snob here).

I think Manatt not raising their salaries is a bad move, especially since they are considered to be top tier in entertainment and real estate in the area. However, that's precisely why they might not raise their salaries. At OCI, it's a lot easier for recruiters to sell the "yes we pay below market, but at Manatt you'll receive some of the best substantive experience in our practice groups." A lot of desperate rising 2Ls would certainly fall in this trap.

Additionally, I think it's inaccurate to state that Manatt will be unable to get "top talent" as a result of their action not to increase salaries. The fact is they never did get top talent. Those folks always went to the V1-30 firms. So you have the same pool of applicants that are applying to Manatt and they really don't have elsewhere to go. So it's really a take it or leave it type of situation. No rising 2L will say to themselves, "Omg, Manatt $150K? Man, hell no, here I come District Attorney's office!"

If you accept my observation to be true, then you're left with the conclusion that the only way to actually put pressure on Manatt to raise their salaries is by showcasing decrease in work moral amongst current Associates and some lateral movement taking place in the marketplace.

They need to raise for the same reason they raised to $150k. It's a tough sell, even for their talking points, when it's a $30-35k base salary difference (because let's be real, most law students are dumb and don't think about total comp even though they should). The same forces at play for $125k -> $150k will dictate they need to raise again.

[Anonymous User]

That's Monet, not Manatt (Sorry, art snob here).

I think Manatt not raising their salaries is a bad move, especially since they are considered to be top tier in entertainment and real estate in the area. However, that's precisely why they might not raise their salaries. At OCI, it's a lot easier for recruiters to sell the "yes we pay below market, but at Manatt you'll receive some of the best substantive experience in our practice groups." A lot of desperate rising 2Ls would certainly fall in this trap.

Additionally, I think it's inaccurate to state that Manatt will be unable to get "top talent" as a result of their action not to increase salaries. The fact is they never did get top talent. Those folks always went to the V1-30 firms. So you have the same pool of applicants that are applying to Manatt and they really don't have elsewhere to go. So it's really a take it or leave it type of situation. No rising 2L will say to themselves, "Omg, Manatt $150K? Man, hell no, here I come District Attorney's office!"

If you accept my observation to be true, then you're left with the conclusion that the only way to actually put pressure on Manatt to raise their salaries is by showcasing decrease in work moral amongst current Associates and some lateral movement taking place in the marketplace.

They need to raise for the same reason they raised to $150k. It's a tough sell, even for their talking points, when it's a $30-35k base salary difference (because let's be real, most law students are dumb and don't think about total comp even though they should). The same forces at play for $125k -> $150k will dictate they need to raise again.

Anon here. I think they need to raise but I certainly don't think it will be to $180K. But the heart of the matter is that PEOPLE NEED TO START MOVING. This may be the only way to start creating pressure. None of these firms will feel the pressure to increase salaries until people start putting in their 2 weeks notice.

But that leads to another issue: firms have just raised their salaries, you really think those firms have budget to bring in more associates?

[Anonymous User]

There won't be an announcement from Dentons considering their salary structure is not pure lockstep and does not follow market. From what I hear they actually pay below market in major cities. Considering there are sources reporting that Dentons' yearly revenue will approach the ultra-exclusive $2bn mark following their merger, I wonder if they will consider moving to lockstep to stay competitive with their Biglaw compatriots.

[reasonable troll]

@ GT associates ITT:


@ all others:
Another day, another [$XX,000] dollar[s less made than that jr. associate at the more presTTTigious firm in your building]

[MCFC]

Dentons matching all offices would be quite a thing. http://www.dentons.com/en/global-presence.aspx

[Anonymous User]

There won't be an announcement from Dentons considering their salary structure is not pure lockstep and does not follow market. From what I hear they actually pay below market in major cities. Considering there are sources reporting that Dentons' yearly revenue will approach the ultra-exclusive $2bn mark following their merger, I wonder if they will consider moving to lockstep to stay competitive with their Biglaw compatriots.

First year pay for Dentons is market. After that, there's some salary compression because they don't follow the traditional lockstep structure. It would take a lot of $$ for them to raise each associate's salary to $180k.

[HerculesQEinstein]

Dentons matching all offices would be quite a thing. http://www.dentons.com/en/global-presence.aspx

Didn't Dentons declare bankruptcy after the Hulk Hogan verdict?

[Anonymous User]

Foley & Lardner has said they will discuss at the month-end management meeting. General sentiment, at least during the summer retreat, was that there would be a raise. Assumption is Cravath match in Major Markets, possibly increases by same amounts in the secondary markets - so Milwaukee/Detroit to 160, etc. But, this is all speculation.

[Anonymous User]

Updated and reordered according to PPP.

Get Yer Pitchforks :
40. Linklaters [2,200,000]
95. Patterson Belknap [1,620,000]
81. Sheppard Mullin [1,445,000]
91. *Manatt [1,385,000]
69. Kaye Scholer [1,380,000]

> 1 Mil. in PPP
63. Holland & Knight [1,250,000]
60. Pillsbury [1,185,000]
93. Finnegan [1,175,000]
73. Chadbourne & Parke [1,135,000]
68. Foley & Lardner [1,130,000]
62. Reed Smith [1,105,000]
59. Perkins Coie [1,100,000]
89. Mintz Levin [1,065,000]
76. Venable [1,060,000]
77. *mcguirewoods [1,045,000]
90. Pepper Hamilton [1,025,000]
86. Seyfarth Shaw [1,020,000]
19. Jones Day [1,010,000]

<1 Mil. in PPP
99. Troutman Sanders [970,000]
100. Kilpatrick Townsend [970,000]
74. Hunton & Williams [950,000]
70. Steptoe & Johnson [940,000]
78. Arent Fox [935,000]
64. Baker & Hostetler [930,000]
67. Nixon Peabody [905,000]
94. *Duane Morris [900,000]
98. Blank Rome [890,000]
82. *squire patton boggs [845,000]
71. *Bryan Cave [805,000]
92. Drinker Biddle [800,000]
97. *Dorsey & Whitney [600,000]

72. Norton Rose (could not find PPP)
80. *Dentons ("refused" to continue reporting PPP in 2014 - lol)


Confirming previous poster - ManaTTT trolls hard and deserves your ire. Plz also remember to publicly shame Linklaters (I think? Unsure what the special variables are here), Patterson, Sheppard Mullin and Kaye Scholer at least 3 times daily until full Cravath match.

[Anonymous User]

ManatTTT associates are leaving from a few who I have spoken to. Should bode well for forcing their hand to raise the starting salary.

Also to the poster above, are their entertainment/real estate practices really that great? real estate I think they're Chambers band 4...

[runinthefront]

Everyone focuses on/talks about disgruntled associates getting ready to lateral from firms that haven't matched, but where could they realistically go? It's not like the financials of many of these firms have been hidden, and surely many of these firms aren't anyone's first choice at OCI.

Serious question: is the lateral market still booming to the point where associates at [insert some of the bottom firms on this list] can just up and leave to another firm that's matching market? And isn't there something to be said about firms who don't try to keep up with the Joneses at the expense of rainmaker defections? There's at least 10-15 firms that absolutely shouldn't be paying 180, given their heavy reliance on superstar partners/high leverage

[Anonymous User]

Everyone focuses on/talks about disgruntled associates getting ready to lateral from firms that haven't matched, but where could they realistically go? It's not like the financials of many of these firms have been hidden, and surely many of these firms aren't anyone's first choice at OCI.

Serious question: is the lateral market still booming to the point where associates at [insert some of the bottom firms on this list] can just up and leave to another firm that's matching market? And isn't there something to be said about firms who don't try to keep up with the Joneses at the expense of rainmaker defections? There's at least 10-15 firms that absolutely shouldn't be paying 180, given their heavy reliance on superstar partners/high leverage

I second this. Honestly, where can the V50-100 associates go?

ManatTTT associates are leaving from a few who I have spoken to. Should bode well for forcing their hand to raise the starting salary.

Also to the poster above, are their entertainment/real estate practices really that great? real estate I think they're Chambers band 4...

Anon above. I said "in the area." I believe they are better in the region but obviously not tier 1 nationwide. Also, I dispute your assertion about Manatt associates leaving. I also have a few sources w/in firm and associates are more pissed because they're not sure if they can go elsewhere. Which office are you referring to?

[Anonymous User]

Serious question: is the lateral market still booming to the point where associates at [insert some of the bottom firms on this list] can just up and leave to another firm that's matching market?

I lateraled from a V75, non-180 firm to a firm that pays market (DC). In the process, I interviewed with four other firms that pay market, including a V10. Someone from my same practice group left for a different V10 shortly after I left. It's not hard to lateral up, because there's a shortage of midlevels as a result of the recession. Fewer members of the classes of 2011-2013 were hired at all, and many of those who that did get hired only got offers from lower-ranked firms. My new firm has had lateral postings up for a long time, and candidates with 3-5 years of relevant V100 experience are uncommon.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know what K&L plans to pay to first years in its secondary markets? I think their comp memo said those offices would be informed separately of any increase in pay so I'm curious how that played out.

[Anonymous User]

And ManatTTT just fell out of the V100...LOL

Time for those kids who are starting there in the fall to start calling up other firms? Shame on ManattTTT.

[Anonymous User]

keep shaming y'all - it works!

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/wait-who ... -salaries/

#blessed

[HerculesQEinstein]

Need to update the ShiTTT LisTTT (TTTM) to remove Chadbourne and Linklaters...anyone else today?

[Foghornleghorn]

Any news from Vedder Price?