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

[Anonymous User]

Is S&C the only V10 who hasn't matched? What are they doing?

Yeah literally wtf

S&C is bleeding midlevels like crazy. Not matching is not helping.

And the first V10 to make its associates return to the office, months before everyone else. Get it together, S&C.

When did they go back?

[Anonymous User]

Is S&C the only V10 who hasn't matched? What are they doing?

Yeah literally wtf

S&C is bleeding midlevels like crazy. Not matching is not helping.

And the first V10 to make its associates return to the office, months before everyone else. Get it together, S&C.

When did they go back?

Like summer 2021. I remember going back in fall at my firm and being bitchy about it, as one of the first firms to re-open, but my SullCrom friends were like "boo fucking hoo, we went back to office MONTHS ago it's crazy"

[Anonymous User]

What is going on in Atlanta? K&S and A&B matched last time, do we think they're matching again or no? (Sorry if I missed this discussion if it was on an earlier page)

Those firms have always matched. K&S even has a PPP on par with some NYC firms. They'll just drag their feet because so many of their associates are in ATL and they can't charge clients very much for them.

Has nothing to do with where their associates sit and everything to do with (1) how much their clients are willing to pay and (2) how much their partners think they need to pay to compete for talent in Atlanta. A given client is not out there offering to pay X for Atlanta associates but X+Y for New York associates from the same firm/partner.

Wrong. Some firms charge higher rates for NYC associates. Regardless, this has everything to do with (2) and very little to do with (1). To the point of K&S's PPP, that has to do with their high leverage. Incidentally that also means raising salaries hits the partners' pockets harder.

Work at one of these two. Absolutely no sympathy for the partners here — I’m in New York and work significantly more than my friends at other firms based in the city. If they are 100% going to raise, can’t understand why they just won’t do it now

[Anonymous User]

What is going on in Atlanta? K&S and A&B matched last time, do we think they're matching again or no? (Sorry if I missed this discussion if it was on an earlier page)

Those firms have always matched. K&S even has a PPP on par with some NYC firms. They'll just drag their feet because so many of their associates are in ATL and they can't charge clients very much for them.

Has nothing to do with where their associates sit and everything to do with (1) how much their clients are willing to pay and (2) how much their partners think they need to pay to compete for talent in Atlanta. A given client is not out there offering to pay X for Atlanta associates but X+Y for New York associates from the same firm/partner.

Wrong. Some firms charge higher rates for NYC associates. Regardless, this has everything to do with (2) and very little to do with (1). To the point of K&S's PPP, that has to do with their high leverage. Incidentally that also means raising salaries hits the partners' pockets harder.

Work at one of these two. Absolutely no sympathy for the partners here — I’m in New York and work significantly more than my friends at other firms based in the city. If they are 100% going to raise, can’t understand why they just won’t do it now

I didn't mean to imply they deserve sympathy - they don't. It just offers some explanation as to why they may be dragging their feet. Partner logic can be both wrong (morally) and right (as to what's happening) at the same time.

[Anonymous User]

What is going on in Atlanta? K&S and A&B matched last time, do we think they're matching again or no? (Sorry if I missed this discussion if it was on an earlier page)

Those firms have always matched. K&S even has a PPP on par with some NYC firms. They'll just drag their feet because so many of their associates are in ATL and they can't charge clients very much for them.

Has nothing to do with where their associates sit and everything to do with (1) how much their clients are willing to pay and (2) how much their partners think they need to pay to compete for talent in Atlanta. A given client is not out there offering to pay X for Atlanta associates but X+Y for New York associates from the same firm/partner.

Wrong. Some firms charge higher rates for NYC associates. Regardless, this has everything to do with (2) and very little to do with (1). To the point of K&S's PPP, that has to do with their high leverage. Incidentally that also means raising salaries hits the partners' pockets harder.

I would like to know which firms do this, since the last few years has all but ended the practice of the market-paying firms discriminating their associate pay by office. NY associates are not worth more than non-NY associates (and are arguably worth less since NY biglaw is the least selective market and presumably lower quality junior associates are there).

[ElCuervo]

RIP the next three pages of this thread.

[Anonymous User]

Sheppard Mullin matched the Cravath scale, retroactive to 1/1. Unclear from the announcement email when the true-up payment will be made.

[Anonymous User]

Why hasn't Katten matched yet? Any insights? Their PPEP and RPL numbers are solid and they always seem to match market on salaries and bonuses but haven't uttered a peep this time around (yet).

[Anonymous User]

What is going on in Atlanta? K&S and A&B matched last time, do we think they're matching again or no? (Sorry if I missed this discussion if it was on an earlier page)

Those firms have always matched. K&S even has a PPP on par with some NYC firms. They'll just drag their feet because so many of their associates are in ATL and they can't charge clients very much for them.

Has nothing to do with where their associates sit and everything to do with (1) how much their clients are willing to pay and (2) how much their partners think they need to pay to compete for talent in Atlanta. A given client is not out there offering to pay X for Atlanta associates but X+Y for New York associates from the same firm/partner.

Wrong. Some firms charge higher rates for NYC associates. Regardless, this has everything to do with (2) and very little to do with (1). To the point of K&S's PPP, that has to do with their high leverage. Incidentally that also means raising salaries hits the partners' pockets harder.

I would like to know which firms do this, since the last few years has all but ended the practice of the market-paying firms discriminating their associate pay by office. NY associates are not worth more than non-NY associates (and are arguably worth less since NY biglaw is the least selective market and presumably lower quality junior associates are there).

[Anonymous User]

What is going on in Atlanta? K&S and A&B matched last time, do we think they're matching again or no? (Sorry if I missed this discussion if it was on an earlier page)

Those firms have always matched. K&S even has a PPP on par with some NYC firms. They'll just drag their feet because so many of their associates are in ATL and they can't charge clients very much for them.

Has nothing to do with where their associates sit and everything to do with (1) how much their clients are willing to pay and (2) how much their partners think they need to pay to compete for talent in Atlanta. A given client is not out there offering to pay X for Atlanta associates but X+Y for New York associates from the same firm/partner.

Wrong. Some firms charge higher rates for NYC associates. Regardless, this has everything to do with (2) and very little to do with (1). To the point of K&S's PPP, that has to do with their high leverage. Incidentally that also means raising salaries hits the partners' pockets harder.

I would like to know which firms do this, since the last few years has all but ended the practice of the market-paying firms discriminating their associate pay by office. NY associates are not worth more than non-NY associates (and are arguably worth less since NY biglaw is the least selective market and presumably lower quality junior associates are there).

DC should be paid most, followed by SF/SV, LA, Chicago, ATL, St. Louis, Poughkeepsie, and then NYC. Boston should still, of course, be below market (who wants to live in a college town for the rest of their lives?).

[Anonymous User]

Sheppard Mullin matched the Cravath scale, retroactive to 1/1. Unclear from the announcement email when the true-up payment will be made.

Sheppard really trying to break into the higher echelon of law firms. lots of very obviously planted, good press lately on the recharge billables, breaking 1B in revenue.. any insight on hours/QOL?

[Anonymous User]

What is going on in Atlanta? K&S and A&B matched last time, do we think they're matching again or no? (Sorry if I missed this discussion if it was on an earlier page)

Those firms have always matched. K&S even has a PPP on par with some NYC firms. They'll just drag their feet because so many of their associates are in ATL and they can't charge clients very much for them.

Has nothing to do with where their associates sit and everything to do with (1) how much their clients are willing to pay and (2) how much their partners think they need to pay to compete for talent in Atlanta. A given client is not out there offering to pay X for Atlanta associates but X+Y for New York associates from the same firm/partner.

Wrong. Some firms charge higher rates for NYC associates. Regardless, this has everything to do with (2) and very little to do with (1). To the point of K&S's PPP, that has to do with their high leverage. Incidentally that also means raising salaries hits the partners' pockets harder.

I would like to know which firms do this, since the last few years has all but ended the practice of the market-paying firms discriminating their associate pay by office. NY associates are not worth more than non-NY associates (and are arguably worth less since NY biglaw is the least selective market and presumably lower quality junior associates are there).

DC should be paid most, followed by SF/SV, LA, Chicago, ATL, St. Louis, Poughkeepsie, and then NYC. Boston should still, of course, be below market (who wants to live in a college town for the rest of their lives?).

Your sarcasm and jab for Boston and NY aside, why should DC be ahead of SF/SV?

[Anonymous User]

What is going on in Atlanta? K&S and A&B matched last time, do we think they're matching again or no? (Sorry if I missed this discussion if it was on an earlier page)

Those firms have always matched. K&S even has a PPP on par with some NYC firms. They'll just drag their feet because so many of their associates are in ATL and they can't charge clients very much for them.

Has nothing to do with where their associates sit and everything to do with (1) how much their clients are willing to pay and (2) how much their partners think they need to pay to compete for talent in Atlanta. A given client is not out there offering to pay X for Atlanta associates but X+Y for New York associates from the same firm/partner.

Wrong. Some firms charge higher rates for NYC associates. Regardless, this has everything to do with (2) and very little to do with (1). To the point of K&S's PPP, that has to do with their high leverage. Incidentally that also means raising salaries hits the partners' pockets harder.

I would like to know which firms do this, since the last few years has all but ended the practice of the market-paying firms discriminating their associate pay by office. NY associates are not worth more than non-NY associates (and are arguably worth less since NY biglaw is the least selective market and presumably lower quality junior associates are there).

DC should be paid most, followed by SF/SV, LA, Chicago, ATL, St. Louis, Poughkeepsie, and then NYC. Boston should still, of course, be below market (who wants to live in a college town for the rest of their lives?).

Your sarcasm and jab for Boston and NY aside, why should DC be ahead of SF/SV?

Typically at my T6, DC was more competitive to get than SF/SV. Unless you were gunning for Keker, the SF/SV firms were attainable below median. DC... less so. Could you get a major firm DC office sub-median? Sure. Was it harder? Significantly. Generally, DC > SF/SV/LA > NY in terms of credentials required for us (though very firm-dependent, obviously).

[Anonymous User]

Dechert re-upped to match Cravath yesterday. Retroactive 1/1, paid 3/23.

[Anonymous User]

CHADwalader just re-upped too, retroactive to 1/1 paid on 3/25.

[Anonymous User]

Milbank silence makes me think they are going to re-raise.

Also, this article implies that some firms aren't going to raise. Is the author referring to non-v100 firms?

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/bi ... g-as-elite

[Anonymous User]

How do these raises work for non-US offices of magic circle firms? Do they apply to US associates anywhere in the world, or just those in the States?

[Anonymous User]

Those firms have always matched. K&S even has a PPP on par with some NYC firms. They'll just drag their feet because so many of their associates are in ATL and they can't charge clients very much for them.

Has nothing to do with where their associates sit and everything to do with (1) how much their clients are willing to pay and (2) how much their partners think they need to pay to compete for talent in Atlanta. A given client is not out there offering to pay X for Atlanta associates but X+Y for New York associates from the same firm/partner.

Wrong. Some firms charge higher rates for NYC associates. Regardless, this has everything to do with (2) and very little to do with (1). To the point of K&S's PPP, that has to do with their high leverage. Incidentally that also means raising salaries hits the partners' pockets harder.

I would like to know which firms do this, since the last few years has all but ended the practice of the market-paying firms discriminating their associate pay by office. NY associates are not worth more than non-NY associates (and are arguably worth less since NY biglaw is the least selective market and presumably lower quality junior associates are there).

DC should be paid most, followed by SF/SV, LA, Chicago, ATL, St. Louis, Poughkeepsie, and then NYC. Boston should still, of course, be below market (who wants to live in a college town for the rest of their lives?).

Your sarcasm and jab for Boston and NY aside, why should DC be ahead of SF/SV?

Typically at my T6, DC was more competitive to get than SF/SV. Unless you were gunning for Keker, the SF/SV firms were attainable below median. DC... less so. Could you get a major firm DC office sub-median? Sure. Was it harder? Significantly. Generally, DC > SF/SV/LA > NY in terms of credentials required for us (though very firm-dependent, obviously).

At my NY T6 kids who couldn’t land a single V20 offer easily got multiple V10 at SF/LA. Below medians kids consistently get Skadden Palo Alto.

[Anonymous User]

Why hasn't Katten matched yet? Any insights? Their PPEP and RPL numbers are solid and they always seem to match market on salaries and bonuses but haven't uttered a peep this time around (yet).

Katten has internally announced a match to the associates committee. Should be coming soon.

[Anonymous User]

Milbank silence makes me think they are going to re-raise.

Also, this article implies that some firms aren't going to raise. Is the author referring to non-v100 firms?

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/bi ... g-as-elite

I think Milbank is waiting for a bit to announce (a) Cravath salary match PLUS (b) special bonuses at 2021 levels, payable in summer & fall.

[Anonymous User]

Milbank silence makes me think they are going to re-raise.

Milbank has a townhall meeting on Monday; I suspect it would announce by Friday or Monday morning.

[Anonymous User]

Milbank silence makes me think they are going to re-raise.

Also, this article implies that some firms aren't going to raise. Is the author referring to non-v100 firms?

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/bi ... g-as-elite

I think Milbank is waiting for a bit to announce (a) Cravath salary match PLUS (b) special bonuses at 2021 levels, payable in summer & fall.

The firm's townhall is next Monday. Would expect any moves by then. But can say that the firm cares more about being first than being comp. leader, so I would not expect a re-raised or bonus announcement.

[Anonymous User]

Wow Kellogg Hansen raised 1st year to 255k - 6 year to 420k

[Ultramar vistas]

It’s wild to me that not a single article about “jaw dropping” associate raises and “salary wars” ever bothers to (a) do the inflation math, or even mention it, or (b) properly contextualize associate salaries in the broader environment of firm profitability.

There’s no doubt that associates in 2022 are doing pretty well, but inflation makes the current numbers look much less eye popping (first years in 2008 were better off, midlevels now are ahead) and is going to continue to quickly erode those momentary gains unless salary increases continue like this (which is never guaranteed).

Also, law firms generally are doing extremely well - when every new day brings another article with an AmLaw firm showing PEP up 10 to 50%, it should be expected that the worker bees see some benefit - isn’t that their Reaganomics in action?

I just can’t stand the tone of these articles.

[LBJ's Hair]

It’s wild to me that not a single article about “jaw dropping” associate raises and “salary wars” ever bothers to (a) do the inflation math, or even mention it, or (b) properly contextualize associate salaries in the broader environment of firm profitability.

There’s no doubt that associates in 2022 are doing pretty well, but inflation makes the current numbers look much less eye popping (first years in 2008 were better off, midlevels now are ahead) and is going to continue to quickly erode those momentary gains unless salary increases continue like this (which is never guaranteed).

Also, law firms generally are doing extremely well - when every new day brings another article with an AmLaw firm showing PEP up 10 to 50%, it should be expected that the worker bees see some benefit - isn’t that their Reaganomics in action?

I just can’t stand the tone of these articles.

+1. if you're writing about associate raises and don't immediately follow with "law firm PPP is up [three digit % since 20XX], I don't wanna hear about it