Fall bonuses Forum

[Scallion]

How about a lit associate who is annualizing about 1850 ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Also, I don't know how to feel about people inviting others to PM them for potential employment. Doesn't that mean revealing non-anon post-history to a potential employer, in a thread and on a site with much complaining about employers? Nevermind that the person might not actually be hiring/a prospective employer? Maybe I'm too paranoid.

Editing post to include an example of what I'm referencing, since my post ended up the first on a new page:

K&E midlevel here. No joke, 2 associates in my class year just submitted applications to Weil, a few others to Milbank. Goal is to take the year-end bonus and bounce. It's clear that the firm is no longer interested in leading the pack on compensation, might as well move to a place where compensation truly matters.

My firm would love to have you or any of your colleagues. We're definitely a compensation leader. PM me if interested.

[Anonymous User]

How about a lit associate who is annualizing about 1850 ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Also, I don't know how to feel about people inviting others to PM them for potential employment. Doesn't that mean revealing non-anon post-history to a potential employer, in a thread and on a site with much complaining about employers? Nevermind that the person might not actually be hiring/a prospective employer? Maybe I'm too paranoid.

Editing post to include an example of what I'm referencing, since my post ended up the first on a new page:

K&E midlevel here. No joke, 2 associates in my class year just submitted applications to Weil, a few others to Milbank. Goal is to take the year-end bonus and bounce. It's clear that the firm is no longer interested in leading the pack on compensation, might as well move to a place where compensation truly matters.

My firm would love to have you or any of your colleagues. We're definitely a compensation leader. PM me if interested.

I'd imagine that you could always create a new account and PM from there?

[Scallion]

I'd imagine that you could always create a new account and PM from there?

Good point.

[Anonymous User]

In my view, any fall bonus announcement is great. Don't want to downplay that all of this is great news. But the Weil scale doesn't make sense for a couple key reasons:

• It equates a 1st year hour with a 7th year hour. Not equivalent for multiple reasons. Obvious reason is the revenue each 7th year hour generates for the firm vs. a 1st year. "Punch in the gut" and perhaps less obvious reason for a 7th year is the internalized stress, buck stops with you, direct client pressure, direct partner pressure, substantive problem-solving time and effort, etc., that you have to take on for each matter. It's not the same.

• It retroactively applies higher value to vacation time taken in the last quarter vs. vacation taken earlier in the year. How the hell was I supposed to know that I should've waited until October to take vacation? I guess I know now. Not sure how parental leave factors into this either, but it's even more screwed up if your child is born in summer 2020 instead of fall 2020 and you have to take the same pay as a first year because you had a summer baby instead of a fall baby. I sure hope that's not what Weil is contemplating.

If you want to base the bonus on hours, then actually base it on hours. Apply a multiple to hours billed as a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc., year that scales up slightly by class year. And think about an artful way to deal with vacation time and parental leave (I haven't thought that piece through, but it's worth being a little bit human about it in bonus considerations). But do not -- I repeat, do not -- pay a 7th year the same for 2100 hours as you pay a 1st year. This Weil calculus has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard about in Biglaw compensation.

[Anonymous User]

Just a Skadden associate wondering where our bonus is while my boyfriend, a Cleary associate, looks at me wondering the same thing.

[Anonymous User]

Just a Skadden associate wondering where our bonus is while my boyfriend, a Cleary associate, looks at me wondering the same thing.

wow i'm so so sorry, will say a prayer for you two

[Anonymous User]

You’re probably trolling, but I’m genuinely surprised at Skadden given how fast they usually move. Apparently Cleary always drags their feet. Either way, any bonus is a good bonus. I don’t care if we do the Weil scale, the Milbank scale or the DPW scale.

[Anonymous User]

In my view, any fall bonus announcement is great. Don't want to downplay that all of this is great news. But the Weil scale doesn't make sense for a couple key reasons:

• It equates a 1st year hour with a 7th year hour. Not equivalent for multiple reasons. Obvious reason is the revenue each 7th year hour generates for the firm vs. a 1st year. "Punch in the gut" and perhaps less obvious reason for a 7th year is the internalized stress, buck stops with you, direct client pressure, direct partner pressure, substantive problem-solving time and effort, etc., that you have to take on for each matter. It's not the same.

• It retroactively applies higher value to vacation time taken in the last quarter vs. vacation taken earlier in the year. How the hell was I supposed to know that I should've waited until October to take vacation? I guess I know now. Not sure how parental leave factors into this either, but it's even more screwed up if your child is born in summer 2020 instead of fall 2020 and you have to take the same pay as a first year because you had a summer baby instead of a fall baby. I sure hope that's not what Weil is contemplating.

If you want to base the bonus on hours, then actually base it on hours. Apply a multiple to hours billed as a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc., year that scales up slightly by class year. And think about an artful way to deal with vacation time and parental leave (I haven't thought that piece through, but it's worth being a little bit human about it in bonus considerations). But do not -- I repeat, do not -- pay a 7th year the same for 2100 hours as you pay a 1st year. This Weil calculus has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard about in Biglaw compensation.

Weil associate here - this is exactly right and the feeling amongst my colleagues is it's a slap in face equating senior / junior time. People are not happy.

[Anonymous User]

Just a Skadden associate wondering where our bonus is while my boyfriend, a Cleary associate, looks at me wondering the same thing.

wow i'm so so sorry, will say a prayer for you two

Cleary associate here. I can only imagine how people will feel if Cleary doesn't match, when Freshfields has matched, given the recent departures. On pace for roughly 2500.

[ConfusedNYer]

RE: Weil bonuses making no sense

If your goal is compensating attorneys directly for their value of the firm sure, but biglaw comp is rarely about that (the whole lockstep class year and bonus system doesn't make sense in that calculation, a 1st year billing 2500 should have a higher bonus than a 2nd year billing 1800).

But Weil's system makes a lot of sense if:

1) You have a bunch of slower groups and you don't want to pay large amounts to midlevels and seniors in those groups

and

2) you have a few crazy busy groups that a really important to firm health right now and are worried about retention (or looking to poach some new hires).

From everything I've heard (so admittedly a lot of hearsay) Weil's bankruptcy group is overworked and had retention issues pre-covid, I can't imagine things are much better now. If your goal is to shore up a super busy group like that, keep bodies (since you still need juniors to get work done even if seniors are "more valuable") and maybe steal some other associates, then this seems like a great tactic.

[Anonymous User]

Just a Skadden associate wondering where our bonus is while my boyfriend, a Cleary associate, looks at me wondering the same thing.

wow i'm so so sorry, will say a prayer for you two

Cleary associate here. I can only imagine how people will feel if Cleary doesn't match, when Freshfields has matched, given the recent departures. On pace for roughly 2500.

Totally get it. Have quite a few friends at Cleary, including a few who turned down offers to go to Freshfields, who are already frustrated with the firm and how it’s been handling the pandemic. This isn’t helping their morale.

[smile0751]

In my view, any fall bonus announcement is great. Don't want to downplay that all of this is great news. But the Weil scale doesn't make sense for a couple key reasons:

• It equates a 1st year hour with a 7th year hour. Not equivalent for multiple reasons. Obvious reason is the revenue each 7th year hour generates for the firm vs. a 1st year. "Punch in the gut" and perhaps less obvious reason for a 7th year is the internalized stress, buck stops with you, direct client pressure, direct partner pressure, substantive problem-solving time and effort, etc., that you have to take on for each matter. It's not the same.

• It retroactively applies higher value to vacation time taken in the last quarter vs. vacation taken earlier in the year. How the hell was I supposed to know that I should've waited until October to take vacation? I guess I know now. Not sure how parental leave factors into this either, but it's even more screwed up if your child is born in summer 2020 instead of fall 2020 and you have to take the same pay as a first year because you had a summer baby instead of a fall baby. I sure hope that's not what Weil is contemplating.

If you want to base the bonus on hours, then actually base it on hours. Apply a multiple to hours billed as a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc., year that scales up slightly by class year. And think about an artful way to deal with vacation time and parental leave (I haven't thought that piece through, but it's worth being a little bit human about it in bonus considerations). But do not -- I repeat, do not -- pay a 7th year the same for 2100 hours as you pay a 1st year. This Weil calculus has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard about in Biglaw compensation.

Yeah I disagree. We all have the same number of hours in a day and the crazy hours take the same toll on someone regardless of their seniority. I think it’s more frustrating that a midlevel who is billing 1700 gets a much larger bonus than some of the juniors in busy groups who are killing themselves. The annual bonus is based on seniority and compensates for skill. It makes perfect sense to me that this special bonus compensates those who are working their butt off to keep clients happy and revenue coming in.

[Anonymous User]

RE: Weil bonuses making no sense

If your goal is compensating attorneys directly for their value of the firm sure, but biglaw comp is rarely about that (the whole lockstep class year and bonus system doesn't make sense in that calculation, a 1st year billing 2500 should have a higher bonus than a 2nd year billing 1800).

But Weil's system makes a lot of sense if:

1) You have a bunch of slower groups and you don't want to pay large amounts to midlevels and seniors in those groups

and

2) you have a few crazy busy groups that a really important to firm health right now and are worried about retention (or looking to poach some new hires).

From everything I've heard (so admittedly a lot of hearsay) Weil's bankruptcy group is overworked and had retention issues pre-covid, I can't imagine things are much better now. If your goal is to shore up a super busy group like that, keep bodies (since you still need juniors to get work done even if seniors are "more valuable") and maybe steal some other associates, then this seems like a great tactic.

Still a dumb tactic. You can accomplish the same thing by figuring out a way to value a 1st year hour differently from a 7th year hour.

Say everyone in litigation was slow. Everyone, from 1st years to 7th years, bills pretty much the same -- 1900 hours.

Say everyone in bankruptcy was crazy busy. Everyone, from 1st years to 7th years, bills pretty much the same -- 2700 hours.

Doesn't make sense to pay everyone in litigation $20k and everyone in bankruptcy $50k. 7th years in BOTH groups are going to be pissed, and who could blame them? Each of those 7th years unequivocally had to work harder during each of those billable hours than each of those 1st years, regardless of group. That's why you generally pay more senior people a higher salary, why you pay more senior people a bigger bonus, and why you bill more senior people out at higher rates. Each hour unit is more challenging, comes with more knowledge and experience, comes with judgment calls, and is more valuable to clients.

It's a shit bonus calculation.

[Anonymous User]

RE: Weil bonuses making no sense

If your goal is compensating attorneys directly for their value of the firm sure, but biglaw comp is rarely about that (the whole lockstep class year and bonus system doesn't make sense in that calculation, a 1st year billing 2500 should have a higher bonus than a 2nd year billing 1800).

But Weil's system makes a lot of sense if:

1) You have a bunch of slower groups and you don't want to pay large amounts to midlevels and seniors in those groups

and

2) you have a few crazy busy groups that a really important to firm health right now and are worried about retention (or looking to poach some new hires).

From everything I've heard (so admittedly a lot of hearsay) Weil's bankruptcy group is overworked and had retention issues pre-covid, I can't imagine things are much better now. If your goal is to shore up a super busy group like that, keep bodies (since you still need juniors to get work done even if seniors are "more valuable") and maybe steal some other associates, then this seems like a great tactic.

One easy way around this is to pick base bonus amounts for different tranches of hours, and apply simple class-year multipliers per associate. 1.1x for 1st years, 1.2x for 2nds, 1.3x for 3rds, whatever. Obviously the bases would be lower but a swamped first year might take in $33k here while a 7th year with the same hours gets $51k. Both are very likely happy.

Long story short, seniors won’t be happy if seniority isn’t a factor in compensation. That’s just biglaw. Class years matter a lot for responsibility and risk, and we know clients pay more based on class year alone.

[Anonymous User]

RE: Weil bonuses making no sense

If your goal is compensating attorneys directly for their value of the firm sure, but biglaw comp is rarely about that (the whole lockstep class year and bonus system doesn't make sense in that calculation, a 1st year billing 2500 should have a higher bonus than a 2nd year billing 1800).

But Weil's system makes a lot of sense if:

1) You have a bunch of slower groups and you don't want to pay large amounts to midlevels and seniors in those groups

and

2) you have a few crazy busy groups that a really important to firm health right now and are worried about retention (or looking to poach some new hires).

From everything I've heard (so admittedly a lot of hearsay) Weil's bankruptcy group is overworked and had retention issues pre-covid, I can't imagine things are much better now. If your goal is to shore up a super busy group like that, keep bodies (since you still need juniors to get work done even if seniors are "more valuable") and maybe steal some other associates, then this seems like a great tactic.

One easy way around this is to pick base bonus amounts for different tranches of hours, and apply simple class-year multipliers per associate. 1.1x for 1st years, 1.2x for 2nds, 1.3x for 3rds, whatever. Obviously the bases would be lower but a swamped first year might take in $33k here while a 7th year with the same hours gets $51k. Both are very likely happy.

Long story short, seniors won’t be happy if seniority isn’t a factor in compensation. That’s just biglaw. Class years matter a lot for responsibility and risk, and we know clients pay more based on class year alone.

Exactly.

[smile0751]

Each of those 7th years unequivocally had to work harder during each of those billable hours than each of those 1st years, regardless of group.

What does this even mean? I was a lot more stressed and had to “work harder” as a junior than I am now (mid-level) and seniors seem even better off. The roles are different, but everyone works hard and makes sacrifices for this job.

[Anonymous User]

Just a Skadden associate wondering where our bonus is while my boyfriend, a Cleary associate, looks at me wondering the same thing.

wow i'm so so sorry, will say a prayer for you two

Cleary associate here. I can only imagine how people will feel if Cleary doesn't match, when Freshfields has matched, given the recent departures. On pace for roughly 2500.

Totally get it. Have quite a few friends at Cleary, including a few who turned down offers to go to Freshfields, who are already frustrated with the firm and how it’s been handling the pandemic. This isn’t helping their morale.

What are some the complaints that you've heard about?

[ChickenSalad]

Each of those 7th years unequivocally had to work harder during each of those billable hours than each of those 1st years, regardless of group.

What does this even mean? I was a lot more stressed and had to “work harder” as a junior than I am now (mid-level) and seniors seem even better off. The roles are different, but everyone works hard and makes sacrifices for this job.

He’s saying juniors get pushed down less sophisticated work that can be done at a lower rate, like doc review. More intensive work is done by seniors, which is reflected by higher rates. 2000 hours by a junior is way way less profitable than 2000 by a mid-level or senior. That should be reflected in bonuses

[ConfusedNYer]

Okay, the bonus system sucks because it makes senior associates feel bad is a different argument - I would understand the point more in a vacuum, but given that we know what other firms are paying:

Assuming your senior a in a busy group (like bankruptcy) you're probably above 2300 hours and getting the $40k, the same exact amount you were hoping to get this morning when you were hoping Weil would match. What you're really asking in that situation is for the firm to pay juniors less for ego reasons? Unless your expecting Weil to provide a bonus scale double what peer firms are offering.

If you're a 5/6/7th year then yes you're getting less, so yea I guess some people will be pissed, but I have a hard time imagining retention issues for a fifth year making 2.5k less then his peers at some firms.

I get seniors billing less than 2k being frustrated, but does the firm care? You're a senior billing less than 2k.

Where are Weil's major retention issues right now? Are they burning through second and third years doing the grunt work necessary for the seniors in its profitable groups to function?

[Anonymous User]

Another Weil associate here. I don't mind high billing juniors getting a larger bonus. For me, the issue is that for many midlevels/seniors, we are getting a below market bonus relative to the DPW scale. I think this would have gone over better if they gave everyone at least the DPW scale for their class year but handed out bigger bonuses for those who hit certain hours.

I'm in one of the busy groups but we still had a couple slow months due to the shutdown so hitting these annualized hours is still going to be difficult even though a lot of us have been crushed the last few months and it looks like it we are going to have a strong finish to the rest of the year.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still happy about getting an unexpected bonus whatever the amount but it just seems strange because historically one of the perks of being at Weil was no hours requirement for a market bonus and this feels like a departure from that.

[Anonymous User]

Each of those 7th years unequivocally had to work harder during each of those billable hours than each of those 1st years, regardless of group.

What does this even mean? I was a lot more stressed and had to “work harder” as a junior than I am now (mid-level) and seniors seem even better off. The roles are different, but everyone works hard and makes sacrifices for this job.

He’s saying juniors get pushed down less sophisticated work that can be done at a lower rate, like doc review. More intensive work is done by seniors, which is reflected by higher rates. 2000 hours by a junior is way way less profitable than 2000 by a mid-level or senior. That should be reflected in bonuses

But they're working the same number of hours, and the first year's work is probably mind-numbing while the 7th year is at least a little more in control of her work and practicing more of what she wants to do in her career by that point anyway. If the firm is trying to keep people from leaving in January because they burn out, they should be more worried about the junior associates. And everyone likes to intimate that the 7th years are just inherently worth more, but the deals simply won't get done if the junior associates are not there. The firms need the bodies.

[PourMeTea]

Isn’t the seniority concern addressed by those massive YE bonuses? Pack it up senior associates

[glitched]

Weil bonuses make no sense. Provides no incentives for mids and seniors to stay.

[Joachim2017]

Senior associates on this thread huffing about how their hours are so much harder and more difficult than junior hours is pretty hilarious. There's no hard and fast rule here. Sometimes juniors have a lot more stress, difficulty, and complexity in their work than seniors, who take the credit and pass it along to partners after some minimum amount of oversight. Sometimes juniors work directly with partners. Obviously that's not always the case, but the linear conception here is just not what's actually true at many firms.

[Anonymous User]

I think most firms recognize that it's harder to lateral as a senior (especially as a 7th year) and most seniors are not going to lateral.

I get that it's shitty and I completely agree that 7th year hours are far more valuable than 1st year hours. To the previous poster, no first year is having more complex or difficult hours than a seventh year. It might be more stressful for the first year, but that's totally beside the point.

A better way to handle this is to offer ranges that are staggered upwards based on seniority and not make it transparent that it's just based on hours.