2021 Special Bonuses Forum

[Anonymous User]

Paul Hastings just matched. May and October.

Do you read their announcement as including an hours requirement? It seems ambiguous to me

I think it gives them flexibility to add an hours requirement next month.

[2013]

Goodwin just announced with 1850 annualized hours req and July 1/October 1 payment dates...

I wonder if this means the bonuses are coming to Boston next.

[Anonymous User]

Goodwin just announced with 1850 annualized hours req and July 1/October 1 payment dates...

I wonder if this means the bonuses are coming to Boston next.

I’m guessing anyone in Boston that paid 2020 special bonuses will pay these as well. K&E and Latham are big competitors for Ropes and Goodwin and Latham also competes with Gunderson, Cooley, etc. So once it starts going through NY firms, it’ll hit Boston

[bruinfan10]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

[lolwutpar]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

It look Latham like a month and a half to match last time around. Those other firms took a little bit too. It will come.

[Anonymous User]

California firms and elite lit boutiques are really waiting until the last minute here guys....is NYC's ascendency at hand?

Wasn't Fenwick one of the first to match Davis Polk? https://abovethelaw.com/2021/03/fenwick ... onus-2021/

As previous posts mentioned, it just takes time

[showusyourtorts]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

We do have Fenwick, which I know isn't a NYC mainstay. I imagine that WSGR and Cooley will have to follow in short order, too.

[ExpOriental]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

Fenwick was one of the first to match, and Paul Hastings matched today. There's basically zero chance any of the CA firms with meaningful transactional practices will fail to match. They're all doing gangbusters and are dealing with the same lack of midlevel staffing as the NYC firms.

I have no idea why people always whip themselves up into a frenzy over firms dragging their heels on a match when it's obvious that they eventually will. There's absolutely nothing to be gleaned from it.

Lit boutiques are a different matter entirely, and I'm curious to see where that goes. They don't really have any reason to do it other than keeping up appearances, because lit is in a completely different place right now in terms of retention pressure as compared to transactional practices.

[AureliusCapital]

When will the Chicago firms move?

[bruinfan10]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

Fenwick was one of the first to match, and Paul Hastings matched today. There's basically zero chance any of the CA firms with meaningful transactional practices will fail to match. They're all doing gangbusters and are dealing with the same lack of midlevel staffing as the NYC firms.

I have no idea why people always whip themselves up into a frenzy over firms dragging their heels on a match when it's obvious that they eventually will. There's absolutely nothing to be gleaned from it.

Lit boutiques are a different matter entirely, and I'm curious to see where that goes. They don't really have any reason to do it other than keeping up appearances, because lit is in a completely different place right now in terms of retention pressure as compared to transactional practices.

Lit practices have also been crushing it, not just transactional. And the lit midlevel lateral market is super super hot right now.

[Anonymous User]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

Fenwick was one of the first to match, and Paul Hastings matched today. There's basically zero chance any of the CA firms with meaningful transactional practices will fail to match. They're all doing gangbusters and are dealing with the same lack of midlevel staffing as the NYC firms.

I have no idea why people always whip themselves up into a frenzy over firms dragging their heels on a match when it's obvious that they eventually will. There's absolutely nothing to be gleaned from it.

Lit boutiques are a different matter entirely, and I'm curious to see where that goes. They don't really have any reason to do it other than keeping up appearances, because lit is in a completely different place right now in terms of retention pressure as compared to transactional practices.

Lit practices have also been crushing it, not just transactional. And the lit midlevel lateral market is super super hot right now.

It's not the same conversation. Lit has been busy, but transactional is at historic levels of activity.

[Anonymous User]

Transactional is busier than lit and it’s wrong to say lit-heavy firms don’t really have a reason to pay retention bonuses. Both are true. I doubt the bonuses would be happening if transactional practices were exactly as busy as lit is right now, but it wouldn’t really surprise me if I were wrong.

[Anonymous User]

Goodwin just announced with 1850 annualized hours req and July 1/October 1 payment dates...

Does anyone know if this means that by July they will look at your annualized hours, and same for October, or is it based on some earlier time.

[TatteredDignity]

When will the Chicago firms move?

This.

I think the most viable path is a Sidley NY match that applies to all US offices, thus forcing the other big Chicago firms to follow suit.

[Anonymous User]

Proskauer match. May/November. DPW $ split. No hours requirement. Paid to attorneys as of Jan 1, 2021 and subject to usual pro-rated portions otherwise.

[Anonymous User]

Kirkland Share Partners too busy diving into literal Scrooge McDuck money vaults to look up and realize what's happening in the market.

[Anonymous User]

GDC...?

[bruinfan10]

When will the Chicago firms move?

This.

I think the most viable path is a Sidley NY match that applies to all US offices, thus forcing the other big Chicago firms to follow suit.

+1

[Anonymous User]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

Fenwick was one of the first to match, and Paul Hastings matched today. There's basically zero chance any of the CA firms with meaningful transactional practices will fail to match. They're all doing gangbusters and are dealing with the same lack of midlevel staffing as the NYC firms.

I have no idea why people always whip themselves up into a frenzy over firms dragging their heels on a match when it's obvious that they eventually will. There's absolutely nothing to be gleaned from it.

Lit boutiques are a different matter entirely, and I'm curious to see where that goes. They don't really have any reason to do it other than keeping up appearances, because lit is in a completely different place right now in terms of retention pressure as compared to transactional practices.

Means these firms consider associates even less of a priority than their peers. If they care enough, they would move fast. It can also mean their partners are not close-knit as they claimed to be

[Anonymous User]

When will the Chicago firms move?

This.

I think the most viable path is a Sidley NY match that applies to all US offices, thus forcing the other big Chicago firms to follow suit.

+1

I'd actually be surprised to see Sidley move first before Kirkland and Latham.

[Anonymous User]

GDC...?

GDC for some reason prides itself on being a late-mover on all things compensation (but they always begrudgingly match the market).

[Anonymous User]

When will the Chicago firms move?

This.

I think the most viable path is a Sidley NY match that applies to all US offices, thus forcing the other big Chicago firms to follow suit.

+1

I'd actually be surprised to see Sidley move first before Kirkland and Latham.

They caught a lot of flack for making the winter 2020 add-on bonus subject to an hours minimum; there is a decent chance they try and make up for that in some fashion.

[ExpOriental]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

Fenwick was one of the first to match, and Paul Hastings matched today. There's basically zero chance any of the CA firms with meaningful transactional practices will fail to match. They're all doing gangbusters and are dealing with the same lack of midlevel staffing as the NYC firms.

I have no idea why people always whip themselves up into a frenzy over firms dragging their heels on a match when it's obvious that they eventually will. There's absolutely nothing to be gleaned from it.

Lit boutiques are a different matter entirely, and I'm curious to see where that goes. They don't really have any reason to do it other than keeping up appearances, because lit is in a completely different place right now in terms of retention pressure as compared to transactional practices.

Means these firms consider associates even less of a priority than their peers. If they care enough, they would move fast. It can also mean their partners are not close-knit as they claimed to be

This is a ridiculous take. I've seen this happen multiple times now, where a firm takes an extra couple of weeks to match, leading to all manner of hysterical TLS screeching about how that firm is obsolete and TTT, and once the firm matches nobody cares or remembers. A two week gap before a firm publicly announces a match that everyone knows is coming anyways signifies nothing, and ginning up these narratives just sounds paranoid and bizarre.

Remember when Covington tried to sandbag DC to 180, and TLS declared it CovingTTTon, and that the firm was over, and it would have to pull from median at Cooley, and how that all totally happened?

Oh wait - that was a fart in the wind that basically disappeared once Covington matched, and it's at most a footnote at this point. And that was infinitely more egregious than slightly delaying the announcement of a match.

Out of all the abuses biglaw levies on associates, getting up in arms about this is hilarious, and I will never not be baffled by it.

[bruinfan10]

Wait, so none of the OG California firms....Latham/OMM/Gibson Dunn....and none of MTO/Irell/HH/KVN...have matched? Man, maybe this is the year NYC actually starts paying their associates more than other markets.

Fenwick was one of the first to match, and Paul Hastings matched today. There's basically zero chance any of the CA firms with meaningful transactional practices will fail to match. They're all doing gangbusters and are dealing with the same lack of midlevel staffing as the NYC firms.

I have no idea why people always whip themselves up into a frenzy over firms dragging their heels on a match when it's obvious that they eventually will. There's absolutely nothing to be gleaned from it.

Lit boutiques are a different matter entirely, and I'm curious to see where that goes. They don't really have any reason to do it other than keeping up appearances, because lit is in a completely different place right now in terms of retention pressure as compared to transactional practices.

Means these firms consider associates even less of a priority than their peers. If they care enough, they would move fast. It can also mean their partners are not close-knit as they claimed to be

This is a ridiculous take. I've seen this happen multiple times now, where a firm takes an extra couple of weeks to match, leading to all manner of hysterical TLS screeching about how that firm is obsolete and TTT, and once the firm matches nobody cares or remembers. A two week gap before a firm publicly announces a match that everyone knows is coming anyways signifies nothing, and ginning up these narratives just sounds paranoid and bizarre.

Remember when Covington tried to sandbag DC to 180, and TLS declared it CovingTTTon, and that the firm was over, and it would have to pull from median at Cooley, and how that all totally happened?

Oh wait - that was a fart in the wind that basically disappeared once Covington matched, and it's at most a footnote at this point. And that was infinitely more egregious than slightly delaying the announcement of a match.

Out of all the abuses biglaw levies on associates, getting up in arms about this is hilarious, and I will never not be baffled by it.

So this is more relevant on fishbowl, where partners actually read the comments, and was more relevant when TLS was like an active forum that legal recruiters took seriously, etc., but basically dude, SHUT UP. It used to be that TLS and ATL would build pressure to get firms to match. Now they're both kind of shells of their former selves.

[Anonymous User]

Where my other DLA anons at?

Think the firm was shamed enough for not matching 2020 bonuses that they’ll get on board with this one, or are we just accepting our fate as a second-rate law firm?