EOY Bonuses Forum

[Anonymous User]

Anon from the above, and frankly surprised at the responses. If you're at a firm that requires a minimum billable hour threshold for bonuses, you meet that threshold, and then the firm lays you off a few weeks before the bonus was due to be paid and doesn't pay you out, sorry that feels gross to me, especially since Cooley is absolutely going to pay out bonuses to other associates. If there are a true performance issues, sure, but if your only flaw is you are in cap markets and they think cap markets is going to be slow for the next 12-18 months, I don't like that. You made the firm a lot of money meeting that billable hour threshold.

Practically speaking, it seems safe to assume that the laid off associates weren’t hitting (or near hitting) hours.

If the whole group is slow, there are plenty of associates that are likely well below hours (through no fault of their own, mind you)

[Anonymous User]

Anon from the above, and frankly surprised at the responses. If you're at a firm that requires a minimum billable hour threshold for bonuses, you meet that threshold, and then the firm lays you off a few weeks before the bonus was due to be paid and doesn't pay you out, sorry that feels gross to me, especially since Cooley is absolutely going to pay out bonuses to other associates. If there are a true performance issues, sure, but if your only flaw is you are in cap markets and they think cap markets is going to be slow for the next 12-18 months, I don't like that. You made the firm a lot of money meeting that billable hour threshold.

Practically speaking, it seems safe to assume that the laid off associates weren’t hitting (or near hitting) hours.

If the whole group is slow, there are plenty of associates that are likely well below hours (through no fault of their own, mind you)

Yes. We've discussed this on here before. Generally speaking, firms don't lay off people billing 2,000+ hours. (Huge disclaimer to avoid 50 angry comments: If you were billing less than 2,000 hours, not saying that was your fault; partners exist to generate business and associates exist to do the work; they failed, not you.) Whenever layoffs hit, you talk with peers / friends / contacts claiming they were "on pace" but were magically laid off. Most of the time these tend to be distortions or self-serving statements because the guy/girl is trying to (understandably) preserve their reputation and position themselves to get a new job and doesn't want the albatross of "you were pacing for 1,300 hours before you were fired?" around their neck even if there's a totally legit. explanation for it.

TL;DR: irl the Venn Diagram overlap between "laid off" and "billing 2,000+ hours" is small to non-existent regardless of what you may hear when layoffs happen.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

I'm in-house at a tech company now and I thought our engineers were insanely entitled, but "pissed off that I didn't get a bonus that paid out after I was fired" beats that.

Law firms don’t have “bonuses” in the colloquial sense of the term; it’s functionally just deferred comp that associates would have almost entirely earned if it were all paid evenly. Firms of course love making more of this comp discretionary so they can pull exactly this sort of bullshit.

The tech version is getting fired right before RSUs/options vest. As I’m sure you’re aware in the industry, companies have done that on a much more massive scale this year, and workers have rightly been furious.

[Anonymous User]

I'm in-house at a tech company now and I thought our engineers were insanely entitled, but "pissed off that I didn't get a bonus that paid out after I was fired" beats that.

Law firms don’t have “bonuses” in the colloquial sense of the term; it’s functionally just deferred comp that associates would have almost entirely earned if it were all paid evenly. Firms of course love making more of this comp discretionary so they can pull exactly this sort of bullshit.

The tech version is getting fired right before RSUs/options vest. As I’m sure you’re aware in the industry, companies have done that on a much more massive scale this year, and workers have rightly been furious.

This is just a bunch of words. How is it "functionally just deferred comp"? What is a "bonus" in the colloquial sense of the term? When is a year-end "bonus" ever not "functionally just deferred comp"? When were there mass tech layoffs solely of people who were just about to hit their cliffs?

[Anonymous User]

I'm in-house at a tech company now and I thought our engineers were insanely entitled, but "pissed off that I didn't get a bonus that paid out after I was fired" beats that.

Law firms don’t have “bonuses” in the colloquial sense of the term; it’s functionally just deferred comp that associates would have almost entirely earned if it were all paid evenly. Firms of course love making more of this comp discretionary so they can pull exactly this sort of bullshit.

The tech version is getting fired right before RSUs/options vest. As I’m sure you’re aware in the industry, companies have done that on a much more massive scale this year, and workers have rightly been furious.

This is just a bunch of words. How is it "functionally just deferred comp"? What is a "bonus" in the colloquial sense of the term? When is a year-end "bonus" ever not "functionally just deferred comp"? When were there mass tech layoffs solely of people who were just about to hit their cliffs?

It's not just a bunch of words it's just you don't like the rejoinder you're getting. A bonus in the pure sense is meant to reward outsized performance or better than expected results, typically at year-end. Your old school sales department bonus in December. That's not what bonuses are in biglaw.

In biglaw, there's no conditioning on the bonus (besides "do your job and bill x hours") which is why it's actually deferred comp. It's understood, for decades and throughout the industry (which engages in a form of cartel-like compensation fixing exactly for this reason), that your compensation will be base + year-end payout as long as you do your job. Cooley is now being accused of breaking this understanding (but then again, are we really surprised that a place that is willing to lay off 10% of its workforce weeks before Christmas would have unclean hands?).

This is, by the way, one of the reasons you see such strong reactions by associates around "bonus" time every year. Exactly because it's not some % of profits that they're getting paid out and it's all subject to chance and whim; it's a portion of their paycheck (put in other words) that they were told would be coming at the end of the year as part of the bargain of doing the work. Important psychological difference between e.g., your sales department year-end (or even the year-end payout for equity partners).

[Anonymous User]

I'm in-house at a tech company now and I thought our engineers were insanely entitled, but "pissed off that I didn't get a bonus that paid out after I was fired" beats that.

Law firms don’t have “bonuses” in the colloquial sense of the term; it’s functionally just deferred comp that associates would have almost entirely earned if it were all paid evenly. Firms of course love making more of this comp discretionary so they can pull exactly this sort of bullshit.

The tech version is getting fired right before RSUs/options vest. As I’m sure you’re aware in the industry, companies have done that on a much more massive scale this year, and workers have rightly been furious.

This is just a bunch of words. How is it "functionally just deferred comp"? What is a "bonus" in the colloquial sense of the term? When is a year-end "bonus" ever not "functionally just deferred comp"? When were there mass tech layoffs solely of people who were just about to hit their cliffs?

It's not just a bunch of words it's just you don't like the rejoinder you're getting. A bonus in the pure sense is meant to reward outsized performance or better than expected results, typically at year-end. Your old school sales department bonus in December. That's not what bonuses are in biglaw.

In biglaw, there's no conditioning on the bonus (besides "do your job and bill x hours") which is why it's actually deferred comp. It's understood, for decades and throughout the industry (which engages in a form of cartel-like compensation fixing exactly for this reason), that your compensation will be base + year-end payout as long as you do your job. Cooley is now being accused of breaking this understanding (but then again, are we really surprised that a place that is willing to lay off 10% of its workforce weeks before Christmas would have unclean hands?).

This is, by the way, one of the reasons you see such strong reactions by associates around "bonus" time every year. Exactly because it's not some % of profits that they're getting paid out and it's all subject to chance and whim; it's a portion of their paycheck (put in other words) that they were told would be coming at the end of the year as part of the bargain of doing the work. Important psychological difference between e.g., your sales department year-end (or even the year-end payout for equity partners).

Similarly, not clear you understand the meaning of the words you're using. Can you give me an example of a bonus that rewards outsized performance or better than expected results, that is paid at year end, that *isn't* "functionally just deferred comp"?

My favorite part of your response was where you said "there's no conditioning on the bonus" and then immediately listed two conditions. Your Honor, I've never murdered anyone except for the two people I murdered, but they don't count!

[Anonymous User]

Different poster from the above, but biglaw bonuses are set with the same expectations each year (~2k hours) and the amount is fixed by the market, like lockstep salary. And you know what that bonus is when you start the new year (unless the market rate changes moderately for everyone).

Critically, billing 2k hours doesn’t just qualify for a bonus, it’s also generally required to remain “in good standing.” ie expected performance. Which looks like a lot like deferred comp.

A bonus paid to a salesperson at EOY is black box/not fixed by market rates and varies wildly based on sales or money brought through the door for that specific salesperson. Earning this comp isn’t the same as remaining in good standing as an employee- it’s for higher performance. So it’s a bonus, whereas a lockstep biglaw bonus isn’t dependent on whether I won X case this year or did $Y in corporate deals. It’s class year and 2k hours

I understood that’s what the above poster said and think that’s a valid distinction

[Anonymous User]

I'm in-house at a tech company now and I thought our engineers were insanely entitled, but "pissed off that I didn't get a bonus that paid out after I was fired" beats that.

Law firms don’t have “bonuses” in the colloquial sense of the term; it’s functionally just deferred comp that associates would have almost entirely earned if it were all paid evenly. Firms of course love making more of this comp discretionary so they can pull exactly this sort of bullshit.

The tech version is getting fired right before RSUs/options vest. As I’m sure you’re aware in the industry, companies have done that on a much more massive scale this year, and workers have rightly been furious.

This is just a bunch of words. How is it "functionally just deferred comp"? What is a "bonus" in the colloquial sense of the term? When is a year-end "bonus" ever not "functionally just deferred comp"? When were there mass tech layoffs solely of people who were just about to hit their cliffs?

It's not just a bunch of words it's just you don't like the rejoinder you're getting. A bonus in the pure sense is meant to reward outsized performance or better than expected results, typically at year-end. Your old school sales department bonus in December. That's not what bonuses are in biglaw.

In biglaw, there's no conditioning on the bonus (besides "do your job and bill x hours") which is why it's actually deferred comp. It's understood, for decades and throughout the industry (which engages in a form of cartel-like compensation fixing exactly for this reason), that your compensation will be base + year-end payout as long as you do your job. Cooley is now being accused of breaking this understanding (but then again, are we really surprised that a place that is willing to lay off 10% of its workforce weeks before Christmas would have unclean hands?).

This is, by the way, one of the reasons you see such strong reactions by associates around "bonus" time every year. Exactly because it's not some % of profits that they're getting paid out and it's all subject to chance and whim; it's a portion of their paycheck (put in other words) that they were told would be coming at the end of the year as part of the bargain of doing the work. Important psychological difference between e.g., your sales department year-end (or even the year-end payout for equity partners).

Similarly, not clear you understand the meaning of the words you're using. Can you give me an example of a bonus that rewards outsized performance or better than expected results, that is paid at year end, that *isn't* "functionally just deferred comp"?

My favorite part of your response was where you said "there's no conditioning on the bonus" and then immediately listed two conditions. Your Honor, I've never murdered anyone except for the two people I murdered, but they don't count!

I understand the meaning of the words. The distinction has been clearly explained to you three times by three separate posters. You strike me as someone who argues for the sake of argument combined with a mild chip on your shoulder about being in-house versus still in biglaw and scoffing at those biglaw folks' "entitlement" when, as we've all explained, that isn't the case. I think that's all the time necessary to spend on this.

[Anonymous User]

I am often surprised by the vitriol generated by discussions about associate compensation, when partners earning seven or eight figures seem to escape it. I guess people like to compare themselves to (and be jealous about) others they consider to be within their sphere, which for the spiteful type of in-house lawyer is associates in private practice.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, you caught me, I'm super jealous of you all. Good thing I have my multi-million dollar net worth, significant equity stake in a tech company, and work-free weekends to soothe me!

By the way, "bonuses paid to salespeople EOY" aren't really a thing anymore, but none of you would know that since you don't know anything about how non-law firm companies work. Everyone is on monthly or quarterly OTE (that's "on-target earnings" for you lawyers) nowadays.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, you caught me, I'm super jealous of you all. Good thing I have my multi-million dollar net worth, significant equity stake in a tech company, and work-free weekends to soothe me!

By the way, "bonuses paid to salespeople EOY" aren't really a thing anymore, but none of you would know that since you don't know anything about how non-law firm companies work. Everyone is on monthly or quarterly OTE (that's "on-target earnings" for you lawyers) nowadays.

Ok

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Law firms don’t have “bonuses” in the colloquial sense of the term; it’s functionally just deferred comp that associates would have almost entirely earned if it were all paid evenly. Firms of course love making more of this comp discretionary so they can pull exactly this sort of bullshit.

The tech version is getting fired right before RSUs/options vest. As I’m sure you’re aware in the industry, companies have done that on a much more massive scale this year, and workers have rightly been furious.

This is just a bunch of words. How is it "functionally just deferred comp"? What is a "bonus" in the colloquial sense of the term? When is a year-end "bonus" ever not "functionally just deferred comp"? When were there mass tech layoffs solely of people who were just about to hit their cliffs?

If a bonus

(1) is consistently paid to a large majority of eligible employees, such that people reasonably anticipate getting one when making employment decisions [typically 80% of FTE associates get them even at firms with minimums]

(2) has defined criteria for its eligibility [almost always hours]

and (3) those criteria exclusively relate to past performance,

then it’s effectively deferred comp.

This contrasts with the colloquial understanding of a “bonus” being something not regularly earned, or earned only for performance considered well above the norm.

Does that help?

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, you caught me, I'm super jealous of you all. Good thing I have my multi-million dollar net worth, significant equity stake in a tech company, and work-free weekends to soothe me!

By the way, "bonuses paid to salespeople EOY" aren't really a thing anymore, but none of you would know that since you don't know anything about how non-law firm companies work. Everyone is on monthly or quarterly OTE (that's "on-target earnings" for you lawyers) nowadays.

Okay Karen.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry guys, I don't have time to argue over your dumbshit semantics anymore, I'm logging off for the day to go to happy hour before going to a law firm's suite for the Knicks' game tonight. Enjoy your billables today!

[Anonymous User]

[12YrsAnAssociate]

Oh my God he has Knicks tickets I guess everything he said in this thread was right and everything everyone else said was wrong.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry guys, I don't have time to argue over your dumbshit semantics anymore, I'm logging off for the day to go to happy hour before going to a law firm's suite for the Knicks' game tonight. Enjoy your billables today!

Please do us all a favor and enjoy an ice-cold arsenic mocktail in the suite.

[DukeMountain]

Has there been an instance since 09 where annual bonus weren’t paid out among am law 100 firms?

[Anonymous User]

I am often surprised by the vitriol generated by discussions about associate compensation, when partners earning seven or eight figures seem to escape it. I guess people like to compare themselves to (and be jealous about) others they consider to be within their sphere, which for the spiteful type of in-house lawyer is associates in private practice.

When debating whether a 7-11 worker gets min wage or min wage + $2, is it relevant what the CEO/CFO make? Partners are the ones who bring business into the firm and keep the lights own, and the owners of the firm to boot, seems irrelevant how much they make (which varies widely by firm and within firms) relative to the question of when associates (treated as expendable overglorified billing machines) should be paid bonuses.

[Anonymous User]

Does it grate on you that the market values those billing machines as being worth more than you? Or do you soothe yourself at night, “they’re only bonuses and don’t count, right? They’re not deferred compensation…”

[Anonymous User]

Does it grate on you that the market values those billing machines as being worth more than you? Or do you soothe yourself at night, “they’re only bonuses and don’t count, right? They’re not deferred compensation…”

Not sure what you are trying to say. Definitely doesn't grate on me that people work themselves bone-dry doing miserable clerical work to get all of some $115k bonus until Cooley decides to fire them. I don't think many people in the world sit around being jealous of biglaw associates.

That being said, I do agree that most people sitting in that seat don't have much in the way of better options, so best bet is to keep your head down, collect your paycheck, stop whining, and what for better opportunities to present themselves.

[Anonymous User]

Does it grate on you that the market values those billing machines as being worth more than you? Or do you soothe yourself at night, “they’re only bonuses and don’t count, right? They’re not deferred compensation…”

Not sure what you are trying to say. Definitely doesn't grate on me that people work themselves bone-dry doing miserable clerical work to get all of some $115k bonus until Cooley decides to fire them. I don't think many people in the world sit around being jealous of biglaw associates.

That being said, I do agree that most people sitting in that seat don't have much in the way of better options, so best bet is to keep your head down, collect your paycheck, stop whining, and what for better opportunities to present themselves.

(chill in-house guy, definitely out at a Knicks game with the bros, not sitting on his computer at home as a biglaw washout seething and responding to post after post about people in biglaw collecting more $$$ than him)

[Anonymous User]

Does it grate on you that the market values those billing machines as being worth more than you? Or do you soothe yourself at night, “they’re only bonuses and don’t count, right? They’re not deferred compensation…”

Not sure what you are trying to say. Definitely doesn't grate on me that people work themselves bone-dry doing miserable clerical work to get all of some $115k bonus until Cooley decides to fire them. I don't think many people in the world sit around being jealous of biglaw associates.

That being said, I do agree that most people sitting in that seat don't have much in the way of better options, so best bet is to keep your head down, collect your paycheck, stop whining, and what for better opportunities to present themselves.

(chill in-house guy, definitely out at a Knicks game with the bros, not sitting on his computer at home as a biglaw washout seething and responding to post after post about people in biglaw collecting more $$$ than him)

Or chill in-house guy hanging out at home and feeling no pressure to do any work or worry about arbitrary billable targets or who is getting stealthed today? Biglaw bonuses may seem life changing as a 5th year associate, but once you are 10 years out you realize that in no way do they compensate for the utter misery, and there is good reason why they need to start paying people partner level comp to stick around.

[Anonymous User]

Chill Knicks in-house "guy" (pretty misogynistic of you to assume my gender!) here -- those last few anon posts weren't me, I haven't been on my computer since that post I made at 4:30 eastern. I know that's tough for you biglaw cogs to fathom.

[Anonymous User]

We recently had a meeting with our practice leader, and he thought we’re lucky the bonuses didn’t decrease given 2021 was such a bumper year (ignoring nonpayment of special bonuses, of course). I cannot believe that’s the mentality from some out there, but here we are…Baker did us a favor by setting the floor early on.