NY GOES TO 180k! IT HAPPENED!!!! (CovingTTTon does a 180! Holder wept.) Forum

[wiz]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

[Anonymous User]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

I've heard rumors in DC about Akin pulling a Cov

[Anonymous User]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

I've heard rumors in DC about Akin pulling a Cov

Not to be weird but I have too

[wiz]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

I've heard rumors in DC about Akin pulling a Cov

Not to be weird but I have too

Wow, that blows. I figured they'd be the best bet to match out of the firms listed on the previous page. It's still bizarre to me that TX-based firms have gone to 180k while DC firms are trying to cheap out.

[wiz]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

I've heard rumors in DC about Akin pulling a Cov

Not to be weird but I have too

Wow, that blows. I figured they'd be the best bet to match out of the firms listed on the previous page. It's still bizarre to me that TX-based firms have gone to 180k while DC firms are trying to cheap out.

[Anonymous User]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

I've heard rumors in DC about Akin pulling a Cov

Not to be weird but I have too

Wow, that blows. I figured they'd be the best bet to match out of the firms listed on the previous page. It's still bizarre to me that TX-based firms have gone to 180k while DC firms are trying to cheap out.

Second anon here: the 'rumor' could be the same source and it could be inaccurate. But yea it was someone who worked there.

[Anonymous User]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

I've heard rumors in DC about Akin pulling a Cov

Not to be weird but I have too

Wow, that blows. I figured they'd be the best bet to match out of the firms listed on the previous page. It's still bizarre to me that TX-based firms have gone to 180k while DC firms are trying to cheap out.

Second anon here: the 'rumor' could be the same source and it could be inaccurate. But yea it was someone who worked there.

Fantastic. Anybody want to give me a rundown on how to get a job after 3L year?

[Mr. Peanutbutter]

This thread has become less than useless

[beautyistruth]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

Does Akin pulling a Cov mean that they're bumping NYC? Since we have a potential inside source is there any chance they have clarification on this? Very relevant to my interests.

[Anonymous User]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

Does Akin pulling a Cov mean that they're bumping NYC? Since we have a potential inside source is there any chance they have clarification on this? Very relevant to my interests.

Covington hasn't raised NYC yet. Although heavily implied, that decision is still outstanding. My guess is that they're trying to wait to see if they need to go to 180 in DC or not.

[Anonymous User]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

Does Akin pulling a Cov mean that they're bumping NYC? Since we have a potential inside source is there any chance they have clarification on this? Very relevant to my interests.

Covington hasn't raised NYC yet. Although heavily implied, that decision is still outstanding. My guess is that they're trying to wait to see if they need to go to 180 in DC or not.

Right, that's pretty clear from Covington's email, and I assume that's what the term means, but I was hoping that whoever the tipster is could clarify how *they* were using the term, i.e. whether they meant Akin was heavily implied to be matching in NY and nowhere else, or whether Akin wasn't matching anywhere. (Because I highly doubt whoever they got the source from internally also used the term "pulling a Cov", but if they did, lol).

I totally realize this is completely grasping at straws, but hey, it's the weekend, and bar prep is very boring.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

Do any of the big law salary historians in this thread know what happened in 2007? When salaries went to 160k did every firm match before oci or did oci start with some firms not yet moving up to the new "market"?

[TLSModBot]

Do any of the big law salary historians in this thread know what happened in 2007? When salaries went to 160k did every firm match before oci or did oci start with some firms not yet moving up to the new "market"?

I posted a link to a dated blow by blow spreadsheet of every firm match for 6 months earlier upthread. Too lazy to dig it up but search my posts here or in the Cravath Spawn thread

[Emma.]

Do any of the big law salary historians in this thread know what happened in 2007? When salaries went to 160k did every firm match before oci or did oci start with some firms not yet moving up to the new "market"?

I posted a link to a dated blow by blow spreadsheet of every firm match for 6 months earlier upthread. Too lazy to dig it up but search my posts here or in the Cravath Spawn thread

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 73uZU/edit

[TLSModBot]

But the takeaway is that a smattering of firms went to 160 nationally right away, then a bunch of firms limited it to NY only which became the norm for 3 months until pressure in CA and DC moved those markets to 160, followed by Chicago and Boston thereafter, followed by raises (not to 160) in Philly, Atlanta and other secondary markets at the 5-6 month mark.

[Anonymous User]

Covington hasn't raised NYC yet. Although heavily implied, that decision is still outstanding. My guess is that they're trying to wait to see if they need to go to 180 in DC or not.

Yeah, I think that is right. Also their SF, LA and Silicon Valley offices. "This is only a NY thing" is a lot more defensible line than "this is an everywhere except DC thing," so they can only not match in DC if they don't match in those offices either I think.

The Covington email said that only NY-based firms had matched, that they didn't expect it would spread beyond that and that they believed it was the reestablishment of the old school order where NY paid more than any other market due to cost of living. They sent that email at 8:41 AM on Wednesday. At that time, that sounded sort of plausible. Only NY-based firms had matched at that point, except for one boutique and the vast majority of attorneys affected were in NY at that point.

The situation is very different now than it was then. 15 or so firms have matched in DC and many have matched in LA and the bay area too. Many firms that aren't based in NY have matched. Texas firms with significantly lower costs of living than LA, SF and DC have even matched. So, nothing they predicted in their email came to pass.

Covington will need to fold. Covington only has something like 500 attorneys in DC and already there are something like 3,000 attorneys in DC who are now on the 180 scale.

[El Pollito]

like 20 SV / SF firms have moved + a bunch more in LA

[Anonymous User]

Texas roundup: to my knowledge, no word yet from Andrews Kurth, Akin Gump, Haynes and Boone, Locke Lord, NRF, Bracewell, and the more "regional" firms like Gardere, Thompson & Knight, Winstead etc. As an associate at one of the bigger firms on this list, I'm still hopeful that good news will come next week.

I really hope TX firms aren't done moving. The pressure on the larger firms in that group with a nationwide presence (Akin, Haynes and Boone, Locke Lord, NRF) is pretty high right now.

[Anonymous User]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

Do you think those firms will do the compressed scale in Texas and Cravath in NYC, or compressed everywhere?

[nothingtosee]

Texas roundup: to my knowledge, no word yet from Andrews Kurth, Akin Gump, Haynes and Boone, Locke Lord, NRF, Bracewell, and the more "regional" firms like Gardere, Thompson & Knight, Winstead etc. As an associate at one of the bigger firms on this list, I'm still hopeful that good news will come next week.

I really hope TX firms aren't done moving. The pressure on the larger firms in that group with a nationwide presence (Akin, Haynes and Boone, Locke Lord, NRF) is pretty high right now.

I think NRF is the most interesting of the batch. It seems that the "Big 3" is really a Big 2. But if NRF and none of the other Texas firms match, then the Big 3 label fits

[soj]

.

[wiz]

I predict Akin matches soon while the other big TX firms bump to 180k but do a compressed TX scale after the first/second year. Regional firms don't match.

Do you think those firms will do the compressed scale in Texas and Cravath in NYC, or compressed everywhere?

Your guess is as good as mine, but I was assuming the former. Those firms have small NYC offices, so it wouldn't be too expensive to make the move, and there's precedent for them doing compressed in Texas and Cravath in NYC under the old 160k scale. I think Fulbright had been at Cravath in NYC for a while but only recently moved from compressed to Cravath for its Texas offices.

[Tiago Splitter]

Do any of the big law salary historians in this thread know what happened in 2007? When salaries went to 160k did every firm match before oci or did oci start with some firms not yet moving up to the new "market"?

This is the first raise that happened in the middle of the year rather than around January, so the pressure to raise by OCI, if it exists, is kind of a new thing.

[Anonymous User]

Do any of the big law salary historians in this thread know what happened in 2007? When salaries went to 160k did every firm match before oci or did oci start with some firms not yet moving up to the new "market"?

This is the first raise that happened in the middle of the year rather than around January, so the pressure to raise by OCI, if it exists, is kind of a new thing.

Thanks. I would be interested in seeing a breakdown of who has matched against # of offices in the U.S. and # of associates in the U.S.. It seems like the more offices and the more associates a firm has the longer it should take to respond because there's more $ involved and its more complicated. On the other hand, if any of these firms hasn't matched by OCI they will be absolutely slaughtered in terms of recruiting.

[Calvin Murphy]

Do any of the big law salary historians in this thread know what happened in 2007? When salaries went to 160k did every firm match before oci or did oci start with some firms not yet moving up to the new "market"?

This is the first raise that happened in the middle of the year rather than around January, so the pressure to raise by OCI, if it exists, is kind of a new thing.

Thanks. I would be interested in seeing a breakdown of who has matched against # of offices in the U.S. and # of associates in the U.S.. It seems like the more offices and the more associates a firm has the longer it should take to respond because there's more $ involved and its more complicated. On the other hand, if any of these firms hasn't matched by OCI they will be absolutely slaughtered in terms of recruiting.

More complex...maybe...but the sheer fact that there is more money involved isn't a deterrent to raising salaries. The large firms also have larger revenues...basically they have larger balance sheets, but that doesn't slow things down to an appreciable degree. I think the two largest factors in timing right now are:

1) Getting partners to a vote--some firms have been waiting for their regularly scheduled meeting to vote on the match. Most of the large firms are going to have to vote before announcing a match; and

2) Figuring out what other firms are doing. Are multi-office firms going to raise in every city? Will Philadelphia go back to being a secondary market?

As for OCI--it would be somewhat irrational for firms to raise ahead of OCI just because of the recruitment. The law students won't be starting full-time for over two years...the difference for the summer itself is like $4,000. The idea that a firm has to match quickly just because of the timing of recruitment season is kind of silly. Any reasonably elite firm is going to be at 180 before October 2018 rolls around.

Then again, matching before recruitment season sends a message to the 2Ls, right? COLUMBIA BROS at their SKADDEN CBs are having MARTINIS with their FILET MIGNON at DEL FRISCOS while FORDHAM 2LS at their covingTTTon CBs pay out of pocket for CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL (no guac).