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

[UnicornHunter]

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).

Yeah, it's not about the $4000 or so bucks its about the signaling. Going to 180 says that the firm is in good financial shape and that it values the work its associates do. Staying at 160 raises questions about both of those. Maybe that's not fair, but firms are tough to distinguish during OCI. Whether or not a firm is paying on the Cravath scale is better grounds to choose than almost any other possible rationale given the paucity of information law students have available to them during OCI.

[Calvin Murphy]

I can see that. I still think it's kind of silly in retrospect, but I would have given firms paying $162,500 a slight edge on my bid list over firms paying $160,000. As for whether a move to 180 signals actual financial health, I'm wondering what people think Dewey would have done if firms went to $180,000 in January of 2012.

[UnicornHunter]

I can see that. I still think it's kind of silly in retrospect, but I would have given firms paying $162,500 a slight edge on my bid list over firms paying $160,000. As for whether a move to 180 signals actual financial health, I'm wondering what people think Dewey would have done if firms went to $180,000 in January of 2012.

Sure, it's borderline specious. But it's still better than any other piece of information you have available to you at that point in the process.

[Calvin Murphy]

Oh...I almost forgot...while we're on the topic of signaling to 2Ls...

The only way to TRULY signal elite status to 2Ls is to raise to 190k.

[Anonymous User]

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.

Completely disagree. There's no way that NY firms not at 180 by OCI will be second on everyone's list. If you're still at 160 you're not paying top of the market, and there are 30+ firms already paying top of the market. They'll still have plenty of students to choose from, but they won't have their picks by a long shot. Not going to 180 when 30+ firms already have sends a pretty bad signal to the field, and this is coming from someone whose v50 hasn't matched yet.

[Anonymous User]

Acquaintence at GDC non-NY office says that they might pull a Cov and only raise in NYC, if at all. This seems incomprehensible to me. I'm beginning to wonder how reliable these tipsters are... are they speculating off a lack of buzz and an assumption that NY salaries are typically higher? It seems incomprehensible that firms like GDC and Covington can get away with not paying market.

[jbagelboy]

Acquaintence at GDC non-NY office says that they might pull a Cov and only raise in NYC, if at all. This seems incomprehensible to me. I'm beginning to wonder how reliable these tipsters are... are they speculating off a lack of buzz and an assumption that NY salaries are typically higher? It seems incomprehensible that firms like GDC and Covington can get away with not paying market.

There is absolutely no way, in any conceivable rational universe, where Gibson does not match in LA given that Latham, Quinn, Munger, Irell, Skadden, and O'Melveny have. That would never happen; every competitive law student in the market is choosing directly between them and at least one of these other firms. Maybe they leave DC in the dust, but they would never move NY without the home office.

[Anonymous User]

Oh, another thing... if a firm leaves an office in a dust when said office is in a market like NY or Cali that has mostly already matched, it sends a signal that they don't much care who they have in that office as long as they have warm bodies. I'd be looking to lateral if I were there.

[Anonymous User]

Will be interesting to see what non-NY firms with NYC offices will do. I'm an associate at Venable, which is based in DC / Baltimore but which has an 80-person NYC office. Given that they didn't go to $160k until 2014 (and don't have different salaries for different offices), might be preparing my resume ...

[soj]

.

[Anonymous User]

The most offensive part about the Gibson story, if true, is that the overwhelming majority of the NY associates would not have been hired into the LA office.

Gibson LA is one of the most selective offices of any V15 in the country; every single person in that office had options at a firm that is now paying market in LA. Their cutoff for grades is absurdly high. Gibson NY, not true nearly to the same degree.

Again, another recruiting bonanza in the works if the well-credentialed associates at Gibson LA are not bumped up.

[CTT]

Acquaintence at GDC non-NY office says that they might pull a Cov and only raise in NYC, if at all. This seems incomprehensible to me. I'm beginning to wonder how reliable these tipsters are... are they speculating off a lack of buzz and an assumption that NY salaries are typically higher? It seems incomprehensible that firms like GDC and Covington can get away with not paying market.

There is absolutely no way, in any conceivable rational universe, where Gibson does not match in LA given that Latham, Quinn, Munger, Irell, Skadden, and O'Melveny have. That would never happen; every competitive law student in the market is choosing directly between them and at least one of these other firms. Maybe they leave DC in the dust, but they would never move NY without the home office.

No chance they leave DC out. Their office down there is far more profitable than CovingTTTon and has a good number of the firm's highest profile practices and partners. If they hold at 160k, their DC office would be unlikely to get associates who had offers from the DC firms paying 180k+, e.g. Skadden, Latham, Cleary, Quinn, Kirkland, Shearman, White & Case etc. Taking the big conservative stick up the rear isn't worth $20,000, even to the Gibson sort, and the privilege of finishing off T.O. with a bj doesn't make up for the remaining difference.

[Anonymous User]

Will be interesting to see what non-NY firms with NYC offices will do. I'm an associate at Venable, which is based in DC / Baltimore but which has an 80-person NYC office. Given that they didn't go to $160k until 2014 (and don't have different salaries for different offices), might be preparing my resume ...

I'm also curious with respect to Philly. If you're a firm like MLB or Dechert and only recently went up to 160 last year, when do you start to feel pressure to increase to 180? I mean if a firm like Weil in Princeton will go to 180 and Wilmington firms like Skadden will go to 180, surely the 3-4 big players in Philly should have to jump up to retain top t14 talent. How else do you get Penn kids to stay in Philly?

[TLSModBot]

Secondary markets "may" feel "some" pressure to raise, but A. Not immediately or even this year and B. Not to 180.

Eta: based on how secondary markets acted with the move to 160

[TLSModBot]

"How will these firms hire anyone? THE SHAME!"

(Lives in a world where ~50% of graduating law students don't end up getting jobs as lawyers, every year.)

[Anonymous User]

"How will these firms hire anyone? THE SHAME!"

(Lives in a world where ~50% of graduating law students don't end up getting jobs as lawyers, every year.)

Well the other problem is retaining those associates - recruiters are targeting associates at those firms like sharks circling in the water.

[Anonymous User]

The most offensive part about the Gibson story, if true, is that the overwhelming majority of the NY associates would not have been hired into the LA office.

Gibson LA is one of the most selective offices of any V15 in the country; every single person in that office had options at a firm that is now paying market in LA. Their cutoff for grades is absurdly high. Gibson NY, not true nearly to the same degree.

Again, another recruiting bonanza in the works if the well-credentialed associates at Gibson LA are not bumped up.

Yes, and Gibson has a great reputation in LA probably at least in part due to the high standards they impose. Not matching market competitors would do some serious damage there. Two classmates I know that ended up there almost certainly had many other firms wanting them to come, and even more so now that they've gotten a few years of training at Gibson's , they would be highly desirable for other firms to recruit in the lateral market.

[Anonymous User]

As someone who had hoped to lateral in the near to mid future, I'm kinda annoyed because I think it'll be ever harder for move with all of the NY to 180 switching that'll happen. :/

(not a GDC anon, though I'm sure the GDC folks will do just fine on the market, some of us have a harder climb)

[TLSModBot]

It's a pity we don't have great lateraling data for below-partner level.

[Anonymous User]

The most offensive part about the Gibson story, if true, is that the overwhelming majority of the NY associates would not have been hired into the LA office.

Gibson LA is one of the most selective offices of any V15 in the country; every single person in that office had options at a firm that is now paying market in LA. Their cutoff for grades is absurdly high. Gibson NY, not true nearly to the same degree.

Again, another recruiting bonanza in the works if the well-credentialed associates at Gibson LA are not bumped up.

I'm not sure how true this is. The numbers our career office puts out says the DC office of GDC has a median offer GPA more than 0.2 points higher than NY and LA offices, but the LA and NY offices have roughly the same metrics. The mean is actually higher in NY.

But it doesn't matter. Gibson is matching in LA, NY, and DC. Probably all offices.

[Anonymous User]

Acquaintence at GDC non-NY office says that they might pull a Cov and only raise in NYC, if at all. This seems incomprehensible to me. I'm beginning to wonder how reliable these tipsters are... are they speculating off a lack of buzz and an assumption that NY salaries are typically higher? It seems incomprehensible that firms like GDC and Covington can get away with not paying market.

Unless the acquaintance is on the management committee at GDC, they don't know what they are talking about. Law firms are not transparently-run businesses. There is no way that an associate at GDC is privy to anything relatively close to accurate information about what GDC will or will not do. It's all speculation based on the radio silence. If GDC management had said "We are considering this and will discuss on Wednesday at our next scheduled executive committee meeting," that information would already be in this thread.

This type of "buzz" is the same thing happening at Akin Gump, Ropes, Wilmer, A&P, etc. - skeptical associates are assuming that it won't happen because their firm didn't do it within a week. Firms take time to make decisions, especially the more fiscally conservative ones (like GDC, Wilmer, etc.) that would wait to see where the market settles (and it clearly has, at 180). The V25/V30 firms that haven't matched yet will do it soon enough, they are just waiting on partner votes/executive committee meetings. There are still several weeks before the raise is even effective. There is plenty of time.

[smaug]

I don't understand what "fiscally conservative" is codeword for here. Are those firms actually fiscally conservative in terms of expenses?

[Anonymous User]

I don't understand what "fiscally conservative" is codeword for here. Are those firms actually fiscally conservative in terms of expenses?

Firms with a reputation for being cheap. Maybe warranted, maybe not.

[Anonymous User]

I don't understand what "fiscally conservative" is codeword for here. Are those firms actually fiscally conservative in terms of expenses?

A lot are - less lavish summer associate events, fewer resources (e.g. support staff) than other firms, etc. Vault firms in the $1mm PPP range especially will do anything to boost that stat for AmLAw.

[Anonymous User]

As someone who had hoped to lateral in the near to mid future, I'm kinda annoyed because I think it'll be ever harder for move with all of the NY to 180 switching that'll happen. :/

(not a GDC anon, though I'm sure the GDC folks will do just fine on the market, some of us have a harder climb)

Eh, on the somewhat-bright side, it might be easier for an NYC associate to lateral to a non-180k non-New York firm, because they're going to be less desirable places to work. For somebody who desperately wants to get out of NY after a few years, the 20k cut might be worth it.