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

[yomisterd]

The crazy part isn't that cost of living isn't factored in, because who cares supply and demand. But that NYC has much more demand than most cities. Chicago and LA aren't booming. NYC is. Yet they pay the same.

I was using COL as an amorphous term for an all inclusive for quality of life (billables) and rate the firm charges out because NYC services are just more expensive. Higher billable rates X higher associate hours = more money and should be more money for the associates.

But that isn't really how labor works. It's all supply and demand.

I mean, labor isn't all supply and demand because people aren't entirely rational when it comes to employment. I think a brief peek at TLS on-topics is proof of that.

[onionz]

But are there firms out there that aren't meeting hiring quotas for talent because they're losing associates to other cities?

[Cobretti]

Finally, firms don't give a fuck about consistency between their offices in comp structure. Plenty of offices have way different bonus structures. It's not unheard of for Chicago offices to give 2x what the NYC office gives to associates that hit the same billables because the Chicago office translates that into more profits.

But the lockstep firms tend to set the market and those firms will pay the same across every office. Which puts some pressure on the non-lockstep firms in those other cities. Chicago might be an exception because the big NYC locksteppers don't have offices there.

Skadden was the first to pay 160 in Chicago. They charge the same rates and pay the same salary in every US office so I don't see them letting NY salaries vary from the rest.

[Johann]

Finally, firms don't give a fuck about consistency between their offices in comp structure. Plenty of offices have way different bonus structures. It's not unheard of for Chicago offices to give 2x what the NYC office gives to associates that hit the same billables because the Chicago office translates that into more profits.

But the lockstep firms tend to set the market and those firms will pay the same across every office. Which puts some pressure on the non-lockstep firms in those other cities. Chicago might be an exception because the big NYC locksteppers don't have offices there.

Skadden was the first to pay 160 in Chicago. They charge the same rates and pay the same salary in every US office so I don't see them letting NY salaries vary from the rest.

Yeah Skadden and Kirkland were my 2 exceptions to the rule...

[Cobretti]

Finally, firms don't give a fuck about consistency between their offices in comp structure. Plenty of offices have way different bonus structures. It's not unheard of for Chicago offices to give 2x what the NYC office gives to associates that hit the same billables because the Chicago office translates that into more profits.

But the lockstep firms tend to set the market and those firms will pay the same across every office. Which puts some pressure on the non-lockstep firms in those other cities. Chicago might be an exception because the big NYC locksteppers don't have offices there.

Skadden was the first to pay 160 in Chicago. They charge the same rates and pay the same salary in every US office so I don't see them letting NY salaries vary from the rest.

Yeah Skadden and Kirkland were my 2 exceptions to the rule...

I know, just responding to tiago

[Tiago Splitter]

Finally, firms don't give a fuck about consistency between their offices in comp structure. Plenty of offices have way different bonus structures. It's not unheard of for Chicago offices to give 2x what the NYC office gives to associates that hit the same billables because the Chicago office translates that into more profits.

But the lockstep firms tend to set the market and those firms will pay the same across every office. Which puts some pressure on the non-lockstep firms in those other cities. Chicago might be an exception because the big NYC locksteppers don't have offices there.

Skadden was the first to pay 160 in Chicago. They charge the same rates and pay the same salary in every US office so I don't see them letting NY salaries vary from the rest.

I thought Skadden had a couple straggler offices but if not that makes it even harder for firms in non-NYC markets to hold back. Latham and Skadden are in like 2/3 of American cities.

Obviously if the more local Chicago firms can't afford it, they can't afford it.

All 3 raises between 2000 and 2007 spread like wildfire, because nearly every firm that went up had offices in multiple locations and felt obligated to give a bump up to everyone. I don't see why this would be much different.

[Johann]

Finally, firms don't give a fuck about consistency between their offices in comp structure. Plenty of offices have way different bonus structures. It's not unheard of for Chicago offices to give 2x what the NYC office gives to associates that hit the same billables because the Chicago office translates that into more profits.

But the lockstep firms tend to set the market and those firms will pay the same across every office. Which puts some pressure on the non-lockstep firms in those other cities. Chicago might be an exception because the big NYC locksteppers don't have offices there.

Skadden was the first to pay 160 in Chicago. They charge the same rates and pay the same salary in every US office so I don't see them letting NY salaries vary from the rest.

I thought Skadden had a couple straggler offices but if not that makes it even harder for firms in non-NYC markets to hold back. Latham and Skadden are in like 2/3 of American cities.

Obviously if the more local Chicago firms can't afford it, they can't afford it.

All 3 raises between 2000 and 2007 spread like wildfire, because nearly every firm that went up had offices in multiple locations and felt obligated to give a bump up to everyone. I don't see why this would be much different.

Also important to remember the economy boom in 2000 to 2007 was basically widespread throughout the US. Law is definitely moving strong but NYC is a very very large chunk of that. Wilkie Farr and other NYC only (or mainly NYC firms) had some very ridiculous years.

[Anonymous User]

I'm a summer there and it kind of happened, but not really in that way and I wouldn't read anything into it.

It was during our procedures for returning breakfast, and was offhand mentioned that our bennies and como have not been determined yet. It was like an staff management lady, not like Karp or a partner, and no real emphasis was placed on it. Seemed more like a cover their ass thing than anything else. I wouldn't read too much into it.

Eta basically what tiago said.

[Desert Fox]

[Vexed]

Sooooo if we've got an OCI interview with Paul Weiss TCR when they ask "why our firm?" is just "190k", right?

[Tiago Splitter]

I'm a summer there and it...happened...

...basically what tiago said.

congrats everyone on NYC to 190k! We did it!

[penn278]

I'm a summer there and it kind of happened, but not really in that way and I wouldn't read anything into it.

It was during our procedures for returning breakfast, and was offhand mentioned that our bennies and como have not been determined yet. It was like an staff management lady, not like Karp or a partner, and no real emphasis was placed on it. Seemed more like a cover their ass thing than anything else. I wouldn't read too much into it.

Eta basically what tiago said.

Yaaas

[curepure]

The major law firms have the best possible situation now in terms of the labor market: 1. compensation is fixed at 160k 2. NYC and other major markets (where it's more expensive to live) are also the only markets to expect 100% offer rate 3. very very few hires made during 3L or after graduation, so law students do not want to risk being no-offered by SAing in a smaller market

It seems to me that this situation is comparable to the allegations against airlines. The law firms are saying: our clients want to keep legal costs low, so we need to be very cautious on compensation. Everyone knows that this means not to raise 1st year compensation, because then everyone has to match to remain competitive, and everyone has to raise the lockstep for the other years. Every law firm is aware of what associates are paid at every other firm because the information is public. It seems to me that the only aspect of legal hiring where this breaks down is with laterals, because the market for 3-6th years who have experience is much tighter and also much more difficult to coordinate.

recently offered by a v25 firm in Chicago after graduation, the offer says "the firm has not determined the starting salary for the class of 2015, our compensation is competitive within our market and relative to other firms. to give you a general idea...last year was 160,000"

[rpupkin]

The major law firms have the best possible situation now in terms of the labor market: 1. compensation is fixed at 160k 2. NYC and other major markets (where it's more expensive to live) are also the only markets to expect 100% offer rate 3. very very few hires made during 3L or after graduation, so law students do not want to risk being no-offered by SAing in a smaller market

It seems to me that this situation is comparable to the allegations against airlines. The law firms are saying: our clients want to keep legal costs low, so we need to be very cautious on compensation. Everyone knows that this means not to raise 1st year compensation, because then everyone has to match to remain competitive, and everyone has to raise the lockstep for the other years. Every law firm is aware of what associates are paid at every other firm because the information is public. It seems to me that the only aspect of legal hiring where this breaks down is with laterals, because the market for 3-6th years who have experience is much tighter and also much more difficult to coordinate.

recently offered by a v25 firm in Chicago after graduation, the offer says "the firm has not determined the starting salary for the class of 2015, our compensation is competitive within our market and relative to other firms. to give you a general idea...last year was 160,000"

Did the offer letter really use ellipses like that? If so, this indicates to me that Chicago is returning to 135K. You've got to subsidize NYC to 190K somehow.

[Poopface]

The major law firms have the best possible situation now in terms of the labor market: 1. compensation is fixed at 160k 2. NYC and other major markets (where it's more expensive to live) are also the only markets to expect 100% offer rate 3. very very few hires made during 3L or after graduation, so law students do not want to risk being no-offered by SAing in a smaller market

It seems to me that this situation is comparable to the allegations against airlines. The law firms are saying: our clients want to keep legal costs low, so we need to be very cautious on compensation. Everyone knows that this means not to raise 1st year compensation, because then everyone has to match to remain competitive, and everyone has to raise the lockstep for the other years. Every law firm is aware of what associates are paid at every other firm because the information is public. It seems to me that the only aspect of legal hiring where this breaks down is with laterals, because the market for 3-6th years who have experience is much tighter and also much more difficult to coordinate.

recently offered by a v25 firm in Chicago after graduation, the offer says "the firm has not determined the starting salary for the class of 2015, our compensation is competitive within our market and relative to other firms. to give you a general idea...last year was 160,000"

my offer last summer said the same shit, i feel like they all say that "we have not yet determined our starting salary for next year but last year it was 160" shit, likely doesn't indicate anything

[Foghornleghorn]

my offer last summer said the same shit, i feel like they all say that "we have not yet determined our starting salary for next year but last year it was 160" shit, likely doesn't indicate anything

or maybe it means 190 you mouth-breathing buzzkill

[BigZuck]

Shut your piehole, Poopface.

Just because you don't want to see NYC to 190 doesn't mean it's not happening before our very eyes

[curepure]

The major law firms have the best possible situation now in terms of the labor market: 1. compensation is fixed at 160k 2. NYC and other major markets (where it's more expensive to live) are also the only markets to expect 100% offer rate 3. very very few hires made during 3L or after graduation, so law students do not want to risk being no-offered by SAing in a smaller market

It seems to me that this situation is comparable to the allegations against airlines. The law firms are saying: our clients want to keep legal costs low, so we need to be very cautious on compensation. Everyone knows that this means not to raise 1st year compensation, because then everyone has to match to remain competitive, and everyone has to raise the lockstep for the other years. Every law firm is aware of what associates are paid at every other firm because the information is public. It seems to me that the only aspect of legal hiring where this breaks down is with laterals, because the market for 3-6th years who have experience is much tighter and also much more difficult to coordinate.

recently offered by a v25 firm in Chicago after graduation, the offer says "the firm has not determined the starting salary for the class of 2015, our compensation is competitive within our market and relative to other firms. to give you a general idea...last year was 160,000"

Did the offer letter really use ellipses like that? If so, this indicates to me that Chicago is returning to 135K. You've got to subsidize NYC to 190K somehow.

ha no, I omitted a few sentence. No way it's going down, they are really busy these days, otherwise why offer me.

[Anonymous User]

NYC biglaw associate here: Don't read too much into this. My firm doesn't even tell us what our yearly comp is going to be until around January. Everyone knows what the scale is, but they "set" it through an email at the beginning of the year. Before that HR keeps up the pretense of saying that salaries have not been set yet.

[Anonymous User]

Summer at well known NY Firm similar to Paul Weiss here, just wanted to let y'all know that even though this story is false, a partner did suggest to me that internal discussions re increasing compensation were in the works.

NY to 190 confirmed.

[Mack.Hambleton]

NYC biglaw associate here: Don't read too much into this. My firm doesn't even tell us what our yearly comp is going to be until around January. Everyone knows what the scale is, but they "set" it through an email at the beginning of the year. Before that HR keeps up the pretense of saying that salaries have not been set yet.

NY to 135 confirmed

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

For a big law firm it seems like the best time to announce a raise in 1st year comp would be August right before (or during) OCI. I wonder who will take the lead on this. Skadden? Paul Weiss? Davis Polk? Cravath?

[Desert Fox]

[bearsfan23]

I agree, any firm that went to $190k within the next couple weeks would kill it in recruiting this year, especially if these are the types of things that firms have to plan for in advance

Also, Skadden would never take the lead on this. If they could pay 1st years $7.75 an hour they would. I'm thinking more along the lines of Cravath, PW, STB, Davis Polk. Maybe even K&E

[Anonymous User]

Skadden has literally taken the lead on this in the past.