Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k Forum

[Anonymous User]

Double post.

[Anonymous User]

There has to be at least one person on here that works at DPW and knows what’s happening and just enjoying watching everyone squirm. I see you.

[Anonymous User]

At what point will DPW and every other V10 who isn’t matching/raising be labeled a TTT firm? This is getting a bit ridiculous. And if backpay isn’t provided like it was at Milbank, I think people are going to be very upset.

[Anonymous User]

At what point will DPW and every other V10 who isn’t matching/raising be labeled a TTT firm? This is getting a bit ridiculous. And if backpay isn’t provided like it was at Milbank, I think people are going to be very upset.

[Anonymous User]

Let's just start e-mailing the guy already

https://www.davispolk.com/lawyers/neil-barr

[Anonymous User]

KE and SC would not lead on raising even if it meant saving their best associates from a burning building.

Lmao. Redpilled associates about to be like

[Anonymous User]

KE and SC would not lead on raising even if it meant saving their best associates from a burning building.

Lmao. Redpilled associates about to be like

Current K&E associate. I don't really give a shit as long as they (a) eventually match market and (b) backdate it to January 1st. I'm ok with being at a firm that doesn't lead as long as they reliably follow.

[Anonymous User]

I just went ahead and asked a partner I’m friends with (am a client now). It’s a smaller committee (Neil & friends) that decides and isn’t up for vote or discussion among the broader partnership. Didn’t know what’s behind the delay either. Fwiw he questioned whether ppl would really flock to Cad over STB over these dollars

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Same. Had offers from V10's and Milbank, would absolutely have chosen Milbank if they paid more. We already make the decisions based on stupid degrees of hairsplitting, you think your PRESTIGE is gonna make me turn down more money?

Fwiw he questioned whether ppl would really flock to Cad over STB over these dollars

Yeah, we would lol. Maybe not everyone, but you think most people won't turn down STB for a lower rank with more money? Or hell, I'd just go to Milbank or Goodwin or Wilmer if I didn't want to shame my family by slumming it at only a V100. If my firm doesn't match I'll absolutely be hitting up Milbank at 3L OCI to ask if they're still interested in me.

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

[Anonymous User]

I just went ahead and asked a partner I’m friends with (am a client now). It’s a smaller committee (Neil & friends) that decides and isn’t up for vote or discussion among the broader partnership. Didn’t know what’s behind the delay either. Fwiw he questioned whether ppl would really flock to Cad over STB over these dollars

As a junior associate who could easily lateral right now, and someone who went through OCI recently, I would 100% go to a firm that paid more even if it was ranked less. It would have to be absolute dogshit in other ways for me to forego the extra pay.

However, I wouldn't go to the less prestigious firm simply because the V10 was slow to match (although if the match wasn't backdated I'd be pretty pissed).

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

I’m a non-equity partner at a V10. I would and will go to any firm where I can get the most money. Once you’re at a V25 (or even V50) and have a few years under your belt the prestige does not matter one fucking bit and I laugh my ass off at some equity partner who would literally stab his peers in the back for another 100k in draw trying to pretend it suddenly does when it comes to associate compensation. Straight cash homie.

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

Lol at thinking any of the V10 is more prestigious than Milbank. This is just laughable (and insufferable). Frankly, it's Wachtell and everyone else. DPW, STB, and whoever else are all the same tier as Milbank.

[Anonymous User]

Fwiw he questioned whether ppl would really flock to Cad over STB over these dollars

Yeah, we would lol. Maybe not everyone, but you think most people won't turn down STB for a lower rank with more money? Or hell, I'd just go to Milbank or Goodwin or Wilmer if I didn't want to shame my family by slumming it at only a V100. If my firm doesn't match I'll absolutely be hitting up Milbank at 3L OCI to ask if they're still interested in me.

Yeah I raised that point and he didn't really push back beyond saying there would still be enough people that would pick them for slightly less money - indeed maybe those are people they want to recruit anyway (i.e., can see the long-term value of taking a slight comp hit for better experience etc).

Anyway my personal guess now is that V10 exec committees are circling up with those "law firm consultants" like Ken Z. to figure out if they absolutely must raise or if there's some other way to achieve same result through outsized bonuses or something (although if Milbank et al match those bonuses too then back to square one i guess).

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

Hi, not a law student, currently at a V10 -- if my firm doesn't match market, I'm dusting off my resume and going to a market firm by the end of the year. Why would I put up with the same bullshit for less money? I work to live, not the other way around.

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

I’m a non-equity partner at a V10. I would and will go to any firm where I can get the most money. Once you’re at a V25 (or even V50) and have a few years under your belt the prestige does not matter one fucking bit and I laugh my ass off at some equity partners
who would literally stab his peer in the back for another 100k in draw trying to pretend it suddenly does when it comes to associate compensation. Straight cash homie.

I mean every day I stay at my current firm I'm foregoing ~$50k or whatever the prevailing lateral signing bonus is by going elsewhere.

[Anonymous User]

Unless you want to cash out after a couple years

[Anonymous User]

Fwiw he questioned whether ppl would really flock to Cad over STB over these dollars

Yeah, we would lol. Maybe not everyone, but you think most people won't turn down STB for a lower rank with more money? Or hell, I'd just go to Milbank or Goodwin or Wilmer if I didn't want to shame my family by slumming it at only a V100. If my firm doesn't match I'll absolutely be hitting up Milbank at 3L OCI to ask if they're still interested in me.

Yeah I raised that point and he didn't really push back beyond saying there would still be enough people that would pick them for slightly less money - indeed maybe those are people they want to recruit anyway (i.e., can see the long-term value of taking a slight comp hit for better experience etc).

Anyway my personal guess now is that V10 exec committees are circling up with those "law firm consultants" like Ken Z. to figure out if they absolutely must raise or if there's some other way to achieve same result through outsized bonuses or something (although if Milbank et al match those bonuses too then back to square one i guess).

There will definitely be people who pick them for less money. I can think of classmates who are like that. But for a firm like DPW, who are super grade selective (at least at my T14 not T6) you've just cut your already small candidate pool in half. Is DPW suddenly going to be ok taking median students from my school? Highly doubt it.

edit: incredulity not aimed at you, just can't believe what some people (partner friend) talk themselves into

[bigboybob]

Do we know if there is a Lobster Committee in addition to Neil's Compensation Committee?

Asking for a slimy friend of mine.

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

It's as if you believe the v10 materialized out of thin air. I can't tell if you are really this foolish or are just trolling.

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Same. Had offers from V10's and Milbank, would absolutely have chosen Milbank if they paid more. We already make the decisions based on stupid degrees of hairsplitting, you think your PRESTIGE is gonna make me turn down more money?

Fwiw he questioned whether ppl would really flock to Cad over STB over these dollars

Yeah, we would lol. Maybe not everyone, but you think most people won't turn down STB for a lower rank with more money? Or hell, I'd just go to Milbank or Goodwin or Wilmer if I didn't want to shame my family by slumming it at only a V100. If my firm doesn't match I'll absolutely be hitting up Milbank at 3L OCI to ask if they're still interested in me.

At CWT (not cap markets, that’s basically a separate firm imho), and people absolutely choose it for one reason or another over some “higher ranked” firms. When you factor in super bonuses, backdoor Roth, cheap health insurance, no $ limit for meal reimbursement, etc. we can makes 10s of thousands of dollars more than at purely “market” firms. Don’t let a meme influence where you work lol.

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

It's as if you believe the v10 materialized out of thin air. I can't tell if you are really this foolish or are just trolling.

If real it’s the rantings of either a law student or junior who hasn’t seen how the sausage is made yet.

[Anonymous User]

It would be interesting if the V10 elected not to raise. I don’t think it would affect retention levels all that much. For many people, status is more enticing than money. Perfect example is the London market. Lots of associates stay put in magic circle firms, despite being able to lateral for a US outfit and make six figures more.

They'll match, but I agree it wouldn't affect retention all that much if they didn't. Few people would lateral solely for the sake of a 10-15k raise. It would certainly affect recruiting though.

Disagree with this part strongly. In this market, they would. I certainly would. It's extremely easy to get hired right now and you get a lateral bonus on top of it. What difference does it make if I make sausage for Wilmer or Ropes? Maybe that'll be different in 12 months time but that's an issue for a year from now.

Yeah, people are wild if they don't think a lot of people will start making moves. If not even for the 10k, then for the security of knowing you're at a "market" or "above-market" firm in case these salary raises continue to happen.

It's absolute stupidity. Not specifically retention/lateral effect, but I start at a "prestigous" NY firm next year (STB/PW) and I would've accepted my Milbank offer over them in a heartbeat if they were confirmed below market during OCI.

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

It's as if you believe the v10 materialized out of thin air. I can't tell if you are really this foolish or are just trolling.

A lot of self-inflated v10ers here. Lots of people at DPW/Cleary/Cravath etc. would love to lateral "down" to tech firms like Fenwick, Cooley, WSGR that provide way better exit opps than so-called prestigious v10s (which are actually easier to get into than tech firms if you're at HYSCCN). No firm with a PPP of 2m + or so could seriously not consider matching. I'm hoping DPW pushes first years to 250 to troll low PPP firms like Covington though - they'll bitch and moan but ultimately match.

[Anonymous User]

KE and SC would not lead on raising even if it meant saving their best associates from a burning building.

Lmao. Redpilled associates about to be like

Current K&E associate. I don't really give a shit as long as they (a) eventually match market and (b) backdate it to January 1st. I'm ok with being at a firm that doesn't lead as long as they reliably follow.

It was just a joke babe.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Lolz at the thought of taking Milbank over any of the v10... Unless you want to cash out after a couple years, that’s a big time drop off in credentials. I’m sure many a law student would eagerly swap a spot at milbank making 10k more for more prestige (not that the situation would ever occur).

Paying below market is, by definition, unprestigious and Cravath/S&C associates have zero explanation for why they pay less than their similarly situated peers at the Fried Franks and Decherts and Cadwaladers of the world other than "Well, I guess the firm can get away with it."