Kirkland Bonuses? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Of the things to complain about as an nsp, additional tax deferred space should not be one of them…

[Anonymous User]

Of the things to complain about as an nsp, additional tax deferred space should not be one of them…

Why not? I’d rather take $130,000 in my pocket than the firm telling me I’m getting “$150,000” but 40k of that goes into a 401k I can’t touch for 30 years and so my bank account is down 20k vs my peer across the street at Latham come end of year. They do this every year it’s just extra apparent this year because of the slimmed down multiplier. K&E does a lot of this bullshit to NSPs that no one talks about. How about having to start paying $25,000 out of pocket every year for health insurance w/ a family as an NSP since they stop subsidizing our health insurance unlike almost every other biglaw firm in the country. Don’t see that getting much press either.

[Anonymous User]

Letters just went out for NSPs. Can someone explain how the 401k plan contribution part works with this? Not sure whether to be merely underwhelmed with my multiple or pretty upset about it.

Haha welcome to the realities of being an NSP. They take out $38,500 this year from your top line payment and put it directly into your 401k plan. Enjoy (like I am) having a bonus that says you've beaten the market by a certain multiplier but in fact you get less cash in hand than your peers at Latham or Skadden. I'm sure I'll appreciate this when I'm 60 but it burns a little now.

Wait, but this $38,500 (or $20,000 I believe for first year NSPs), is in addition to market bonus right? So minimum bonus for a class of 2014 this year would be $115,000 base bonus + $23,000 special bonus + $20,000 (which would be $38,500 after your first year) 401K contribution - for a minimum no multiple bonus of $158,000?

This is how it would work in fantasy land but not, as many NSPs find out, in reality—they don’t care if your total take home lags peers they can still point to your overall bonus as being higher than market without mentioning the asterisk that 40k of it is in the form of a 401(k) contribution that’s locked away for decades.

[Anonymous User]

Of the things to complain about as an nsp, additional tax deferred space should not be one of them…

Why not? I’d rather take $130,000 in my pocket than the firm telling me I’m getting “$150,000” but 40k of that goes into a 401k I can’t touch for 30 years. They do this every year it’s just extra apparent this year because of the slimmed down multiplier. K&E does a lot of this bullshit that no one talks about. How about having to start paying $25,000 out of pocket every year for health insurance w/ a family as an NSP since they stop subsidizing the payment? Don’t see that getting much press either.

This is just a strange take. Do you not contribute to your 401(k)? (Re the plan contribution.)

Now, the health insurance and the self-employment taxes, those are real things that bite and have always compressed the pay.

[Anonymous User]

Of the things to complain about as an nsp, additional tax deferred space should not be one of them…

Why not? I’d rather take $130,000 in my pocket than the firm telling me I’m getting “$150,000” but 40k of that goes into a 401k I can’t touch for 30 years. They do this every year it’s just extra apparent this year because of the slimmed down multiplier. K&E does a lot of this bullshit that no one talks about. How about having to start paying $25,000 out of pocket every year for health insurance w/ a family as an NSP since they stop subsidizing the payment? Don’t see that getting much press either.

This is just a strange take. Do you not contribute to your 401(k)? (Re the plan contribution.)

Now, the health insurance and the self-employment taxes, those are real things that bite and have always compressed the pay.

It’s not a strange take at all? 130k cash in my bank account now (what I’d get at Latham or Sidley or literally any other biglaw firm) is more valuable to me than 110k cash in my bank account now (what I’d get at K&E) plus a 40k contribution into my 401k that is utterly meaningless to me until I’m 60 years old.

[Anonymous User]

Of the things to complain about as an nsp, additional tax deferred space should not be one of them…

Why not? I’d rather take $130,000 in my pocket than the firm telling me I’m getting “$150,000” but 40k of that goes into a 401k I can’t touch for 30 years. They do this every year it’s just extra apparent this year because of the slimmed down multiplier. K&E does a lot of this bullshit that no one talks about. How about having to start paying $25,000 out of pocket every year for health insurance w/ a family as an NSP since they stop subsidizing the payment? Don’t see that getting much press either.

This is just a strange take. Do you not contribute to your 401(k)? (Re the plan contribution.)

Now, the health insurance and the self-employment taxes, those are real things that bite and have always compressed the pay.

It’s not a strange take at all? 130k cash in my bank account now (what I’d get at Latham or Sidley or literally any other biglaw firm) is more valuable to me than 110k cash in my bank account now (what I’d get at K&E) plus a 40k contribution into my 401k that is utterly meaningless to me until I’m 60 years old.

I agree with this. I’m also not a big proponent of a 401(k). You could have pocketed the cash and utilized it in high return low risk investments and made it work harder for you than a 401(k) and earned more cash flow with less taken out in taxes. Such is the case if you do what I plan to do with real estate investments.

[thisismytlsuername]

Of the things to complain about as an nsp, additional tax deferred space should not be one of them…

Why not? I’d rather take $130,000 in my pocket than the firm telling me I’m getting “$150,000” but 40k of that goes into a 401k I can’t touch for 30 years. They do this every year it’s just extra apparent this year because of the slimmed down multiplier. K&E does a lot of this bullshit that no one talks about. How about having to start paying $25,000 out of pocket every year for health insurance w/ a family as an NSP since they stop subsidizing the payment? Don’t see that getting much press either.

This is just a strange take. Do you not contribute to your 401(k)? (Re the plan contribution.)

Now, the health insurance and the self-employment taxes, those are real things that bite and have always compressed the pay.

It’s not a strange take at all? 130k cash in my bank account now (what I’d get at Latham or Sidley or literally any other biglaw firm) is more valuable to me than 110k cash in my bank account now (what I’d get at K&E) plus a 40k contribution into my 401k that is utterly meaningless to me until I’m 60 years old.

I agree with this. I’m also not a big proponent of a 401(k). You could have pocketed the cash and utilized it in high return low risk investments and made it work harder for you than a 401(k) and earned more cash flow with less taken out in taxes. Such is the case if you do what I plan to do with real estate investments.

Ah yes, the classic "high return low risk investments" that everyone on crypto tiktok has been telling me about.

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

[Anonymous User]

Letters just went out for NSPs. Can someone explain how the 401k plan contribution part works with this? Not sure whether to be merely underwhelmed with my multiple or pretty upset about it.

Haha welcome to the realities of being an NSP. They take out $38,500 this year from your top line payment and put it directly into your 401k plan. Enjoy (like I am) having a bonus that says you've beaten the market by a certain multiplier but in fact you get less cash in hand than your peers at Latham or Skadden. I'm sure I'll appreciate this when I'm 60 but it burns a little now.

Wait, but this $38,500 (or $20,000 I believe for first year NSPs), is in addition to market bonus right? So minimum bonus for a class of 2014 this year would be $115,000 base bonus + $23,000 special bonus + $20,000 (which would be $38,500 after your first year) 401K contribution - for a minimum no multiple bonus of $158,000?

This is how it would work in fantasy land but not, as many NSPs find out, in reality—they don’t care if your total take home lags peers they can still point to your overall bonus as being higher than market without mentioning the asterisk that 40k of it is in the form of a 401(k) contribution that’s locked away for decades.

Holy shit. I am a new NSP, they insinuated this was extra. I was thinking this is what made up for the increased costs/taxes/insurance we now pay. If you have a family, you take a $40k+ pay hit between higher insurance costs, "non-resident" state income tax, required insurance, etc. I figured the 401K contribution was to make NSPs whole (or at least help) and not significantly underpaid compared to other firms. This makes no sense, we legit make far less than our peers at other shops. I am blown away this is not more known.

[Wanderingdrock]

Of the things to complain about as an nsp, additional tax deferred space should not be one of them…

Why not? I’d rather take $130,000 in my pocket than the firm telling me I’m getting “$150,000” but 40k of that goes into a 401k I can’t touch for 30 years. They do this every year it’s just extra apparent this year because of the slimmed down multiplier. K&E does a lot of this bullshit that no one talks about. How about having to start paying $25,000 out of pocket every year for health insurance w/ a family as an NSP since they stop subsidizing the payment? Don’t see that getting much press either.

This is just a strange take. Do you not contribute to your 401(k)? (Re the plan contribution.)

Now, the health insurance and the self-employment taxes, those are real things that bite and have always compressed the pay.

It’s not a strange take at all? 130k cash in my bank account now (what I’d get at Latham or Sidley or literally any other biglaw firm) is more valuable to me than 110k cash in my bank account now (what I’d get at K&E) plus a 40k contribution into my 401k that is utterly meaningless to me until I’m 60 years old.

I agree with this. I’m also not a big proponent of a 401(k). You could have pocketed the cash and utilized it in high return low risk investments and made it work harder for you than a 401(k) and earned more cash flow with less taken out in taxes. Such is the case if you do what I plan to do with real estate investments.

Bolded doing a TON of work in this post.

[Anonymous User]

Letters just went out for NSPs. Can someone explain how the 401k plan contribution part works with this? Not sure whether to be merely underwhelmed with my multiple or pretty upset about it.

Haha welcome to the realities of being an NSP. They take out $38,500 this year from your top line payment and put it directly into your 401k plan. Enjoy (like I am) having a bonus that says you've beaten the market by a certain multiplier but in fact you get less cash in hand than your peers at Latham or Skadden. I'm sure I'll appreciate this when I'm 60 but it burns a little now.

Wait, but this $38,500 (or $20,000 I believe for first year NSPs), is in addition to market bonus right? So minimum bonus for a class of 2014 this year would be $115,000 base bonus + $23,000 special bonus + $20,000 (which would be $38,500 after your first year) 401K contribution - for a minimum no multiple bonus of $158,000?

This is how it would work in fantasy land but not, as many NSPs find out, in reality—they don’t care if your total take home lags peers they can still point to your overall bonus as being higher than market without mentioning the asterisk that 40k of it is in the form of a 401(k) contribution that’s locked away for decades.

Holy shit. I am a new NSP, they insinuated this was extra. I was thinking this is what made up for the increased costs/taxes/insurance we now pay. If you have a family, you take a $40k+ pay hit between higher insurance costs, "non-resident" state income tax, required insurance, etc. I figured the 401K contribution was to make NSPs whole (or at least help) and not significantly underpaid compared to other firms. This makes no sense, we legit make far less than our peers at other shops. I am blown away this is not more known.

I was under the impression that first-year NSP was where the comp didn't really compare favorably but that it got better by second-year NSP and improved from there. Is this not true?

No doubt it varies year-to-year but I generally understood that Kirkland NSPs who would otherwise be 8-10 year associates at other shops (e.g., Skadden, GDC) fared better. I'm not sure we're getting enough info in this thread from NSPs to draw a conclusion on that one way or another.

[Anonymous User]

Letters just went out for NSPs. Can someone explain how the 401k plan contribution part works with this? Not sure whether to be merely underwhelmed with my multiple or pretty upset about it.

Haha welcome to the realities of being an NSP. They take out $38,500 this year from your top line payment and put it directly into your 401k plan. Enjoy (like I am) having a bonus that says you've beaten the market by a certain multiplier but in fact you get less cash in hand than your peers at Latham or Skadden. I'm sure I'll appreciate this when I'm 60 but it burns a little now.

Wait, but this $38,500 (or $20,000 I believe for first year NSPs), is in addition to market bonus right? So minimum bonus for a class of 2014 this year would be $115,000 base bonus + $23,000 special bonus + $20,000 (which would be $38,500 after your first year) 401K contribution - for a minimum no multiple bonus of $158,000?

This is how it would work in fantasy land but not, as many NSPs find out, in reality—they don’t care if your total take home lags peers they can still point to your overall bonus as being higher than market without mentioning the asterisk that 40k of it is in the form of a 401(k) contribution that’s locked away for decades.

Holy shit. I am a new NSP, they insinuated this was extra. I was thinking this is what made up for the increased costs/taxes/insurance we now pay. If you have a family, you take a $40k+ pay hit between higher insurance costs, "non-resident" state income tax, required insurance, etc. I figured the 401K contribution was to make NSPs whole (or at least help) and not significantly underpaid compared to other firms. This makes no sense, we legit make far less than our peers at other shops. I am blown away this is not more known.

I was under the impression that first-year NSP was where the comp didn't really compare favorably but that it got better by second-year NSP and improved from there. Is this not true?

No doubt it varies year-to-year but I generally understood that Kirkland NSPs who would otherwise be 8-10 year associates at other shops (e.g., Skadden, GDC) fared better. I'm not sure we're getting enough info in this thread from NSPs to draw a conclusion on that one way or another.

It depends on your specific circumstances (do you have a family? how are you planning for retirement? do you have sufficient existing life/disability/general liability insurance? how much in expensable items do you typically purchase? etc.), but on average it’s probably slightly worse economically in years 7-8 and slightly better economically in years 9-10.

[Anonymous User]

Letters just went out for NSPs. Can someone explain how the 401k plan contribution part works with this? Not sure whether to be merely underwhelmed with my multiple or pretty upset about it.

Haha welcome to the realities of being an NSP. They take out $38,500 this year from your top line payment and put it directly into your 401k plan. Enjoy (like I am) having a bonus that says you've beaten the market by a certain multiplier but in fact you get less cash in hand than your peers at Latham or Skadden. I'm sure I'll appreciate this when I'm 60 but it burns a little now.

Wait, but this $38,500 (or $20,000 I believe for first year NSPs), is in addition to market bonus right? So minimum bonus for a class of 2014 this year would be $115,000 base bonus + $23,000 special bonus + $20,000 (which would be $38,500 after your first year) 401K contribution - for a minimum no multiple bonus of $158,000?

This is how it would work in fantasy land but not, as many NSPs find out, in reality—they don’t care if your total take home lags peers they can still point to your overall bonus as being higher than market without mentioning the asterisk that 40k of it is in the form of a 401(k) contribution that’s locked away for decades.

Holy shit. I am a new NSP, they insinuated this was extra. I was thinking this is what made up for the increased costs/taxes/insurance we now pay. If you have a family, you take a $40k+ pay hit between higher insurance costs, "non-resident" state income tax, required insurance, etc. I figured the 401K contribution was to make NSPs whole (or at least help) and not significantly underpaid compared to other firms. This makes no sense, we legit make far less than our peers at other shops. I am blown away this is not more known.

I was under the impression that first-year NSP was where the comp didn't really compare favorably but that it got better by second-year NSP and improved from there. Is this not true?

No doubt it varies year-to-year but I generally understood that Kirkland NSPs who would otherwise be 8-10 year associates at other shops (e.g., Skadden, GDC) fared better. I'm not sure we're getting enough info in this thread from NSPs to draw a conclusion on that one way or another.

It depends on your specific circumstances (do you have a family? how are you planning for retirement? do you have sufficient existing life/disability/general liability insurance? how much in expensable items do you typically purchase? etc.), but on average it’s probably slightly worse economically in years 7-8 and slightly better economically in years 9-10.

Basically you do worse (or only marginally better) as long as you are in a class year that is on the NY scale. After that it is a black box and really hard to tell - I don't talk to other NSPs about my comp and I don't know what others are getting, but my sense is the really well paid NSPs are those whose ultimate fate is known (e.g., they are already valued permanent NSPs or were hired at a more senior level with expectation of receiving shares). From what I can tell those coming up through the system on share track aren't getting much more than I'd expect counsel/associates of similar vintage at other firms get until they actually make shares.

In the end it is the system - you get a partner title early that helps with clients but isn't worth much in the industry, and you get treated like a partner for purposes other than no shares and some of the costs mentioned above. I don't think it is intentionally set up to screw over the NSPs - I suspect it is more about trying to fit the NSP role into what is permissible for a partnership for tax/benefits/etc. But agree a little more transparency would be helpful for those coming up (or in to) the system.

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

if you asked me what I thought a K&E mid billing 2,100 in a hot market would get in 2021, I would have guessed "basically market" tbh

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

So approx. $70/hour? Seems like a side hustle could have made more. Sincerely hope you're on track for shares at KE or as a lateral elsewhere, because that is brutal and it seems you like what you do.

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

That’s an average of 68 hours per week for 50 weeks of the year. Are you a robot or massively padding?

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

I can’t tell if this is a troll or just the most KE associate response I could possibly imagine. Putting aside the absurdity of billing 3,400 hours in 12 months, you are (seemingly willfully) missing the point that the multiplier for X hours has decreased year after year, no matter what X is - be it sub-2000, or 2200, or 2500, or yes, even 3400. That is “what everyone is complaining about.”

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

Class year and rating? Is 2.1 based on special bonus plus base?

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

For people who think 3,400 is “absurd,” have some compassion. It’s hard enough to survive that kind of hours, the constant shaming and questioning just makes it worse. No, some people actually have the integrity not to pad their hours and the capacity to work on that many deals.

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

I call BS. Definitely padding.

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

I call BS. Definitely padding.

…my hours are higher and there was NO padding. Had plenty of days where the physical pain from sleep deprivation was hard to bear but still had to tough it out because of how understaffed we were.

[Anonymous User]

3rd/4th yr, 2100 hrs, only 1% above market. Basically the floor. Literally no other DP has been this low, am I the lowest paid bonus in the firm or what?

I am in your class year range with similar hours (and a 2 rating) and mine beat the market by something like 8%. Not even 1.1x.

I’m old enough to be friends with current NSPs who would talk about getting 1.5x just by hitting 200 hours a month. Kirkland has methodically ramped down its multiplier every year since those days.

It’s kind of fascinating. The firm has spent literally decades building a reputation for above market bonuses that has allowed it to recruit laterals in spite of a reputation (fair or not) for being even more sweaty than the other V10 sweatshops. And now, in the face of greater associate attrition than ever, they’ve decided to dismantle that reputation in the course of a couple of years, so that lateral quality and quantity will be negatively impacted.

I'm not quite sure what everyone is complaining about. It's pretty simple - the highest billers get the highest bonuses - you are rewarded proportionally to your revenue generation (that's when you "shatter" the market, not when you bill 2,200/2,300 hours). I received 2.1x market, but I had to work 3,400 hours to get it. Was it worth it? Who knows. I'm alive and much richer.

I can’t tell if this is a troll or just the most KE associate response I could possibly imagine. Putting aside the absurdity of billing 3,400 hours in 12 months, you are (seemingly willfully) missing the point that the multiplier for X hours has decreased year after year, no matter what X is - be it sub-2000, or 2200, or 2500, or yes, even 3400. That is “what everyone is complaining about.”

The multiplier on super high billables has actually gone up, because there used to be an hours cap (i.e., you the hours multiplier could only be so high) but they did away with it in 2020. Agree with you on the multipliers for more standard billables though. Also agree that the person you're responding to is annoying as hell.