Kirkland Bonuses? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Kirkland is a great place filled with truly exceptional lawyers. It is also definitely not for everyone. If someone billed 2,000 hours in six months, they are doing it wrong. SP's, NSP's etc. will send you work without even considering what else you are working on. The savvy ones will never even say "We need this in the next three days" because they know that there is a pretty good chance that the associate will turn it around faster/immediately so why even put that out there? That tends to be the expectation.

The key to really doing well there is to get the reputation of taking on whatever is needed and working a lot but then, once you have a good reputation, you have to learn to put up a few boundaries and endeavor to be treated like a proper adult instead of a worker bee. This means just being straight up with people and saying no and actually meaning it.

If you are the type that will shrink a bit and not assert yourself, they will run right over you (much like many biglaw firms of that caliber will). I think it is legitimately one of the top 3-4 firms in the world but it is definitely not for everyone.

[Anonymous User]

Kirkland is a great place filled with truly exceptional lawyers. It is also definitely not for everyone. If someone billed 2,000 hours in six months, they are doing it wrong. SP's, NSP's etc. will send you work without even considering what else you are working on. The savvy ones will never even say "We need this in the next three days" because they know that there is a pretty good chance that the associate will turn it around faster/immediately so why even put that out there? That tends to be the expectation.

The key to really doing well there is to get the reputation of taking on whatever is needed and working a lot but then, once you have a good reputation, you have to learn to put up a few boundaries and endeavor to be treated like a proper adult instead of a worker bee. This means just being straight up with people and saying no and actually meaning it.

If you are the type that will shrink a bit and not assert yourself, they will run right over you (much like many biglaw firms of that caliber will). I think it is legitimately one of the top 3-4 firms in the world but it is definitely not for everyone.

Interestingly, that is what one of the SPs told me several months before I ultimately decided to leave. My belief/experience is that the whole "you're just not standing up for yourself" ruse is just a way to pretend that there isn't an inherent problem with the system. Maybe some groups are better than others, but if you only have a few associates in your group in your office and you're one of the more competent ones, people will try to preempt others to staff you on their deals even if you say no (as I mentioned above, often times I would find out I was staffed on a new deal by getting an email cc'ing me to the client from the partner). The only real choice you have at that point is to go to an SP and tell them "Hey, I'm on X, Y and Z deal with you right now as well as a few other deals, but NSP X just staffed me on deal A, so would you mind letting them know that I don't have capacity right now? I've already told them no, but they've said that they've already told the client that I'm on the deal and won't back down, and I don't want to hurt the firm's relationships with its clients." The group I was in had about a 2:1 SP/NSP to associate ratio for most of my time in at the firm, so the above happened more often than I wish it had; a reason for the imbalance was extremely high attrition rates among the associates - I tried sticking it out longer than most, but I eventually decided to become a statistic as well. Also, it was usually the "bad" NSPs who wanted to milk the system that I mentioned above who would be doing this. After a point, it just feels ridiculous that you have to "stick up" for yourself by going up the chain of command to tell people that you can't work 100-hour weeks for months on end.

Anyway, I think that Kirkland has risen in the ranks by bringing in a lot of high-profile people by paying them more than what they would've gotten at lockstep firms (notably Cravath). In many markets (e.g., Houston), however, they've disrupted the market by basically offering huge signing bonuses to anyone with a pulse at other firms in the region. In NY, they're about to outgrow their Chicago office this year because of the number of people they're hiring. There are definitely some really smart people joining K&E regardless of the office, and their model is working for them right now, but I do not think it is sustainable. I don't necessarily think they'll go the way of Dewey & LeBoeuf, but I also don't think that they're a top 3-4 firm by any means (other than in perhaps revenues/profits... for now).

[Anonymous User]

I suspect Kirkland will be at the $5.75m PPP level next time around if not higher. I think their model is very unique and they are probably the only firm that could pull it off. I don't ever see them being in any sort of difficult spot, certainly the furthest thing from a Dewey. They rarely give guarantees and were smart to really only focus on 5 or so practice areas and go all out on those practices. It's kind of the bargain - you will work a ton but, in addition to getting paid more, you will have Kirkland on the resume which is essentially the gold standard (in certain markets at least) and thus be primed for in house jobs. Then you hire Kirkland again in most cases. It's essentially the McKinsey approach and they kind of do pull it off, to be honest. I am not a lacky for the place but I do respect the folks that can stick it out and do well there.

[dabigchina]

I suspect Kirkland will be at the $5.75m PPP level next time around if not higher. I think their model is very unique and they are probably the only firm that could pull it off. I don't ever see them being in any sort of difficult spot, certainly the furthest thing from a Dewey. They rarely give guarantees and were smart to really only focus on 5 or so practice areas and go all out on those practices. It's kind of the bargain - you will work a ton but, in addition to getting paid more, you will have Kirkland on the resume which is essentially the gold standard (in certain markets at least) and thus be primed for in house jobs. Then you hire Kirkland again in most cases. It's essentially the McKinsey approach and they kind of do pull it off, to be honest. I am not a lacky for the place but I do respect the folks that can stick it out and do well there.

What exactly is unique about the Kirkland model? What you described sounds like the Cravath model? Not disputing it, but also not seeing how it distinguishes Kirkland from the rest of the v10 or so firms.

[The Lsat Airbender]

I suspect Kirkland will be at the $5.75m PPP level next time around if not higher. I think their model is very unique and they are probably the only firm that could pull it off. I don't ever see them being in any sort of difficult spot, certainly the furthest thing from a Dewey. They rarely give guarantees and were smart to really only focus on 5 or so practice areas and go all out on those practices. It's kind of the bargain - you will work a ton but, in addition to getting paid more, you will have Kirkland on the resume which is essentially the gold standard (in certain markets at least) and thus be primed for in house jobs. Then you hire Kirkland again in most cases. It's essentially the McKinsey approach and they kind of do pull it off, to be honest. I am not a lacky for the place but I do respect the folks that can stick it out and do well there.

What exactly is unique about the Kirkland model? What you described sounds like the Cravath model? Not disputing it, but also not seeing how it distinguishes Kirkland from the rest of the v10 or so firms.

It's basically the Cravath Model except that partner compensation is completely different. The model rewards rockstars who bill huge amounts from whale clients and (comparatively) incentivizes subject-matter-experts, who would become service partners in the Cravath Model, to leave. Their work is done instead by the super-seniors in the non-equity partner tier.

[Anonymous User]

The model is actually the opposite of the Cravath model. Cravath has an assignment system and rotates associates through different practice areas so they can get a good foundation. Kirkland sort of does that but to a lesser extent. Kirkland is also highly reliant on lateral hiring, especially for mid level associates. I don't think Cravath does much of that at all. Kirkland does not have lockstep comp, part of the reason why some Cravath partners have headed to Kirkland in the last few years. Kirkland also highly rewards share partners earlier in their career than a lockstep firm would.

Nothing really disruptive about the K&E model or approach, it works for them because joiners tend to self select for that type of culture.

[Neff]

Everything about Kirkland is disgusting.

[Anonymous User]

im at one of the more traditional v10 firms in NY, and i think Kirkland's success as a firm is pretty incredible. i don't know that any firm has achieved the level of scale, profitability, and quality that K&E has in such a short amount of time.

partners at my firm seem to have very strong feelings about K&E, usually negative. they've seen their rainmaker colleagues get poached by K&E, and i think a lot of the old shops still view K&E (and Latham too) as young up and comers new to town. well now K&E is eating everyone's lunch.

even my firm, which is traditionally a bank-heavy firm, is moving into repping PE sponsors. but we're so behind the curve on it that it'd be difficult to catch up.

i don't know if their success will be sustainable long term, but PE sponsors wield all the power in the current market and K&E is certainly having a wildly successful run.

[MillllerTime]

Kirkland is a great place filled with truly exceptional lawyers. It is also definitely not for everyone. If someone billed 2,000 hours in six months, they are doing it wrong. SP's, NSP's etc. will send you work without even considering what else you are working on. The savvy ones will never even say "We need this in the next three days" because they know that there is a pretty good chance that the associate will turn it around faster/immediately so why even put that out there? That tends to be the expectation.

The key to really doing well there is to get the reputation of taking on whatever is needed and working a lot but then, once you have a good reputation, you have to learn to put up a few boundaries and endeavor to be treated like a proper adult instead of a worker bee. This means just being straight up with people and saying no and actually meaning it.

If you are the type that will shrink a bit and not assert yourself, they will run right over you (much like many biglaw firms of that caliber will). I think it is legitimately one of the top 3-4 firms in the world but it is definitely not for everyone.

Interestingly, that is what one of the SPs told me several months before I ultimately decided to leave. My belief/experience is that the whole "you're just not standing up for yourself" ruse is just a way to pretend that there isn't an inherent problem with the system. Maybe some groups are better than others, but if you only have a few associates in your group in your office and you're one of the more competent ones, people will try to preempt others to staff you on their deals even if you say no (as I mentioned above, often times I would find out I was staffed on a new deal by getting an email cc'ing me to the client from the partner). The only real choice you have at that point is to go to an SP and tell them "Hey, I'm on X, Y and Z deal with you right now as well as a few other deals, but NSP X just staffed me on deal A, so would you mind letting them know that I don't have capacity right now? I've already told them no, but they've said that they've already told the client that I'm on the deal and won't back down, and I don't want to hurt the firm's relationships with its clients." The group I was in had about a 2:1 SP/NSP to associate ratio for most of my time in at the firm, so the above happened more often than I wish it had; a reason for the imbalance was extremely high attrition rates among the associates - I tried sticking it out longer than most, but I eventually decided to become a statistic as well. Also, it was usually the "bad" NSPs who wanted to milk the system that I mentioned above who would be doing this. After a point, it just feels ridiculous that you have to "stick up" for yourself by going up the chain of command to tell people that you can't work 100-hour weeks for months on end.

Anyway, I think that Kirkland has risen in the ranks by bringing in a lot of high-profile people by paying them more than what they would've gotten at lockstep firms (notably Cravath). In many markets (e.g., Houston), however, they've disrupted the market by basically offering huge signing bonuses to anyone with a pulse at other firms in the region. In NY, they're about to outgrow their Chicago office this year because of the number of people they're hiring. There are definitely some really smart people joining K&E regardless of the office, and their model is working for them right now, but I do not think it is sustainable. I don't necessarily think they'll go the way of Dewey & LeBoeuf, but I also don't think that they're a top 3-4 firm by any means (other than in perhaps revenues/profits... for now).

I don't want to hate on this too much because it sounds like you were in a truly terrible group, of which I am sure Kirkland has a few. Sorry to hear that and I think you made the right choice to move on.

But it's also not representative of my experience (general corp) in the slightest. I've billed 300 in a month and instantly gotten a talking to about needing to cut back. I know of others who billed a lot in a ~6 month period (though nowhere near 2000, that is insane) and had partners literally come in to take them off projects and tell them to take a few weeks off.

I also agree that it's a place that will take advantage of you though. Getting staffed without your consent is pretty ridiculous, though I could see it happening. If it were me, I would immediately call the partner and say WTF? If they don't take no for an answer, literally ignore them and the deal. It's the partners client and their responsibility... if you don't agree to help it's not your problem. Maybe that doesn't work in a small group where you can't just decide not to work for this person ever again, but better than billing 300+ a month every month.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

Senior, ~1800, 1.1x. I know someone else my year who also had relatively low hours and got ~1.05x.

I'm very interested in how the average bonus has been changing over the years. In 2017, they told us the average bonus across class years was like 1.3x (and there was a 1.05x floor), last year the presentation said the average was 1.25x and this year it was 1.2x. And the statistics are always conspicuously limited to people who got a rating of 3 or better. Would love to have some more insight into how many people are getting ratings below 3. I'd expect when the next recession comes they're going to start fucking people on ratings so they don't have to pay them as much while still being able to state that everyone gets above market.

This is the dream situation in my opinion. Even with Kirkland going over the top with bonuses it’s not worth the money to be in super high billing territory because of the impact on quality of life. I’m a fifth year at a big law firm in NYC and after billing 2100 (2016), 2250 (2017), and 2350 (2018) ending this year at ~1950 it’s a huge difference in terms of the wear and tear of the year.

[Anonymous User]

I don't want to hate on this too much because it sounds like you were in a truly terrible group, of which I am sure Kirkland has a few. Sorry to hear that and I think you made the right choice to move on.

But it's also not representative of my experience (general corp) in the slightest. I've billed 300 in a month and instantly gotten a talking to about needing to cut back. I know of others who billed a lot in a ~6 month period (though nowhere near 2000, that is insane) and had partners literally come in to take them off projects and tell them to take a few weeks off.

I also agree that it's a place that will take advantage of you though. Getting staffed without your consent is pretty ridiculous, though I could see it happening. If it were me, I would immediately call the partner and say WTF? If they don't take no for an answer, literally ignore them and the deal. It's the partners client and their responsibility... if you don't agree to help it's not your problem. Maybe that doesn't work in a small group where you can't just decide not to work for this person ever again, but better than billing 300+ a month every month.

I was definitely at the top of the billables even among my group (I was on target to bill well over 4,000 for 2019 before I left), but all of my friends in the group (other associates) were on target to bill into the 3,000s for the year. I had friends in other "better" corporate groups in terms of hours and they were still billing 2,700+ for this year. At the V5 firm I came from, 2,500 was viewed as a lot of hours. That seemed to be the norm at K&E, at least among my group of colleagues. I knew at least one junior associate in another major corporate group in my office who had to go on sick leave for being pushed to do several 400+ hours months in a row. I think it's probably largely practice group / office specific, but almost everyone I knew at the associate level was overworked. I think that of the associates that were in my group when I started, literally only 1 is still at the firm. More money is great and all, but even with the added ~40% bonus, it basically comes out to you making $20 per hour for each extra hour over 2,500 that you work, which simply isn't worth it.

One other thing that's worth mentioning since others have brought it up is laterals. As a result of K&E hiring so many laterals (myself included), they don't really have their own culture and haven't established their own way of doing many things. For example, their knowledge management system is a mess because people just save stuff however they were doing it at their previous firms... or however they want, really. In my group, only one associate and one NSP were home-grown (and they both quit before I did because they were tired of seeing K&E promote outsiders instead of insiders). The firm would bring on entire groups from other firms, who would often operate in a cliquey manner and watch out for themselves at the expense of others within K&E who weren't part of their Cravath team or the Proskauer team or whatever firm they came from. It definitely didn't help with "firm culture," to say the least.

[Anonymous User]

I don't want to hate on this too much because it sounds like you were in a truly terrible group, of which I am sure Kirkland has a few. Sorry to hear that and I think you made the right choice to move on.

But it's also not representative of my experience (general corp) in the slightest. I've billed 300 in a month and instantly gotten a talking to about needing to cut back. I know of others who billed a lot in a ~6 month period (though nowhere near 2000, that is insane) and had partners literally come in to take them off projects and tell them to take a few weeks off.

I also agree that it's a place that will take advantage of you though. Getting staffed without your consent is pretty ridiculous, though I could see it happening. If it were me, I would immediately call the partner and say WTF? If they don't take no for an answer, literally ignore them and the deal. It's the partners client and their responsibility... if you don't agree to help it's not your problem. Maybe that doesn't work in a small group where you can't just decide not to work for this person ever again, but better than billing 300+ a month every month.

I was definitely at the top of the billables even among my group (I was on target to bill well over 4,000 for 2019 before I left), but all of my friends in the group (other associates) were on target to bill into the 3,000s for the year.

Just chiming in to say that billing 3000 hours is not what I've experienced, nor is it what most folks bill. Most of the junior associates I've spoken with bill ~2200-2400 a year. That is still higher than other firms, yes, but don't really see the need for hyperbole. Very few folks are billing 3000 hours.

[Anonymous User]

Just chiming in to say that billing 3000 hours is not what I've experienced, nor is it what most folks bill. Most of the junior associates I've spoken with bill ~2200-2400 a year. That is still higher than other firms, yes, but don't really see the need for hyperbole. Very few folks are billing 3000 hours.

It’s not “hyperbole” - it’s actually what I and most people I knew experienced. Also, at the associate’s town hall this year (where they announced record profits but no summer bonus), they also did not announce average billables like they’d done in previous years. My guess is that’s because people are much busier than previous years but they don’t want associates to know that because it would tie into we’re working more, the firm is making more, but they’re paying us less......?

[Anonymous User]

Just chiming in to say that billing 3000 hours is not what I've experienced, nor is it what most folks bill. Most of the junior associates I've spoken with bill ~2200-2400 a year. That is still higher than other firms, yes, but don't really see the need for hyperbole. Very few folks are billing 3000 hours.

It’s not “hyperbole” - it’s actually what I and most people I knew experienced. Also, at the associate’s town hall this year (where they announced record profits but no summer bonus), they also did not announce average billables like they’d done in previous years. My guess is that’s because people are much busier than previous years but they don’t want associates to know that because it would tie into we’re working more, the firm is making more, but they’re paying us less......?

I agree with you that the decreased bonus multiple this year was total bullshit. But your claim that lots of folks are billing 3000+ hours is wrong. The bonus meeting had a bonus multiple breakdown, 3k hours would net approx. 2x Cravath, which less than 5% of the associate class received. It is not typical to bill that much, nor is it excepted. I’m sorry you had a bad experience but please don’t try to pass it off as normal or representative in any way. Your hours represent an unfortunate outlier.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

No idea why weirdos insist on being a stan for their firm. It’s just a job.

[Pennoyer v. Meh]

I’m sorry you had a bad experience but please don’t try to pass it off as normal or representative in any way. Your hours represent an unfortunate outlier.

It's possible you represent the outlier? Obviously things vary by office and practice group, so I don't understand the need to attack other people's experiences and hype up your own firm. Isn't the point to provide as much info as possible? To do otherwise just seems like weird homerism for what is, no matter how you slice it, a job that requires way too much of your time and way too much of your soul.

[Anonymous User]

I’m sorry you had a bad experience but please don’t try to pass it off as normal or representative in any way. Your hours represent an unfortunate outlier.

It's possible you represent the outlier? Obviously things vary by office and practice group, so I don't understand the need to attack other people's experiences and hype up your own firm. Isn't the point to provide as much info as possible? To do otherwise just seems like weird homerism for what is, no matter how you slice it, a job that requires way too much of your time and way too much of your soul.

This is ridiculous. In the post I specifically call out the decreasing bonuses this year. Calling that "homerism" is just stupid. People should have an accurate read of how many hours associates are putting in. We actually got statistics about these hours at the year end bonus meeting, which OP did not attend, because he/she left before then.

[dyemond]

I’m sorry you had a bad experience but please don’t try to pass it off as normal or representative in any way. Your hours represent an unfortunate outlier.

It's possible you represent the outlier? Obviously things vary by office and practice group, so I don't understand the need to attack other people's experiences and hype up your own firm. Isn't the point to provide as much info as possible? To do otherwise just seems like weird homerism for what is, no matter how you slice it, a job that requires way too much of your time and way too much of your soul.

Not if the other person is just making nonsense up, no. There is a lot wrong with the "4k" billables post and it's not worth the time breaking it down brick by brick because it's not a post written in good faith.

[Anonymous User]

I estimate most juniors in my office are billing about 2200. I’d put the range containing 80% of junior associates from 1900-2600. Maybe 5-10% are very slow and 10-15% get absolutely slammed.

Side note - I would prefer more KE associates chiming in with their bonuses ITT. We have plenty of threads for Kirkland vs. generic white shoe V10 debates.

[Anonymous User]

Are the hours being posted in this thread inclusive of allowable pro bono hours or just pure billables? Asking for a friend trying to gauge pros and cons of lateraling versus staying put.

[Ultramar vistas]

Yeah, I don’t know what sick practice group this poster was in, but among my class year friends, 1900-2300 is the normal spread.

Anyway - 2nd year, ~2170hrs, ~$33k

[MillllerTime]

Senior associate, good review, 2400 hours = ~1.4x

I got several pats on the back and positive comments about my hour total this year (as an aside, hour total seemed to have a large impact on reviews this year, which lots of people are annoyed and confused about). 2400 is significantly above average hours, at least in corporate. I also have dozens of data points from other senior and midlevel associates over the course of the past few years, and only ONCE have I ever even seen a yearly hour total that began with 3. I know multiple people billing consistently less than 2000 over the past few years who have or will make NSP (though they'll never touch shares).

To address the stan comment, I don't think anyone is really thumping Kirkland's chest in here. It can be a tough place to work and there are a lot of people that aren't going to be a good fit. But the 4,000 hour comment is just so far off reality of a typical K&E associate that it needs to be addressed. I feel for that person, but a non-padded 2,000 in 6 months is likely the single highest billing associate in any 6-month span in a long long time.

I have plenty of friends at similar firms (think NY v10, not sure it makes sense to compare against AMlaw 200 or something), and I would say that anecdotally K&E is less of a sweatshop than most. The common perception seems to be quite the opposite, so just want to provide a little counter to that.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, I don’t know what sick practice group this poster was in, but among my class year friends, 1900-2300 is the normal spread.

Anyway - 2nd year, ~2170hrs, ~$33k

Wait by "2nd year" you mean c/o 2017 right? If you are c/o 2018 that is a dope bonus for 2170 hours.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, I don’t know what sick practice group this poster was in, but among my class year friends, 1900-2300 is the normal spread.

Anyway - 2nd year, ~2170hrs, ~$33k

This is pretty much my experience too. Most folks are billing ~180/month, but obviously varies a ton depending on practice group. Restructuring folks bill crazy hours from what I hear but litigation tends to be a lot more chill.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, I don’t know what sick practice group this poster was in, but among my class year friends, 1900-2300 is the normal spread.

Anyway - 2nd year, ~2170hrs, ~$33k

This is pretty much my experience too. Most folks are billing ~180/month, but obviously varies a ton depending on practice group. Restructuring folks bill crazy hours from what I hear but litigation tends to be a lot more chill.

Yeah and the perception in other groups in the firm is that the entire restructuring and M&A groups pad their hours like crazy. Like I'm sorry but if you're billing 12.5 hours in a day but you were only there for 13 hours, you need to re-evaluate when you are turning your timers on and off.