SA offered bump to $180, then withdrawn Forum

[Anonymous User]

So my firm said all SAs who join the firm as first years next year get the 180k bump, then a few days later basically said to a group of us "oh sorry, forgot you were in on this communication. This does not apply to your office." Anything we can do?

I'm guessing no bc we're only summers and (at least I) want an offer / job with this firm. Just feels like a dick move though ...

[LeDique]

yes, work for another firm.

lol what would you do if you were actual associates

[Anonymous User]

It's easier to lateral than to look for a big law job as a 3L. Also if OP actually likes the office, staying prob makes sense.

[oblig.lawl.ref]

It's easier to lateral than to look for a big law job as a 3L. Also if OP actually likes the office, staying prob makes sense.

Sure if OP likes the office, should stay. If sub-180 is market in OP's market, maybe OP should stay. If OP think OP has a chance to work at a 180 firm and wants to, OP should apply for jobs as a 3L. 3L firm switching isn't that difficult to do or crazy, I know several people who did it. The key is having a summer associate gig and switching firms. Not trying to get hired without one. That's more difficult.

[scro2o62]

Which firm was this?

[kcdc1]

Mailbox rule - snail mail your acceptance to the managing partner and timestamp your letter between the 180k email and the retraction.

[Anonymous User]

OP here: SA offers won't go out until July so it was really an announcement saying if you get an offer, it'll be for 180.

Really don't want to change firms - the office is great. Just sucks that they went back on their word. How much do firms care about their reputation with this sort of stuff?

[kcdc1]

It sounds like they didn't go back on their word -- they just sent the email to the wrong group. If you're wondering if you can somehow shame the firm into honoring the errant email, the answer is no.

[Anonymous User]

As I said, I want a job at that firm so obviously shaming is not an option. Just surprised that the firm cares so little about what people think that it would do this.

Do other people agree that the firm didn't go back on its word? Initial communication was addressed to "all summer associates" so when I got that, I felt justified in believing that it was addressed to me.

[arklaw13]

Leak it to ATL so they can shame them into paying you more

[jbagelboy]

Which firm was this?

[Anonymous User]

The point of posting ANON was not to disclose this information. I'm hesitant about emailing ATL for similar reasons - even if they say they keep their sources anonymous.

Thanks for everyone's input! Interested to hear more if anyone has anything to add to the above.

[jbagelboy]

How many SAs are in your class?

If >5, out--to us or ATL. You're anonymous. It will help us give you advise. If 5 or less, yea I get it.

[hoos89]

The point of posting ANON was not to disclose this information. I'm hesitant about emailing ATL for similar reasons - even if they say they keep their sources anonymous.

Thanks for everyone's input! Interested to hear more if anyone has anything to add to the above.

If you cover your tracks and don't actually tell them who you are it would be tough for them to out you. Of course if there's only a few SAs in that office it would be a bit risky. This would probably get posted because it's kind of funny, but you're an at-will employee so they can lower your salary any time. Pray they don't alter the deal further.

[oblig.lawl.ref]

Sure it was a pretty bad fuck up but apparently it was an accident, right? I get it sucks but do you really think they should just raise your salary because they accidentally said they would? I have a feeling I may be in the minority here but I think it's just a major bummer but not much else.

[Anonymous User]

Ok, thanks for the advice! SA class is <5. Not sure whether other firms pay 180k in this market but our office's pay has historically been tied to that of another office (not NYC) and that other office got the 180k bump (without subsequent retraction). I think what bugs me the most is the feeling that they broke a promise - it's not like 160k is a bad number.

[bern victim]

take them to court

[Anonymous User]

oblig.law.ref - just saw your post. Yup, I guess so. Major disappointment though

[skeenbr0]

OK, can we all just establish for the record that a guy who thinks he's worth $180K a year just posted a first week of contracts question to the forum, apparently without any clue about what the answer is?

[zot1]

Just surprised that the firm cares so little about what people think that it would do this.

You're in for a ride.

[BigZuck]

OK, can we all just establish for the record that a guy who thinks he's worth $180K a year just posted a first week of contracts question to the forum, apparently without any clue about what the answer is?

As long as we first establish the fact that you are a CRAVEN ANON COWARD

[Mr. Fancy]

This thread is awesome

[Nebby]

Just surprised that the firm cares so little about what people think that it would do this.

You're in for a ride.

Lol my first thought too

[sublime]

OK, can we all just establish for the record that a guy who thinks he's worth $180K a year just posted a first week of contracts question to the forum, apparently without any clue about what the answer is?

Don't use anon to be a dick.

[skeenbr0]

OK, I'll come out of the closet and take my laps for what I should have said under my name.

Seriously, you are an aspiring lawyer, you know the answer, or at least you damned well should.