Jones Day Blackbox Compensation?? Forum

[Anonymous User]

reviving this thread to ask: does anyone know if fed clerks coming into a major market office start as 2nd years at 200k? or do you start as 2nd year but comp is still 190? (ignoring clerkship bonus). Thanks!!

[Anonymous User]

I'd really love to get data points from associates in secondary markets on their salaries after the first year. I have zero idea what to expect (first year associate here)

I spent years 2, 3, and 4 at a v50 firm in a secondary city. I started at either 115 or 120, and my raise every year was either 5k or 10k. My bonus every year was somewhere between 5-10k. Clerkship bonus for federal clerkship was $0.

Edit: I’m an idiot. I figured I’d help with a data point, but I realize that you probably meant JD associates in secondary markets.

Lol yeah, but thank you, since that is still a little helpful. But yeah, any JD associates from like Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Columbus, etc. on the 160k scale I'd love to know what a 3rd year, 5th year, etc. make

Since the thread was bumped anyway, I'll bump this again. I know it's now the 170k scale in the smaller cities, but same question to any JD associates in those cities

[Anonymous User]

You should ask someone what the salary scale is in those offices. It's not known because the bumps likely don't track New York market.

[Anonymous User]

You should ask someone what the salary scale is in those offices. It's not known because the bumps likely don't track New York market.

The problem is comp is personal and confidential so it's 1) forbidden to ask and 2) forbidden for anyone to talk about it. That's why I'm anonymously asking internet strangers in those offices for anecdotal points.

I feel like I'm in a gulag

[Anonymous User]

reviving this thread to ask: does anyone know if fed clerks coming into a major market office start as 2nd years at 200k? or do you start as 2nd year but comp is still 190? (ignoring clerkship bonus). Thanks!!

Also interested

[Anonymous User]

Bump. Particularly interested in the the yearly increases for associates in Jones Day's offices on the $170K scale, i.e. Cleveland, Columbus, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Pittsburgh. ATL's article from 2016 is pretty sparse on info from those offices, perhaps because there are fewer associates in those types of offices which would make it easier to tie a particular person to an anonymous tip. I'm considering lateraling to JD in one of those cities, but it seems next to impossible to figure out whether an offer is good or not.

[QContinuum]

Bump. Particularly interested in the the yearly increases for associates in Jones Day's offices on the $170K scale, i.e. Cleveland, Columbus, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Pittsburgh. ATL's article from 2016 is pretty sparse on info from those offices, perhaps because there are fewer associates in those types of offices which would make it easier to tie a particular person to an anonymous tip. I'm considering lateraling to JD in one of those cities, but it seems next to impossible to figure out whether an offer is good or not.

In many of these secondary markets, JD's the highest-paying employer in town so pickings are slim (unlike in the major markets).

[OneTwoThreeFour]

You should ask someone what the salary scale is in those offices. It's not known because the bumps likely don't track New York market.

The problem is comp is personal and confidential so it's 1) forbidden to ask and 2) forbidden for anyone to talk about it. That's why I'm anonymously asking internet strangers in those offices for anecdotal points.

I feel like I'm in a gulag

Wait, what. You're not allowed to ask other employees about compensation? JD straight up issuing policies contrary to decades of collective action precedent? Bold move...

[Anonymous User]

Midlevel in major market making over 50k below market. No performance issues. Complete lack of transparency about compensation decisions. Talking in circles to the partner assigned to discuss compensation.

Don’t think it won’t happen to you. It almost certainly will. And they will patronize you with how there are benefits to this compensation structure - and you can’t tell them you aren’t an idiot and can do math, because they might fire you.

It’s absolutely toxic. Leaving as soon as I can.

[Anonymous User]

Midlevel in major market making over 50k below market. No performance issues. Complete lack of transparency about compensation decisions. Talking in circles to the partner assigned to discuss compensation.

Don’t think it won’t happen to you. It almost certainly will. And they will patronize you with how there are benefits to this compensation structure - and you can’t tell them you aren’t an idiot and can do math, because they might fire you.

It’s absolutely toxic. Leaving as soon as I can.

Sorry to hear this--sounds ridiculously frustrating. Between what years did you notice the biggest discrepancies in your salary vs. market salary? Just curious if they're compressing ppl's pay the most between years 2-3, 3-4, etc. I guess it obviously starts out in the beginning though when they're paying $190/170 without any bonuses.

[RaceJudicata]

You should ask someone what the salary scale is in those offices. It's not known because the bumps likely don't track New York market.

The problem is comp is personal and confidential so it's 1) forbidden to ask and 2) forbidden for anyone to talk about it. That's why I'm anonymously asking internet strangers in those offices for anecdotal points.

I feel like I'm in a gulag

Yes, this seems like a direct violation of the NLRA. Employees are free to discuss their terms and conditions of employment. Of course, probably career suicide (at JD and elsewhere) to challenge the policy.

[BlackAndOrange84]

You should ask someone what the salary scale is in those offices. It's not known because the bumps likely don't track New York market.

The problem is comp is personal and confidential so it's 1) forbidden to ask and 2) forbidden for anyone to talk about it. That's why I'm anonymously asking internet strangers in those offices for anecdotal points.

I feel like I'm in a gulag

Yes, this seems like a direct violation of the NLRA. Employees are free to discuss their terms and conditions of employment. Of course, probably career suicide (at JD and elsewhere) to challenge the policy.

Too lazy to look it up, but I'd kinda be surprised if professional services orgs, particularly a pure partnership like JD, weren't carved out of the NLRA. Any labor nerds know the answer or whether there's some other carve out at play here? It'd at least offer another explanation of how JD can get away with this.

[Anonymous User]

Too lazy to look it up, but didn't JD modify its formal policy a year or two ago to provide that employees are "strongly discouraged" (but not technically prohibited) from sharing their compensation?

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Midlevel in major market making over 50k below market. No performance issues. Complete lack of transparency about compensation decisions. Talking in circles to the partner assigned to discuss compensation.

Don’t think it won’t happen to you. It almost certainly will. And they will patronize you with how there are benefits to this compensation structure - and you can’t tell them you aren’t an idiot and can do math, because they might fire you.

It’s absolutely toxic. Leaving as soon as I can.

Why is JD considered prestigious again? This stuff is absolutely insane and they should be endlessly shamed for this shit.

[Anonymous User]

Midlevel in major market making over 50k below market. No performance issues. Complete lack of transparency about compensation decisions. Talking in circles to the partner assigned to discuss compensation.

Don’t think it won’t happen to you. It almost certainly will. And they will patronize you with how there are benefits to this compensation structure - and you can’t tell them you aren’t an idiot and can do math, because they might fire you.

It’s absolutely toxic. Leaving as soon as I can.

Why is JD considered prestigious again? This stuff is absolutely insane and they should be endlessly shamed for this shit.

You're obviously not wrong, but for those of us in secondary markets where few/no other firms are even near a COL-adjusted Cravath scale, the possibility of making $50K more than we would at the "best, highest-paying regional firm" is pretty enticing. If only we knew whether it was actually $50K+ more or $10-15K+ more...

Anyone have any idea how much JD is compressing mid-level salaries in those markets?

[Anonymous User]

1. Shamed for what? In the real world, lockstep compensation is extremely rare. It's unheard of. In normal jobs, you get raises based on your market value, not how many years you've worked. If you don't like it you can get another job that pays more.

We're talking specifically about the relevant market: BigLaw. It's irrelevant what other industries do or don't do.

2. I'm really surprised by your post because in another thread, you tried to get me banned for linking the O'Melveny blog. "Honestly, can we please ban this douchenozzle who keeps posting this bullshit blog about OMM." http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 349502#top

Why are you linking to that blog & discussing OMM again... in a thread specifically about JD compensation?! We get it, you hate OMM.

[tlsthrowaway1]

1. Shamed for what? In the real world, lockstep compensation is extremely rare. It's unheard of. In normal jobs, you get raises based on your market value, not how many years you've worked. If you don't like it you can get another job that pays more.

We're talking specifically about the relevant market: BigLaw. It's irrelevant what other industries do or don't do.

2. I'm really surprised by your post because in another thread, you tried to get me banned for linking the O'Melveny blog. "Honestly, can we please ban this douchenozzle who keeps posting this bullshit blog about OMM." http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 349502#top

Why are you linking to that blog & discussing OMM again... in a thread specifically about JD compensation?! We get it, you hate OMM.

And you hate Jones Day, that's why you started this thread about them. The point is they don't deserve the hate. They're doing things right. This notion that you're entitled to a fixed raise after 12 months, because you work at one of 100 firms, flies in the face of economics and capitalist thought. It's ludicrous. There are no free lunches.

And be careful with anonymous replies. I personally don't care and will not report you, but I too clicked the red quote by habit, and someone reported me and I got a warning.

[OneTwoThreeFour]

1. Shamed for what? In the real world, lockstep compensation is extremely rare. It's unheard of. In normal jobs, you get raises based on your market value, not how many years you've worked. If you don't like it you can get another job that pays more.

We're talking specifically about the relevant market: BigLaw. It's irrelevant what other industries do or don't do.

2. I'm really surprised by your post because in another thread, you tried to get me banned for linking the O'Melveny blog. "Honestly, can we please ban this douchenozzle who keeps posting this bullshit blog about OMM." http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 349502#top

Why are you linking to that blog & discussing OMM again... in a thread specifically about JD compensation?! We get it, you hate OMM.

And you hate Jones Day, that's why you started this thread about them. The point is they don't deserve the hate. They're doing things right. This notion that you're entitled to a fixed raise after 12 months, because you work at one of 100 firms, flies in the face of economics and capitalist thought. It's ludicrous. There are no free lunches.

And be careful with anonymous replies. I personally don't care and will not report you, but I too clicked the red quote by habit, and someone reported me and I got a warning.

Jones Day is well-deserving of hate. No one is entitled to anything, but Jones Day is unlike most other top-tier firms with their black-box bullshit. If you want to make below market compensation, go for it buddy. But that's what it is, less money. Why would the workforce (read: associates) choose to go to a firm where they have to work just as hard, but make less money? Every other major firm is lockstep (with some exceptions like Kirkland bonuses and whatnot) but Jones Day chooses to fuck over associates because they can.

It's not us who are failing to comprehend the realities of the market, but you. The legal market doesn't make sense, no argument from me. But it is what it is. Associates should be aware that JD is below-market, and they should wear that brand. I get that sometimes its the only choice, and I can respect that, but for those who can go to a firm with real market comp, they should do so.

BTW I reported you for shilling your dumbass blog, and will continue to do so if it's irrelevant and off-topic.

[RaceJudicata]

You should ask someone what the salary scale is in those offices. It's not known because the bumps likely don't track New York market.

The problem is comp is personal and confidential so it's 1) forbidden to ask and 2) forbidden for anyone to talk about it. That's why I'm anonymously asking internet strangers in those offices for anecdotal points.

I feel like I'm in a gulag

Yes, this seems like a direct violation of the NLRA. Employees are free to discuss their terms and conditions of employment. Of course, probably career suicide (at JD and elsewhere) to challenge the policy.

Too lazy to look it up, but I'd kinda be surprised if professional services orgs, particularly a pure partnership like JD, weren't carved out of the NLRA. Any labor nerds know the answer or whether there's some other carve out at play here? It'd at least offer another explanation of how JD can get away with this.

Agreed - for partners, who are owners of the business. Associates are still employees of the partnership. They must have some legal basis (but maybe not?)... I am also too lazy to look any of this up.

[BlackAndOrange84]

You should ask someone what the salary scale is in those offices. It's not known because the bumps likely don't track New York market.

The problem is comp is personal and confidential so it's 1) forbidden to ask and 2) forbidden for anyone to talk about it. That's why I'm anonymously asking internet strangers in those offices for anecdotal points.

I feel like I'm in a gulag

Yes, this seems like a direct violation of the NLRA. Employees are free to discuss their terms and conditions of employment. Of course, probably career suicide (at JD and elsewhere) to challenge the policy.

Too lazy to look it up, but I'd kinda be surprised if professional services orgs, particularly a pure partnership like JD, weren't carved out of the NLRA. Any labor nerds know the answer or whether there's some other carve out at play here? It'd at least offer another explanation of how JD can get away with this.

Agreed - for partners, who are owners of the business. Associates are still employees of the partnership. They must have some legal basis (but maybe not?)... I am also too lazy to look any of this up.

So I got unlazy just now. There's no jurisdictional carve out for law firms or professional service organizations. The NLRA specifically grants NLRB jurisdiction over legal services agencies (law firms) with revenue greater than $250,000. There's also no reason attorneys can't be employees and so covered. Staff attorneys for instance will often be employees for NLRA purposes. The difficulty with associates is that they may often qualify as supervisors and so not be covered by the NLRA (in virtue of being able to tell non-lawyer staff what to do, and for midlevels their supervision of junior associates and exercise of independent professional judgment). That said, this hasn't been tested much, it looks like there's only one or two cases from small firms, where associate attorneys were found to be supervisors. So it does look like no one at JD has wanted their legal career to die on this particular hill.

Also, for the comment about whether they changed the policy to "strongly discourage" from forbidden, I'm pretty sure that wouldn't matter for the NLRB's purposes. If they took some negative action against an employee that even appeared to be linked to the policy discouraging discussion of salary information, it could be considered an adverse action motivated by animus against protected concerted action (the very thing the NLRA protects, whether employees are unionized or not). From what I know, the general counsel and the Board itself take a pretty broad view of this and err on the side of employees.

[Anonymous User]

I worked at a major L&E firm before leaving for greener pastures. Prohibiting, and even discouraging, discussions about salary violate the NLRA. If JD has a policy doing this, the NLRB would drop the hammer on the firm. Moreover, if JD retaliated against someone for talking about salary or filing an unfair labor practice charge that attorney would certainly get a windfall.