Top Law Schools

After market pay increased to 180k, has there been a trickle-down effect to midlaw/regional biglaw firms? I know there have been raises in secondary market offices of biglaw firms, but I'm curious if non-Vault firms have had salary increases lately, particularly in secondary/tertiary markets. Any anecdotes/info appreciated.

No, not really. The only firms that pay 180k fall into three categories. Those that can, those that have to to compete, and both.

No, not really. The only firms that pay 180k fall into three categories. Those that can, those that have to to compete, and both.

kellyfrost wrote:No, not really. The only firms that pay 180k fall into three categories. Those that can, those that have to to compete, and both.

I understand that these types of firms aren't going up to 180, I'm just curious if there has been pressure for firms in smaller markets to go from 100 to 110 or something like that.

Yes, my non-vault biglaw firm has made big comp changes to compete with 180. I don't believe all of it was reflected on ATL, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was happening quietly elsewhere. But my firm, because of its location(s) and the work it does, is very vulnerable to losing associates to 180 firms. I assume that a 100-lawyer, truly regional firm in, say, Sioux Falls wouldn't have the same incentives.

This really depends on how you define "midlaw" and "regional biglaw" which are both pretty ambiguous terms and can over vastly different firms within those umbrellas.

Anecdotally, I know of a fe "regional biglaw" shops that were paying slightly below market in my city (think 125-145k) when market was 160k that now got pushed up (145-160k) when market moved to 180k.

Depends on the market. Since in all likelihood you have City X in mind and don't care about, say, Nashville, you're best just consulting this list. Or indicating which market you really care about.

My regional biglaw/midlaw/whatever you want to call it pays first years 180k (Southern California). Not even close to Cravath scale raises or bonuses though (raises and bonuses are tiny). There must be some regional big law firms in major markets that are similar.

A number of NC firms and regional firms' NC offices have moved from 130-135 to 150-160.

Anonymous User wrote:My regional biglaw/midlaw/whatever you want to call it pays first years 180k (Southern California). Not even close to Cravath scale raises or bonuses though (raises and bonuses are tiny). There must be some regional big law firms in major markets that are similar.

^ There are plenty of non-regional biglaw shops that do the same thing. Lots of firms out there that may pay "market" first year but don't follow Cravath scale after. (I'm thinking particularly of some places in Texas)

Any insight firms in the mountain west? Reno/Boise/SLC/Denver etc.?

Anonymous User wrote:Any insight firms in the mountain west? Reno/Boise/SLC/Denver etc.?

I'm in one of these states and there has been no salary movement for several years now, and NY to 180 does not seem to have changed it. These are small markets and people who want to be there want to be there. As long as these firms can fill their 3-person summer classes with applicants they like there is no real incentive to boost salaries. More importantly, what has happened in NYC has nothing to do with the cost-sensitivity of clients in Boise or Reno. Unless firms can raise rates they are unlikely to boost salaries.

firm i interviewed with in Los Angeles had about 100 attorneys and paid 180K-195K to 1st years.

Anonymous User wrote:firm i interviewed with in Los Angeles had about 100 attorneys and paid 180K-195K to 1st years.

I mean, 195k far exceeds the big law market. I'm sure this firm was paying above market pre raises

I work in the Phoenix market, and I've seen a number of raises in the last year. Obviously, because of low COL, market has always been "low" for Phoenix - ~120k is market pay for larger Phoenix firms. My firm just raised to 135k, and I know for a fact a couple othere firms have raised from 120k as well (one to ~130, the other to 140k).

Spoke with several managing partners at regional biglaw in the Midwest (think KC, MSP, Cincy, etc.), and they expected very little movement in response to coastal movement. Seems the business model at regionals is just distinctly resistant to major market forces. They largely recruit people who only want to be in that market.

Anonymous User wrote:I work in the Phoenix market, and I've seen a number of raises in the last year. Obviously, because of low COL, market has always been "low" for Phoenix - ~120k is market pay for larger Phoenix firms. My firm just raised to 135k, and I know for a fact a couple othere firms have raised from 120k as well (one to ~130, the other to 140k).

Curious about which firms raised to 135 and 140 recently. I know the firm that raised to 130 (seems like maybe they raised too early and got passed up by their competitors).

With all the increases the new market is likely 130-140.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I work in the Phoenix market, and I've seen a number of raises in the last year. Obviously, because of low COL, market has always been "low" for Phoenix - ~120k is market pay for larger Phoenix firms. My firm just raised to 135k, and I know for a fact a couple othere firms have raised from 120k as well (one to ~130, the other to 140k).

Curious about which firms raised to 135 and 140 recently. I know the firm that raised to 130 (seems like maybe they raised too early and got passed up by their competitors).

With all the increases the new market is likely 130-140.

Polsinelli is at 135k; Perkins Cole is at 140k. I'd generally agree with the 130-140 range, although Phoenix is a mecca of small-mid Law that sit just below market, so I'd expect they would raise to ~120k