biglaw to 200k?? Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 432595
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
biglaw to 200k??
when are salaries gonna go to 190k or 200k? according to associates at my v20 firm, the management committee had decided they would agree to raise starting salaries higher than the 180k but then when cravath moved they decided to obviously follow that. anyone predict when the next raise will come?
-
- Posts: 1381
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:41 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
This sounds like bullshit leaked by the mgmt committee to get the retention benefits of a soon-coming raise without planning to raise. If u are in biglaw now I wouldn't make any plans on it during your likely tenureAnonymous User wrote:when are salaries gonna go to 190k or 200k? according to associates at my v20 firm, the management committee had decided they would agree to raise starting salaries higher than the 180k but then when cravath moved they decided to obviously follow that. anyone predict when the next raise will come?
-
- Posts: 432595
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: biglaw to 200k??
My firm is still one of the 2-3 of the v100 at 160k in NYC
. I just want 180k. Please.

Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 1381
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:41 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
u should leaveAnonymous User wrote:My firm is still one of the 2-3 of the v100 at 160k in NYC. I just want 180k. Please.
-
- Posts: 432595
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: biglaw to 200k??
Lol firmwide email this morning as it displayed in my inbox :
Re: NYC SALARY
(Open the rest of the email to see that the email is actually from HR and titled NYC SALARY HISTORY LAW)
Re: NYC SALARY
(Open the rest of the email to see that the email is actually from HR and titled NYC SALARY HISTORY LAW)
-
- Posts: 432595
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: biglaw to 200k??
Yeah I got something along the lines of “YOUR BONUS THIS YEAR” but it was from Thompson Reuters.
-
- Posts: 432595
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: biglaw to 200k??
Are people really thinking we could see a raise this year? Either in salary or bonus, or both?
Is there any particular reason this thread is popping up now, like would firms actually consider a raise during the holidays?
And is this something that you think would be specific to NY, or all Biglaw offices on the NY scale that match Cravath (or whoever would set the new scale)?
Is there any particular reason this thread is popping up now, like would firms actually consider a raise during the holidays?
And is this something that you think would be specific to NY, or all Biglaw offices on the NY scale that match Cravath (or whoever would set the new scale)?
- Monochromatic Oeuvre
- Posts: 2481
- Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
TBH it would be better to slow-cook this flame over a period of several months rather than just shooting your whole wad now.Anonymous User wrote:when are salaries gonna go to 190k or 200k? according to associates at my v20 firm, the management committee had decided they would agree to raise starting salaries higher than the 180k but then when cravath moved they decided to obviously follow that. anyone predict when the next raise will come?
-
- Posts: 432595
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: biglaw to 200k??
I agree, but this was the only offer I got at OCI and didn't get bites during 3L oci. As a junior, I dont want to rock the boat and just be locked out of biglaw completely.jd20132013 wrote:u should leaveAnonymous User wrote:My firm is still one of the 2-3 of the v100 at 160k in NYC. I just want 180k. Please.
-
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:12 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
I don't know if it will happen, but there should definitely be a premium for NYC salaries. There's no reason associates in any other market should get paid as much as NYC lawyers.
In those markets that have similar high costs (really only SF) associates work fewer hours on average. NYC has the most brutal combination of high costs and rough hours. There's no reason for associates in random markets like Chicago to be on the same scale.
In those markets that have similar high costs (really only SF) associates work fewer hours on average. NYC has the most brutal combination of high costs and rough hours. There's no reason for associates in random markets like Chicago to be on the same scale.
- LaLiLuLeLo
- Posts: 949
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:54 am
Re: biglaw to 200k??
If associates are billed out at the same rate they should be paid the same. Not our fault you suckers decided to work in NYC while we were chilling at the beach billing 1800 a year.FascinatedWanderer wrote:I don't know if it will happen, but there should definitely be a premium for NYC salaries. There's no reason associates in any other market should get paid as much as NYC lawyers.
In those markets that have similar high costs (really only SF) associates work fewer hours on average. NYC has the most brutal combination of high costs and rough hours. There's no reason for associates in random markets like Chicago to be on the same scale.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 347
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2016 9:22 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
I'll bet on 2027. I think firms went to 160k from 145k in 2007, which is all my evidence.
-
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:19 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
^. One could also argue that NY associates have other benefits, specifically thinking of lateraling/exit options down the road. I don't have experience with this as a junior, but when I was going through OCI it seemed to be the consensus that if you started in NY, you could someday lateral out to any other market, since NY is still viewed as the "best" training by some/many. The flip side isn't true or at least is not as easily done, in that it is super hard to lateral into NY from another market.LaLiLuLeLo wrote:If associates are billed out at the same rate they should be paid the same. Not our fault you suckers decided to work in NYC while we were chilling at the beach billing 1800 a year.FascinatedWanderer wrote:I don't know if it will happen, but there should definitely be a premium for NYC salaries. There's no reason associates in any other market should get paid as much as NYC lawyers.
In those markets that have similar high costs (really only SF) associates work fewer hours on average. NYC has the most brutal combination of high costs and rough hours. There's no reason for associates in random markets like Chicago to be on the same scale.
-
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 6:00 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
I've posted the issue of NY v. Non-NY hours several times on TLS, and the consensus was that the idea of a better work-like balance outside NY is far from guaranteed, and if it is better, then only marginally.
-
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:12 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
KijiStewart wrote:I've posted the issue of NY v. Non-NY hours several times on TLS, and the consensus was that the idea of a better work-like balance outside NY is far from guaranteed, and if it is better, then only marginally.
Well, if you've posted about it several times...
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
dude, you just went through OCI.KijiStewart wrote:I've posted the issue of NY v. Non-NY hours several times on TLS, and the consensus was that the idea of a better work-like balance outside NY is far from guaranteed, and if it is better, then only marginally.
- UVA2B
- Posts: 3570
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 10:48 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
Seriously, you posted several times about it, and you got a pretty uniform answer. NYC generally has a more intense workload, but a better work-life balance isn't guaranteed in another market. If you can't understand when people joke about having it easier because they're not doing that NYC life (even if there is a kernel of truth to it), then you should focus on understanding nuance. Generally speaking, LA is less intense than NYC, but it'd be stupid to think LA=easy life. Same goes for Houston, or Miami, or Denver, or...you get the idea. Especially when dealing with national and international firms, you also have to remember that while office cultures will differ, the overall firm culture will still affect your work flow and work-life balance. Just because you're at Skadden DE doesn't mean that all of a sudden you're not an associate at Skadden. It just means you have a marginal shot at having less demanding hours.KijiStewart wrote:I've posted the issue of NY v. Non-NY hours several times on TLS, and the consensus was that the idea of a better work-like balance outside NY is far from guaranteed, and if it is better, then only marginally.
You shouldn't get into this job for work-life balance, at least in the private big firm. Stop lamenting it.
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 10:28 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
I'm gonna recommend you guys head on over to the "how many hours is too many" thread where we're crowdsourcing some very interesting info on this at this v moment!UVA2B wrote:Seriously, you posted several times about it, and you got a pretty uniform answer. NYC generally has a more intense workload, but a better work-life balance isn't guaranteed in another market. If you can't understand when people joke about having it easier because they're not doing that NYC life (even if there is a kernel of truth to it), then you should focus on understanding nuance. Generally speaking, LA is less intense than NYC, but it'd be stupid to think LA=easy life. Same goes for Houston, or Miami, or Denver, or...you get the idea. Especially when dealing with national and international firms, you also have to remember that while office cultures will differ, the overall firm culture will still affect your work flow and work-life balance. Just because you're at Skadden DE doesn't mean that all of a sudden you're not an associate at Skadden. It just means you have a marginal shot at having less demanding hours.KijiStewart wrote:I've posted the issue of NY v. Non-NY hours several times on TLS, and the consensus was that the idea of a better work-like balance outside NY is far from guaranteed, and if it is better, then only marginally.
You shouldn't get into this job for work-life balance, at least in the private big firm. Stop lamenting it.
- UVA2B
- Posts: 3570
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 10:48 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
I'm fully aware, but thanks for proving the point I already made.oblig.lawl.ref wrote:I'm gonna recommend you guys head on over to the "how many hours is too many" thread where we're crowdsourcing some very interesting info on this at this v moment!UVA2B wrote:Seriously, you posted several times about it, and you got a pretty uniform answer. NYC generally has a more intense workload, but a better work-life balance isn't guaranteed in another market. If you can't understand when people joke about having it easier because they're not doing that NYC life (even if there is a kernel of truth to it), then you should focus on understanding nuance. Generally speaking, LA is less intense than NYC, but it'd be stupid to think LA=easy life. Same goes for Houston, or Miami, or Denver, or...you get the idea. Especially when dealing with national and international firms, you also have to remember that while office cultures will differ, the overall firm culture will still affect your work flow and work-life balance. Just because you're at Skadden DE doesn't mean that all of a sudden you're not an associate at Skadden. It just means you have a marginal shot at having less demanding hours.KijiStewart wrote:I've posted the issue of NY v. Non-NY hours several times on TLS, and the consensus was that the idea of a better work-like balance outside NY is far from guaranteed, and if it is better, then only marginally.
You shouldn't get into this job for work-life balance, at least in the private big firm. Stop lamenting it.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 10:28 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
You seem like a neat person. Not sure that that thread really "proves" any "point" you made. That may be a tad of a "reach."UVA2B wrote:I'm fully aware, but thanks for proving the point I already made.oblig.lawl.ref wrote:I'm gonna recommend you guys head on over to the "how many hours is too many" thread where we're crowdsourcing some very interesting info on this at this v moment!UVA2B wrote:Seriously, you posted several times about it, and you got a pretty uniform answer. NYC generally has a more intense workload, but a better work-life balance isn't guaranteed in another market. If you can't understand when people joke about having it easier because they're not doing that NYC life (even if there is a kernel of truth to it), then you should focus on understanding nuance. Generally speaking, LA is less intense than NYC, but it'd be stupid to think LA=easy life. Same goes for Houston, or Miami, or Denver, or...you get the idea. Especially when dealing with national and international firms, you also have to remember that while office cultures will differ, the overall firm culture will still affect your work flow and work-life balance. Just because you're at Skadden DE doesn't mean that all of a sudden you're not an associate at Skadden. It just means you have a marginal shot at having less demanding hours.KijiStewart wrote:I've posted the issue of NY v. Non-NY hours several times on TLS, and the consensus was that the idea of a better work-like balance outside NY is far from guaranteed, and if it is better, then only marginally.
You shouldn't get into this job for work-life balance, at least in the private big firm. Stop lamenting it.
- UVA2B
- Posts: 3570
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 10:48 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
I'm sorry, are you saying the thread proves nothing at all, or that it proves a very different point than I've made? My point, if not clear, was that the types of hours required isn't strictly based on the market, but also involves firm & practice group, work flow in that year, and specific partners someone works with. That could happen in NYC (and probably does more often, FWIW, even if that can't be quantified), or it could happen in pretty much any market that is busier.oblig.lawl.ref wrote:You seem like a neat person. Not sure that that thread really "proves" any "point" you made. That may be a tad of a "reach."UVA2B wrote:I'm fully aware, but thanks for proving the point I already made.oblig.lawl.ref wrote:I'm gonna recommend you guys head on over to the "how many hours is too many" thread where we're crowdsourcing some very interesting info on this at this v moment!UVA2B wrote:Seriously, you posted several times about it, and you got a pretty uniform answer. NYC generally has a more intense workload, but a better work-life balance isn't guaranteed in another market. If you can't understand when people joke about having it easier because they're not doing that NYC life (even if there is a kernel of truth to it), then you should focus on understanding nuance. Generally speaking, LA is less intense than NYC, but it'd be stupid to think LA=easy life. Same goes for Houston, or Miami, or Denver, or...you get the idea. Especially when dealing with national and international firms, you also have to remember that while office cultures will differ, the overall firm culture will still affect your work flow and work-life balance. Just because you're at Skadden DE doesn't mean that all of a sudden you're not an associate at Skadden. It just means you have a marginal shot at having less demanding hours.KijiStewart wrote:I've posted the issue of NY v. Non-NY hours several times on TLS, and the consensus was that the idea of a better work-like balance outside NY is far from guaranteed, and if it is better, then only marginally.
You shouldn't get into this job for work-life balance, at least in the private big firm. Stop lamenting it.
Maybe I'm objectively naive about how you're refuting what I've said, but so far I'm not seeing it.
-
- Posts: 432595
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: biglaw to 200k??
This won’t happen until more people start turning down nyc firms for non-nyc firms.FascinatedWanderer wrote:I don't know if it will happen, but there should definitely be a premium for NYC salaries. There's no reason associates in any other market should get paid as much as NYC lawyers.
In those markets that have similar high costs (really only SF) associates work fewer hours on average. NYC has the most brutal combination of high costs and rough hours. There's no reason for associates in random markets like Chicago to be on the same scale.
2 of my friends chose nyc biglaw over Texas biglaw. Plenty others chose nyc over Chicago/DC/etc. Some of them prestige driven, some of the actually like nyc.
To be fair to nyc, it is a pretty fuckin bomb city. Believe it or not, lots of people want to be there and are willing to pay the premium. Enough so that nyc doesn’t need to raise salaries to compete with non-nyc firms/offices for new hires.
Also, the firms that need to “feel the pain” are the market leaders in nyc: cravath, etc. White & Case isn’t gonna be the first to hike to 200k because they have to hire more sub-median kids from Cornell. And cravath isn’t gonna be hurting for top candidates anytime soon.
-
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:19 pm
Re: biglaw to 200k??
Pretty sure this hits the nail on the head. The compensation leaders aren't going to hurt for candidates, because most people are not turning down Cravath, WLRK, etc. to go to a smaller market with a shot at work-life balance. They'll put in their dues in these top firms, then someday lateral to a smaller market. And everyone else going to NY does so because they don't have ties to other markets and it's where all the jobs are, or they want the NY lifestyle/training/experience.Anonymous User wrote:This won’t happen until more people start turning down nyc firms for non-nyc firms.FascinatedWanderer wrote:I don't know if it will happen, but there should definitely be a premium for NYC salaries. There's no reason associates in any other market should get paid as much as NYC lawyers.
In those markets that have similar high costs (really only SF) associates work fewer hours on average. NYC has the most brutal combination of high costs and rough hours. There's no reason for associates in random markets like Chicago to be on the same scale.
2 of my friends chose nyc biglaw over Texas biglaw. Plenty others chose nyc over Chicago/DC/etc. Some of them prestige driven, some of the actually like nyc.
To be fair to nyc, it is a pretty fuckin bomb city. Believe it or not, lots of people want to be there and are willing to pay the premium. Enough so that nyc doesn’t need to raise salaries to compete with non-nyc firms/offices for new hires.
Also, the firms that need to “feel the pain” are the market leaders in nyc: cravath, etc. White & Case isn’t gonna be the first to hike to 200k because they have to hire more sub-median kids from Cornell. And cravath isn’t gonna be hurting for top candidates anytime soon.
So, NY won't be getting a salary premium unless people start turning down the TOP firms for non-NY jobs (which won't happen, IMO). Also, to keep quality candidates coming to smaller markets, those markets need to offer something better than NY, such as equal income, better COL, to attract candidates away from NY (because it really is an awesome city and the mecca of legal work in many respects).
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login