Jones Day Compensation Data Points Forum

[objctnyrhnr]

Data points are kind of meaningless without hours and male pay comparison. A lot of these numbers seem indicative of performance problems, as others have said. From personal experience, JD usually tries to phase people out without outright firing them. I know people who literally billed 1000-1200 hours for multiple years and I'm sure their pay was stagnant but I'm also sure they preferred raking in 200k a year and doing very little work to getting fired.

Did you miss the part where three of the associates in market paying...markets NEVER actually got market pay?

Pretty sure his/her point is that if all you’re saying is three female attorneys didn’t receive market pay, that doesn’t necessarily imply discrimination if their counterpart male associates also weren’t receiving market pay. And we don’t know that because all we have are these there data points.

I think we’ve pretty well established here that JD pays plenty of people under market... in market paying markets... just because they can.

I don’t know if they were or were not discriminated against because again, we don’t have all the facts. But you can’t just blindly accept they’re being discriminated against when this behavior by JD seems pretty standard (for JD as a firm, not firm’s overall).

This thread isn’t really about the discrimination aspect, though, it’s more about whether JD pays under market as a general matter. To that point, I disagree that these data points are meaningless without hours and male pay comparison.

Seconded. I want to make sure that we aren’t conflating two related issues here:

1. JD pays its associates relatively little but maintains a good rep. How/where/when/why/who?

2. JD did/did not discriminate, which is/is not inferable from the shared datapoints.

[Elston Gunn]

Posters jumping in to say that they could be getting paid under market for performance or other non-discriminatory reasons is really odd/defensive. I mean, *of course* they could be. That’s why there’s a 100+ page complaint full of allegations of discrimination and then there will be discovery.

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Posters jumping in to say that they could be getting paid under market for performance or other non-discriminatory reasons is really odd/defensive. I mean, *of course* they could be. That’s why there’s a 100+ page complaint full of allegations of discrimination and then there will be discovery.

Agreed. These data points show that it's likely that associates, even in major markets, get below-market compensation. I'm not sure why anyone in their right mind would regard this firm as "prestigious" in any way whatsoever. Compensation in biglaw isn't really variable, a firm that fails to meet the minimum standard set out by the market is a shithole, don't sugar coat it.

[dabigchina]

Does nobody have friends at JD? whether they pay market seems like something that could be easily determined by asking them.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Does nobody have friends at JD? whether they pay market seems like something that could be easily determined by asking them.

No, my friends like getting compensated market.

[Pulsar]

Does nobody have friends at JD? whether they pay market seems like something that could be easily determined by asking them.

Also people lie, and people at JD who get paid less than market might not want to talk about it for fear of sounding like they just suck at their jobs or something, and it's an awkward question to ask.

[QContinuum]

Compensation in biglaw isn't really variable, a firm that fails to meet the minimum standard set out by the market is a shithole, don't sugar coat it.

No one thinks of W&C as a "shithole" even though it also pays below market, IIRC. So it's possible for prestige to track independently of compensation.

[hdivschool]

I have friends at JD. It is well known that JD pays many people below market. But there are many reasons to work at JD, even if there is some risk that your pay might be below market.

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Compensation in biglaw isn't really variable, a firm that fails to meet the minimum standard set out by the market is a shithole, don't sugar coat it.

No one thinks of W&C as a "shithole" even though it also pays below market, IIRC. So it's possible for prestige to track independently of compensation.

W&C isn't really analogous though. First, the base compensation at W&C exceeds the market. I think they are below-market when it comes to total compensation, and they should probably be shamed more for that. BUT I think the key difference here is that the compensation differential isn't that extreme and there is a lot of transparency in their compensation system.

What makes JD uniquely shitty is the combination of an opaque compensation system (and evidence that any discussions of compensation among associates is actively discouraged) + significantly below-market base compensation. JD isn't compensating for below-market base compensation with above-market bonuses. W&C in contrast tries to compensate for below-market bonuses (or no bonuses, not sure) with above-market base compensation AND is super transparent about it.

[Anonymous User]

Worked at JD for a few years. Not going to discuss or make any comment on the lawsuit, but can at least provide some details regarding compensation.

After my first year, I received a slightly above-market raise, but zero bonus so you end up making far less than peers at similar firms. A few superstar associates will get comp that is above market. But the black box is used as a way to ensure that the vast majority end up below market. We had an all-associates meeting during my 2nd year and most of it was people complaining about comp. Yet you had the few senior associate superstars saying how it all gets better as you go along, not realizing that 90% of the associates in that room would be gone well before that point. I can deal with a black box and the idea of being happy/upset with your comp in a vacuum. But I didn't like that the firm tries to make you think you are somehow still getting market due to outsized raises. If you go in with that misconception, you will be disappointed.

Thats not to say that JD is a poor choice of firm. There are many really positive things about it. But its kind of a kool-aid firm, and theres simply no way to self-justify the compensation aspect for an extended period of time unless you are truly drinking the kool aid. This is partially why the turnover is so high. Pretty sure about 90% of my 1L class is now gone from the firm.

[Anonymous User]

Shearman's bonus is completely black box too. There are some firms with black box compensation. It's not just JD.

[2013]

Shearman's bonus is completely black box too. There are some firms with black box compensation. It's not just JD.

Very different. At shearman, you at least know what you’re getting for your base salary:

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Worked at JD for a few years. Not going to discuss or make any comment on the lawsuit, but can at least provide some details regarding compensation.

After my first year, I received a slightly above-market raise, but zero bonus so you end up making far less than peers at similar firms. A few superstar associates will get comp that is above market. But the black box is used as a way to ensure that the vast majority end up below market. We had an all-associates meeting during my 2nd year and most of it was people complaining about comp. Yet you had the few senior associate superstars saying how it all gets better as you go along, not realizing that 90% of the associates in that room would be gone well before that point. I can deal with a black box and the idea of being happy/upset with your comp in a vacuum. But I didn't like that the firm tries to make you think you are somehow still getting market due to outsized raises. If you go in with that misconception, you will be disappointed.

Thats not to say that JD is a poor choice of firm. There are many really positive things about it. But its kind of a kool-aid firm, and theres simply no way to self-justify the compensation aspect for an extended period of time unless you are truly drinking the kool aid. This is partially why the turnover is so high. Pretty sure about 90% of my 1L class is now gone from the firm.

What were the hours like? Maybe below-market compensation is justifiable (although probably not) if associates are billing like 1500-1600 annually, but I have a feeling that isn't the case at JD.

[Anonymous User]

Worked at JD for a few years. Not going to discuss or make any comment on the lawsuit, but can at least provide some details regarding compensation.

After my first year, I received a slightly above-market raise, but zero bonus so you end up making far less than peers at similar firms. A few superstar associates will get comp that is above market. But the black box is used as a way to ensure that the vast majority end up below market. We had an all-associates meeting during my 2nd year and most of it was people complaining about comp. Yet you had the few senior associate superstars saying how it all gets better as you go along, not realizing that 90% of the associates in that room would be gone well before that point. I can deal with a black box and the idea of being happy/upset with your comp in a vacuum. But I didn't like that the firm tries to make you think you are somehow still getting market due to outsized raises. If you go in with that misconception, you will be disappointed.

Thats not to say that JD is a poor choice of firm. There are many really positive things about it. But its kind of a kool-aid firm, and theres simply no way to self-justify the compensation aspect for an extended period of time unless you are truly drinking the kool aid. This is partially why the turnover is so high. Pretty sure about 90% of my 1L class is now gone from the firm.

What were the hours like? Maybe below-market compensation is justifiable (although probably not) if associates are billing like 1500-1600 annually, but I have a feeling that isn't the case at JD.

Not the case. I had a friend there who billed solid hours in a major market, got good reviews and was on basically cravath scale at the beginning of the year, but barely got a bonus and didn’t get a cravath increase as he entered his next class year. At the time I was applying off a clerkship and seriously considering JD, they gave me a “black box offer letter” which listed my starting salary 15% higher than my class year on cravath scale, but then associates told me not to expect a year end bonus or necessarily much of an increase when I moved up a year. It was like a teaser rate. My friend left and went to a firm that pays market and I picked another firm, but if I hadn’t been told how badly black box screws people I might be at JD and very bitter.

[Anonymous User]

Worked at JD for a few years. Not going to discuss or make any comment on the lawsuit, but can at least provide some details regarding compensation.

After my first year, I received a slightly above-market raise, but zero bonus so you end up making far less than peers at similar firms. A few superstar associates will get comp that is above market. But the black box is used as a way to ensure that the vast majority end up below market. We had an all-associates meeting during my 2nd year and most of it was people complaining about comp. Yet you had the few senior associate superstars saying how it all gets better as you go along, not realizing that 90% of the associates in that room would be gone well before that point. I can deal with a black box and the idea of being happy/upset with your comp in a vacuum. But I didn't like that the firm tries to make you think you are somehow still getting market due to outsized raises. If you go in with that misconception, you will be disappointed.

Thats not to say that JD is a poor choice of firm. There are many really positive things about it. But its kind of a kool-aid firm, and theres simply no way to self-justify the compensation aspect for an extended period of time unless you are truly drinking the kool aid. This is partially why the turnover is so high. Pretty sure about 90% of my 1L class is now gone from the firm.

What were the hours like? Maybe below-market compensation is justifiable (although probably not) if associates are billing like 1500-1600 annually, but I have a feeling that isn't the case at JD.

The hours were pretty brutal. Late nights essentially every night and worked through most weekends. And since I was junior at the time, I was in no position to set any kinds of boundaries. I can't recall what my hour total was since its been awhile, but probably close to 2300 for the year. And despite that, I only got 5k above-market raise (and no bonus, which left me way behind market comp). Its the kind of firm where folks work biglaw hours for real, so if anything, folks there should be getting more than market, not below.

[Anonymous User]

At least if average comp at JD is somewhat similar to the market pay, I may understand them as a true meritocracy firm. But if only few associates get above-market comp and a vast majority of others are paid with such lower comp, it's just not a market pay firm. Can't believe they do not publish at least some average datapoints.

[purpletiger]

At least if average comp at JD is somewhat similar to the market pay, I may understand them as a true meritocracy firm. But if only few associates get above-market comp and a vast majority of others are paid with such lower comp, it's just not a market pay firm. Can't believe they do not publish at least some average datapoints.

Well, if the median JD associate is making 15-20% less than Cravath market + bonus, they certainly want to keep that under wraps as much as possible.

[objctnyrhnr]

At least if average comp at JD is somewhat similar to the market pay, I may understand them as a true meritocracy firm. But if only few associates get above-market comp and a vast majority of others are paid with such lower comp, it's just not a market pay firm. Can't believe they do not publish at least some average datapoints.

Well, if the median JD associate is making 15-20% less than Cravath market + bonus, they certainly want to keep that under wraps as much as possible.

If JD has a rainy day fund, I’m thinking disco period on this case would be a good time to...raise everybody to market (and then if they wanna pay a couple former scotus clerks more, by all means).

Then it’ll be less devastating to them when they release the evidence to demonstrate that these people weren’t actually discriminated against with Comp.

[Anonymous User]

I’m in a major office and am being paid Cravath base + special bonus + bonus for a class year ahead so I’m not upset about compensation at all. I haven’t clerked and am not an appellate associate. No clue about overall compensation for all associates but I do think that compensation is genuinely individualized.

[RecruiterMan]

I’m in a major office and am being paid Cravath base + special bonus + bonus for a class year ahead so I’m not upset about compensation at all. I haven’t clerked and am not an appellate associate. No clue about overall compensation for all associates but I do think that compensation is genuinely individualized.

Genuinely gendered is probably a better description

[objctnyrhnr]

I’m in a major office and am being paid Cravath base + special bonus + bonus for a class year ahead so I’m not upset about compensation at all. I haven’t clerked and am not an appellate associate. No clue about overall compensation for all associates but I do think that compensation is genuinely individualized.

For the sake of adding a datapoint to the conversation, can you provide any other info about your experience and day to day and projects and assignments at JD (and maybe also your gender?) without outing yourself?

[Anonymous User]

Bumping this because comp letters went out the last few days. Midlevel JD associate and from what I understand the vast majority of folks got no comp raises, some had their salaries lowered, and some got only nominal raises. Any other JD associates care to chime in?

[Anonymous User]

NLGs in my office got a 5k bump, which I was happy about. Haven't talked to anyone more senior though.

[M458]

NLGs in my office got a 5k bump, which I was happy about. Haven't talked to anyone more senior though.

Isn't that way off market (includes yearly pay raise + bonus increase, no)?

[2013]

That’s surprising that JD raised $5k for first/second years. I feel like JD is in the group of firms that reduced salaries, so 195 may be higher than peer firms.