Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=308051
wait is that salary decrease just for this year, or is that a permanent thing?Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 5:42 pmIt also cut salaries so that it is no longer 20k above market at every class year.
It looks like it will be a permanent thing. I think the context is important—the overall benefit package is still well above market (the firm pays 4% of salaries into the associates’ 401ks and pays health care premiums). And salaries are still above market, just less so. But the gap between Desmarais and market is now narrower.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 6:23 pmwait is that salary decrease just for this year, or is that a permanent thing?Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 5:42 pmIt also cut salaries so that it is no longer 20k above market at every class year.
It appears that second years are now at 215k and that all class years above that are 10k above market. I am not sure whether first year salaries were lowered.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 7:09 pmThank you. do you know what years the salary went down for? e.g. is it still the same for first, second, and third years?
Bonuses for most class years were around market (regular + "special" bonuses) although there were some outliers. Those amounts are around what the firm gives most years anyway, so it means associates did not get a COVID bump. What about bonuses and salaries at Reichman?Anonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:21 pmReichman associate here. What range did the Desmarais bonuses fall into this year?
bump re ReichmanAnonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:21 pmReichman associate here. What range did the Desmarais bonuses fall into this year?
Wow. This is good to know. I had a recruiter contact me about Reichman Jorgensen last year and was going on and on about how great and promising the firm was. I had my doubts, but this is valuable information. It's a no from me, dog.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed May 12, 2021 3:52 pmI don't think it makes sense at all for anyone from a solid, market-paying biglaw firm to go to Reichman. The firm has not paid "above market" compensation since special bonuses began. None were paid last year, and I was explicitly told by management that the firm simply had not grown enough over the past year to pay them this year, either (the target bonus is just a year-end Cravath bonus).
Moreover, the above-market "base" salaries (which were once 20k above cravath) are also no longer lockstep, so your total all-in will be between $35,000 and $50,000 lower than biglaw. Moreover, the $240 million verdict in the Densify case that the firm touts in all promotional materials has been thrown out by Judge Stark, who recently also denied a motion for certification. Not sure what litigation funders are interested anymore in this slowly drowning ship (almost all the patent clients are contingency).
And, of course, despite the no billable requirement, you will be working at least 2400 hours on client matters per year (which depreciates your relative compensation even more, as many biglaw firms offer above-market comp for exceeding hours thresholds).
The fact that the firm still advertises "above market compensation" on its website is pretty obscene, imo.
Also interested in this. Hard to imagine they won't fall into line if their business model w/r/t talent is "we hire the best and pay them above market" (their words, not mine) and the new increases would render them no longer above market. My guess is they'll wait until the final scale is determined though since they're not competing for the same talent pool as the corporate departments that are driving salaries up. Once full-service biglaw firms with competitive IP lit departments (KE, LW, Wilmer etc.) match the pressure will be on to keep up.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:40 pmcurious if desmarais is going to keep up with the milbank and DPW salary increases. right now it's at 210 for first years, to maintain the same relative compensation they would have to go to 220 or 225 b
If you look around, you'll actually notice that a fair number of Desmarais associates leave for tech transactions groups and more generalist law firms without large IP lit departments.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 12:39 pmAlso interested in this. Hard to imagine they won't fall into line if their business model w/r/t talent is "we hire the best and pay them above market" (their words, not mine) and the new increases would render them no longer above market. My guess is they'll wait until the final scale is determined though since they're not competing for the same talent pool as the corporate departments that are driving salaries up. Once full-service biglaw firms with competitive IP lit departments (KE, LW, Wilmer etc.) match the pressure will be on to keep up.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:40 pmcurious if desmarais is going to keep up with the milbank and DPW salary increases. right now it's at 210 for first years, to maintain the same relative compensation they would have to go to 220 or 225 b
What's interesting about DLLP is that they seem to be moving to a more defense-oriented business model, which is more consistently profitable = able to pay higher salaries. The downside is that big tech defense clients always seem to be hesitant to let younger lawyers get early experience. I would take DLLP at market if it was still plaintiff focused. I'm not so sure I would take DLLP at market for a defense-only practice with similar clients and experiences as, e.g., Kirkland or Quinn. The extra comp (including benefits) is make or break -- without it, the firm basically becomes interchangeable with Fish/Finnegan/Knobbe etc. IMO.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:24 pmI can't help but wonder if the "above-market lit boutique" model is going to be harder to sustain now than in the decade of stagnant comp up to 2016 - especially if its corporate driving salary growth rather than a countercyclical litigation practice. That said, W&C seems a good test case to show that lit associates will still even take a small pay cut relative to V10 firms for the sake of prestige/experience. So maybe the question for Desmarais/Reichman/other non-Susman boutiques is whether they can credibly offer that to associates while not distinguishing themselves on pay.
The scale used to be 20k above market and is now about 10-15k higher than the 190k scale (prior to the latest round of raises) for most class years. I don't know if they will match the latest raise to maintain that distance above market.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 8:59 pmWhat's interesting about DLLP is that they seem to be moving to a more defense-oriented business model, which is more consistently profitable = able to pay higher salaries. The downside is that big tech defense clients always seem to be hesitant to let younger lawyers get early experience. I would take DLLP at market if it was still plaintiff focused. I'm not so sure I would take DLLP at market for a defense-only practice with similar clients and experiences as, e.g., Kirkland or Quinn. The extra comp (including benefits) is make or break -- without it, the firm basically becomes interchangeable with Fish/Finnegan/Knobbe etc. IMO.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:24 pmI can't help but wonder if the "above-market lit boutique" model is going to be harder to sustain now than in the decade of stagnant comp up to 2016 - especially if its corporate driving salary growth rather than a countercyclical litigation practice. That said, W&C seems a good test case to show that lit associates will still even take a small pay cut relative to V10 firms for the sake of prestige/experience. So maybe the question for Desmarais/Reichman/other non-Susman boutiques is whether they can credibly offer that to associates while not distinguishing themselves on pay.
Firms that do more plaintiff work (Irell, McKool) make a good case for differentiating themselves based on experience. IIRC McKool even used to be above market and no longer is, and attracts folks looking for P-side work and true lean staffing.
Does anyone know what the DLLP salary scale actually is these days? They used to be 20k above 190k, then I heard they moved to only 10k above in 2020, and anon in this thread now said 210k for first years.
Prior to last week it was 10k above for 3rd years+, 15k above for 2nd, 20k above for first years (210). we'll see if they go upAnonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 8:59 pmWhat's interesting about DLLP is that they seem to be moving to a more defense-oriented business model, which is more consistently profitable = able to pay higher salaries. The downside is that big tech defense clients always seem to be hesitant to let younger lawyers get early experience. I would take DLLP at market if it was still plaintiff focused. I'm not so sure I would take DLLP at market for a defense-only practice with similar clients and experiences as, e.g., Kirkland or Quinn. The extra comp (including benefits) is make or break -- without it, the firm basically becomes interchangeable with Fish/Finnegan/Knobbe etc. IMO.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:24 pmI can't help but wonder if the "above-market lit boutique" model is going to be harder to sustain now than in the decade of stagnant comp up to 2016 - especially if its corporate driving salary growth rather than a countercyclical litigation practice. That said, W&C seems a good test case to show that lit associates will still even take a small pay cut relative to V10 firms for the sake of prestige/experience. So maybe the question for Desmarais/Reichman/other non-Susman boutiques is whether they can credibly offer that to associates while not distinguishing themselves on pay.
Firms that do more plaintiff work (Irell, McKool) make a good case for differentiating themselves based on experience. IIRC McKool even used to be above market and no longer is, and attracts folks looking for P-side work and true lean staffing.
Does anyone know what the DLLP salary scale actually is these days? They used to be 20k above 190k, then I heard they moved to only 10k above in 2020, and anon in this thread now said 210k for first years.
Re: W&C is the pay cut really that "small?" It seems that they don't pay any bonuses at all, so it's $100,000 below market or more, depending on your class year.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:24 pmI can't help but wonder if the "above-market lit boutique" model is going to be harder to sustain now than in the decade of stagnant comp up to 2016 - especially if its corporate driving salary growth rather than a countercyclical litigation practice. That said, W&C seems a good test case to show that lit associates will still even take a small pay cut relative to V10 firms for the sake of prestige/experience. So maybe the question for Desmarais/Reichman/other non-Susman boutiques is whether they can credibly offer that to associates while not distinguishing themselves on pay.
Re: W&C is the pay cut really that "small?" It seems that they don't pay any bonuses at all, so it's $100,000 below market or more, depending on your class year.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:24 pmI can't help but wonder if the "above-market lit boutique" model is going to be harder to sustain now than in the decade of stagnant comp up to 2016 - especially if its corporate driving salary growth rather than a countercyclical litigation practice. That said, W&C seems a good test case to show that lit associates will still even take a small pay cut relative to V10 firms for the sake of prestige/experience. So maybe the question for Desmarais/Reichman/other non-Susman boutiques is whether they can credibly offer that to associates while not distinguishing themselves on pay.
They pay a materially above-market base (or used to) so it is less than $100,000.misanthrope8219 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:00 pmRe: W&C is the pay cut really that "small?" It seems that they don't pay any bonuses at all, so it's $100,000 below market or more, depending on your class year.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:24 pmI can't help but wonder if the "above-market lit boutique" model is going to be harder to sustain now than in the decade of stagnant comp up to 2016 - especially if its corporate driving salary growth rather than a countercyclical litigation practice. That said, W&C seems a good test case to show that lit associates will still even take a small pay cut relative to V10 firms for the sake of prestige/experience. So maybe the question for Desmarais/Reichman/other non-Susman boutiques is whether they can credibly offer that to associates while not distinguishing themselves on pay.
Vault says:Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 3:24 pmThey pay a materially above-market base (or used to) so it is less than $100,000.misanthrope8219 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:00 pmRe: W&C is the pay cut really that "small?" It seems that they don't pay any bonuses at all, so it's $100,000 below market or more, depending on your class year.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:24 pmI can't help but wonder if the "above-market lit boutique" model is going to be harder to sustain now than in the decade of stagnant comp up to 2016 - especially if its corporate driving salary growth rather than a countercyclical litigation practice. That said, W&C seems a good test case to show that lit associates will still even take a small pay cut relative to V10 firms for the sake of prestige/experience. So maybe the question for Desmarais/Reichman/other non-Susman boutiques is whether they can credibly offer that to associates while not distinguishing themselves on pay.