Signing bonuses for corporate mid-level laterals? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Any other data points on signing bonuses for Goodwin midlevels? Asking for a friend.

[Adz123]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

[Anonymous User]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

Yes because every single lawyer in the group is putting up consecutive 250+ months (some over that). General counsels are calling Kirkland partners and the partners are saying sorry, try someone else this time. (Not to very large clients of course.)

[Sad248]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

Yes because every single lawyer in the group is putting up consecutive 250+ months (some over that). General counsels are calling Kirkland partners and the partners are saying sorry, try someone else this time. (Not to very large clients of course.)

That is insane. But good on them, actually. Never thought I'd see the day where a firm would put their associates' wellbeing (if any is left after 250 hours) before more money.

[Anonymous User]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

Yes because every single lawyer in the group is putting up consecutive 250+ months (some over that). General counsels are calling Kirkland partners and the partners are saying sorry, try someone else this time. (Not to very large clients of course.)

That is insane. But good on them, actually. Never thought I'd see the day where a firm would put their associates' wellbeing (if any is left after 250 hours) before more money.

It’s still self-interested, I think, because the firm cannot hire fast enough to keep up with the work. There is some concern that pushing any harder will just result in more defections and the firm is already putting more money into lateral recruiting than I have ever seen (huge signing and referral bonuses, paying recruiters a ton, you name it). So it’s more about self preservation because there are certain groups/offices that are teetering on the edge of implosion if a critical mass of associates/NSPs get enough courage to make the jump at the same time.

[Anonymous User]

A few months ago during one of the routine emails that promise it will get better, my firm claimed that partners were instructed to turn down work as appropriate (not KE btw). No clue if that is true or if that ever happened, but that was the messaging.

[ExpOriental]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

Yes because every single lawyer in the group is putting up consecutive 250+ months (some over that). General counsels are calling Kirkland partners and the partners are saying sorry, try someone else this time. (Not to very large clients of course.)

That is insane. But good on them, actually. Never thought I'd see the day where a firm would put their associates' wellbeing (if any is left after 250 hours) before more money.

It's not about associate well being, it's about simply not having the capacity to take on the work. It either just wouldn't get done, or it would only get done with impermissible delays or compromises in quality.

It's weird to see people taken aback by this, because I've heard about this happening at various firms for a while. I've been hearing rumors going back years about Weil's BFR group turning down big debtor cases because they just couldn't staff them, large in part because of attrition.

[Anonymous User]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

Yes because every single lawyer in the group is putting up consecutive 250+ months (some over that). General counsels are calling Kirkland partners and the partners are saying sorry, try someone else this time. (Not to very large clients of course.)

That is insane. But good on them, actually. Never thought I'd see the day where a firm would put their associates' wellbeing (if any is left after 250 hours) before more money.

If it had anything to do with wellbeing they would have started doing this 6 months ago when first years were running spac ipos, and before 40 percent of the firms capM lawyers quit. It's disgusting how they've treated associates, particularly juniors. Oh, and all these benefits are going to laterals, not the people putting up with this bullshit

[Anonymous User]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

Yes because every single lawyer in the group is putting up consecutive 250+ months (some over that). General counsels are calling Kirkland partners and the partners are saying sorry, try someone else this time. (Not to very large clients of course.)

That is insane. But good on them, actually. Never thought I'd see the day where a firm would put their associates' wellbeing (if any is left after 250 hours) before more money.

It's not about associate well being, it's about simply not having the capacity to take on the work. It either just wouldn't get done, or it would only get done with impermissible delays or compromises in quality.

It's weird to see people taken aback by this, because I've heard about this happening at various firms for a while. I've been hearing rumors going back years about Weil's BFR group turning down big debtor cases because they just couldn't staff them, large in part because of attrition.

? When would this have happened? I know the RX market well, no big shop was ever at a moment where they turned down big cases due to staffing.

[soft blue]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

Yes because every single lawyer in the group is putting up consecutive 250+ months (some over that). General counsels are calling Kirkland partners and the partners are saying sorry, try someone else this time. (Not to very large clients of course.)

That is insane. But good on them, actually. Never thought I'd see the day where a firm would put their associates' wellbeing (if any is left after 250 hours) before more money.

It's not about associate well being, it's about simply not having the capacity to take on the work. It either just wouldn't get done, or it would only get done with impermissible delays or compromises in quality.

It's weird to see people taken aback by this, because I've heard about this happening at various firms for a while. I've been hearing rumors going back years about Weil's BFR group turning down big debtor cases because they just couldn't staff them, large in part because of attrition.

? When would this have happened? I know the RX market well, no big shop was ever at a moment where they turned down big cases due to staffing.

After 2008. K&E really got run because while Weil was jammed on a few giant cases, they were able to run a mountain of mid-market cases and several significant ones that Weil (at that time) would have gotten, no question, if they had said yes.

[Anonymous User]

The signing bonuses for corp associates are also probably firm-specific. K&E’s M&A is having to turning down work because they don’t have enough associates and NSPs. Hence the high bonuses being mentioned in this thread.

No way K&E is ACTUALLY turning down work???? right???

Yes because every single lawyer in the group is putting up consecutive 250+ months (some over that). General counsels are calling Kirkland partners and the partners are saying sorry, try someone else this time. (Not to very large clients of course.)

That is insane. But good on them, actually. Never thought I'd see the day where a firm would put their associates' wellbeing (if any is left after 250 hours) before more money.

It's not about associate well being, it's about simply not having the capacity to take on the work. It either just wouldn't get done, or it would only get done with impermissible delays or compromises in quality.

It's weird to see people taken aback by this, because I've heard about this happening at various firms for a while. I've been hearing rumors going back years about Weil's BFR group turning down big debtor cases because they just couldn't staff them, large in part because of attrition.

? When would this have happened? I know the RX market well, no big shop was ever at a moment where they turned down big cases due to staffing.

After 2008. K&E really got run because while Weil was jammed on a few giant cases, they were able to run a mountain of mid-market cases and several significant ones that Weil (at that time) would have gotten, no question, if they had said yes.

I've seen firms and partners turn down work (even from big clients) every year I've been a lawyer. If you don't have the bodies you don't have the bodies. Taking on work you can't service appropriately is not a good long term strategy. It's like selling a car you know is broken.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone heard of antitrust laterals getting signing bonuses?

[Anonymous User]

Corporate midlevel that just received a lateral offer with no mention of a signing bonus. What do you think is a reasonable number to ask for?

[Anonymous User]

Corporate midlevel that just received a lateral offer with no mention of a signing bonus. What do you think is a reasonable number to ask for?

I think it depends on the firm. Is it a V25 or top AmLaw ranking? Is the offer from an office in a primary market? I think a safe number is $50k and a top would be $150k since it feels like the market is calming down.

I would ask for guaranteed special bonus and year-end bonus.

[taks7]

If anyone is interested in lateralling to a V30 in corporate departments and would like to split the referral bonus, DM me for details.