Just how brutal is Kirkland? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Got an offer from them for NY. Lots of pros to joining from my perspective: top tier PE (debt finance and fund side), restructuring, strong all-round corporate; free assignment system; everyone I've talked to has been smart and cordial; great bonuses.

That said, I've heard they have insanely high attrition rates, that the office environment is not very pleasant, and that the free assignment system can lead to cutthroat behavior and associates screwing each other over. Does anyone have any experience with their NY office and the free assignment system?

[Anonymous User]

It's overplayed because in this world of dozens of firms that are all very similar, any small difference will get magnified for people to latch on to as differentiators. Kirkland associates will generally bill a bit more than most peer firms, but not always, and on the whole not by very much. (And accordingly, Kirkland associates will get a bit more $$$ at year-end than most peers at other firms). Kirkland probably attracts some stronger-willed, Type A associates based on its reputation, but those folks are all over biglaw, and there are plenty of people here (I'm at KE btw) who aren't like that.

Basically, the job is pretty rough most of the time and absolutely brutal some of the time no matter where you go - you have a slightly higher chance of it being awful if you choose Kirkland over Insert V10 here, but it's certainly not a unique hellhole when compared to its peers.

[Anonymous User]

It's overplayed because in this world of dozens of firms that are all very similar, any small difference will get magnified for people to latch on to as differentiators. Kirkland associates will generally bill a bit more than most peer firms, but not always, and on the whole not by very much. (And accordingly, Kirkland associates will get a bit more $$$ at year-end than most peers at other firms). Kirkland probably attracts some stronger-willed, Type A associates based on its reputation, but those folks are all over biglaw, and there are plenty of people here (I'm at KE btw) who aren't like that.

Basically, the job is pretty rough most of the time and absolutely brutal some of the time no matter where you go - you have a slightly higher chance of it being awful if you choose Kirkland over Insert V10 here, but it's certainly not a unique hellhole when compared to its peers.

OP here. It's not the average billing that worries me. Biglaw implies shitty hours, that's a given.

It's primarily the idea that you can have summers and juniors trying to one-up one another, which seems like it would be a natural consequence of KE's free-market system. While it's true most of the above criticisms could apply to any V10, Kirkland's assignment system is pretty particular to it.

[Dcc617]

People generally aren’t competing. However, people will strive to be perfect even when it doesn’t matter. And there’s the general sentiment that Kirkland is never allowed to be the hold up on any deal because “we’re Kirkland.” So if there’s a .1% chance a deal will close way ahead of schedule you better believe Kirkland is pushing hard as hell to be prepared for that hypothetical close.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. It's not the average billing that worries me. Biglaw implies shitty hours, that's a given.

It's primarily the idea that you can have summers and juniors trying to one-up one another, which seems like it would be a natural consequence of KE's free-market system. While it's true most of the above criticisms could apply to any V10, Kirkland's assignment system is pretty particular to it.

This was never my experience at KE. Trying to one-up someone you work with would be so weird.

[Anonymous User]

People aren't competing. The competition, if any, only *begins* at the very senior associate level, when you're being evaluated on where (i.e., which clients) management wants to slot you into, and even then, I've never seen anybody actively seeking to screw someone else. This dictates whether or not you'll be awarded shares after your time as an NSP is done. The "up or out" motto is real, but it doesn't lead to backstabbing or hyper competitive behavior. Indeed brutal (TTM north of 3500 hours), but I understand that number is very rare - 2,400 is more than enough to protect your job. There is literally zero competition as a summer and no competition as a junior, so whoever you heard that from is severely misguided. Open assignment system is fantastic - work for who you want, when you want and how you want. Don't be scared to work hard.

[Anonymous User]

2400 hours to just protect your job sounds absolutely beyond brutal

[Ultramar vistas]

2400 hours to just protect your job sounds absolutely beyond brutal

And nonsense. 2000 will “protect your job”, for as long as it matters.

[Anonymous User]

2400 hours to just protect your job sounds absolutely beyond brutal

It's also completely untrue. I've been at K&E for 9 years and many years I've billed under 2000. In fact, I have never received a less-than-market bonus so far.

[Buglaw]

People aren't competing. The competition, if any, only *begins* at the very senior associate level, when you're being evaluated on where (i.e., which clients) management wants to slot you into, and even then, I've never seen anybody actively seeking to screw someone else. This dictates whether or not you'll be awarded shares after your time as an NSP is done. The "up or out" motto is real, but it doesn't lead to backstabbing or hyper competitive behavior. Indeed brutal (TTM north of 3500 hours), but I understand that number is very rare - 2,400 is more than enough to protect your job. There is literally zero competition as a summer and no competition as a junior, so whoever you heard that from is severely misguided. Open assignment system is fantastic - work for who you want, when you want and how you want. Don't be scared to work hard.

2400 to remain employed is brutal. That's the highest to remain employed number I am aware of. 3500 is insane. I worked in v10 for about 5 years and saw yearly hours reports and I don't think anyone billed 3500 in those 5 years. So this sounds truly terrible and much worse than other firms.

As to the fact it's only a few more hours, all of those hours are awful. They all take place after 10:00 at night or on the weekends. Hours get exponentially more painful as they increase. Every hour over 2k hurts more than hours under 2k. Every hour over 2200 is MUCH worse than every hour over 2k. Every hour over 2400 is WAYYYY worse than every hour over 2200, etc. It doesn't sound that bad until you've experienced the reality of 3 all nighters in a row, or sleeping less than 15 hours in a week. Once you do, you'll realize how terrible it is to do that even one more time in a year. Everything about the above post makes me think Kirkland is just as terrible as everything I've heard.

[Anonymous User]

Got an offer from them for NY. Lots of pros to joining from my perspective: top tier PE (debt finance and fund side), restructuring, strong all-round corporate; free assignment system; everyone I've talked to has been smart and cordial; great bonuses.

That said, I've heard they have insanely high attrition rates, that the office environment is not very pleasant, and that the free assignment system can lead to cutthroat behavior and associates screwing each other over. Does anyone have any experience with their NY office and the free assignment system?

(1) High attrition rates? Kirkland is up or out. No deniability here for anyone at Kirkland. That's the business model. They pull in as many bodies as they can and wait for those bodies to whittle themselves down on autopilot before deciding who to invest in across an associate class.

Hire 50 in a group, 10ish will leave before the first year is out, then decide from the 40 left who will be a worthy associate for investment vs. hiring based on your team's needs for concrete/existing positions. This is why the competition is so bad, even if you have a job if your group is slow you're still going to be competing to keep it.

If they don't pick you then you'll more or less stagnate in your career unless you're willing to switch directions. You should know which you are relatively quickly based on your reaction to other firm-dependent variables that you've listed.

(2) free assignment system is plus/negative; plus is that you can turn down work from NSPs and partners that have made your life miserable.

The negative is that the onus is on junior staffing to say no and to basically fire bad NSPs for the firm by collectively refusing to work with them. Negative: It goes out the window pretty quickly if you're being forced staffed to a busy group with an NSP or partner juniors absolutely refuse to work for.

Plus, the idea that it will help you, likely going to be a hybrid virtual first-year, define your career is bullshit for the most part unless you are the type to hunt down every assignment and go the extra mile just to get work in a slower group. Very, very easy to fall through the cracks and be assigned nothing for substantial stretches of time which can make it hard to reach the unofficial 1900 hours target. Not so much a problem if your group is busy like M&A/P&E right now. OAS is nice in person, online it's very difficult to manage as an incoming associate from what I have seen.

(3) strong all-around corporate? If you can stomach corporate, just join M&A. Unless you have a niche group that you have a strong reason to pursue at Kirkland it will probably not be worth it to join outside of the juggernaut practice. Personalities tend to be so-so outside of funds/exec comp (have heard that's where the nice people live).

(4) People are nice? I mean they're nice enough. Everyone is young and pretty and easy to talk to. The entire feel of the place is "entrepreneurial" which is very true in some senses. You're probably not going to get cussed out very often at Kirkland as it wouldn't be very on-brand. But, there are other ways to be unkind or passive-aggressive. Everyone will universally warn you to "be careful about emails," because it's common practice for people to forward them or share them. It's an extremely gossip-ey place with some groups (litigation/restructuring) being worse than others for it (funds, M&A due to sheer volume of work and size of teams).

The description "cutthroat" is accurate. It's a function of two things: (a) scarce partners -- at Kirkland the model is built off of you ingratiating yourself to a partner ASAP so you can be protected from the bad aspects of being out for yourself at a 2,500 person firm, which the OAS basically guarantees will result to any incoming associate that doesn't have good connections, made a connection with a partner who then left the firm etc., etc.; (b) scarce work throughout various groups -- not only are people competing to work for the best partners they want to work for the best partners on the best deals and have no qualms with bad behavior to get there.

(5) The person who said there is zero competition is half-true. There isn't a lot of competition between lateral associates. For instance, first-years don't really compete with first-years because they're all afraid. But, what you have to consider is how juniors all substantively do the same work. If you have three second years who do okay work, and three first-years who do better work, the second years will be passed over for the next assignments. That's fine if based on meritocracy, I suppose maybe not everyone's cup of tea but fine, but nevertheless that environment encourages competition between people who are barely your senior and the more junior team members. I know it's true because I experienced it. Everyone competes at Kirkland. If you join be ready for that.

If you want more info we can find an anon way to connect. Good luck!

[Anonymous User]

(1) High attrition rates? Kirkland is up or out. No deniability here for anyone at Kirkland. That's the business model. They pull in as many bodies as they can and wait for those bodies to whittle themselves down on autopilot before deciding who to invest in across an associate class.

Hire 50 in a group, 10ish will leave before the first year is out, then decide from the 40 left who will be a worthy associate for investment vs. hiring based on your team's needs for concrete/existing positions. This is why the competition is so bad, even if you have a job if your group is slow you're still going to be competing to keep it.

If they don't pick you then you'll more or less stagnate in your career unless you're willing to switch directions. You should know which you are relatively quickly based on your reaction to other firm-dependent variables that you've listed.

(2) free assignment system is plus/negative; plus is that you can turn down work from NSPs and partners that have made your life miserable.

The negative is that the onus is on junior staffing to say no and to basically fire bad NSPs for the firm by collectively refusing to work with them. Negative: It goes out the window pretty quickly if you're being forced staffed to a busy group with an NSP or partner juniors absolutely refuse to work for.

Plus, the idea that it will help you, likely going to be a hybrid virtual first-year, define your career is bullshit for the most part unless you are the type to hunt down every assignment and go the extra mile just to get work in a slower group. Very, very easy to fall through the cracks and be assigned nothing for substantial stretches of time which can make it hard to reach the unofficial 1900 hours target. Not so much a problem if your group is busy like M&A/P&E right now. OAS is nice in person, online it's very difficult to manage as an incoming associate from what I have seen.

(3) strong all-around corporate? If you can stomach corporate, just join M&A. Unless you have a niche group that you have a strong reason to pursue at Kirkland it will probably not be worth it to join outside of the juggernaut practice. Personalities tend to be so-so outside of funds/exec comp (have heard that's where the nice people live).

(4) People are nice? I mean they're nice enough. Everyone is young and pretty and easy to talk to. The entire feel of the place is "entrepreneurial" which is very true in some senses. You're probably not going to get cussed out very often at Kirkland as it wouldn't be very on-brand. But, there are other ways to be unkind or passive-aggressive. Everyone will universally warn you to "be careful about emails," because it's common practice for people to forward them or share them. It's an extremely gossip-ey place with some groups (litigation/restructuring) being worse than others for it (funds, M&A due to sheer volume of work and size of teams).

The description "cutthroat" is accurate. It's a function of two things: (a) scarce partners -- at Kirkland the model is built off of you ingratiating yourself to a partner ASAP so you can be protected from the bad aspects of being out for yourself at a 2,500 person firm, which the OAS basically guarantees will result to any incoming associate that doesn't have good connections, made a connection with a partner who then left the firm etc., etc.; (b) scarce work throughout various groups -- not only are people competing to work for the best partners they want to work for the best partners on the best deals and have no qualms with bad behavior to get there.

(5) The person who said there is zero competition is half-true. There isn't a lot of competition between lateral associates. For instance, first-years don't really compete with first-years because they're all afraid. But, what you have to consider is how juniors all substantively do the same work. If you have three second years who do okay work, and three first-years who do better work, the second years will be passed over for the next assignments. That's fine if based on meritocracy, I suppose maybe not everyone's cup of tea but fine, but nevertheless that environment encourages competition between people who are barely your senior and the more junior team members. I know it's true because I experienced it. Everyone competes at Kirkland. If you join be ready for that.

If you want more info we can find an anon way to connect. Good luck!

I am happy this environment exists for people who thrive in it, but that's gonna be a no from me, dawg.

[Anonymous User]

(1) High attrition rates? Kirkland is up or out. No deniability here for anyone at Kirkland. That's the business model. They pull in as many bodies as they can and wait for those bodies to whittle themselves down on autopilot before deciding who to invest in across an associate class.

Hire 50 in a group, 10ish will leave before the first year is out, then decide from the 40 left who will be a worthy associate for investment vs. hiring based on your team's needs for concrete/existing positions. This is why the competition is so bad, even if you have a job if your group is slow you're still going to be competing to keep it.

If they don't pick you then you'll more or less stagnate in your career unless you're willing to switch directions. You should know which you are relatively quickly based on your reaction to other firm-dependent variables that you've listed.

(2) free assignment system is plus/negative; plus is that you can turn down work from NSPs and partners that have made your life miserable.

The negative is that the onus is on junior staffing to say no and to basically fire bad NSPs for the firm by collectively refusing to work with them. Negative: It goes out the window pretty quickly if you're being forced staffed to a busy group with an NSP or partner juniors absolutely refuse to work for.

Plus, the idea that it will help you, likely going to be a hybrid virtual first-year, define your career is bullshit for the most part unless you are the type to hunt down every assignment and go the extra mile just to get work in a slower group. Very, very easy to fall through the cracks and be assigned nothing for substantial stretches of time which can make it hard to reach the unofficial 1900 hours target. Not so much a problem if your group is busy like M&A/P&E right now. OAS is nice in person, online it's very difficult to manage as an incoming associate from what I have seen.

(3) strong all-around corporate? If you can stomach corporate, just join M&A. Unless you have a niche group that you have a strong reason to pursue at Kirkland it will probably not be worth it to join outside of the juggernaut practice. Personalities tend to be so-so outside of funds/exec comp (have heard that's where the nice people live).

(4) People are nice? I mean they're nice enough. Everyone is young and pretty and easy to talk to. The entire feel of the place is "entrepreneurial" which is very true in some senses. You're probably not going to get cussed out very often at Kirkland as it wouldn't be very on-brand. But, there are other ways to be unkind or passive-aggressive. Everyone will universally warn you to "be careful about emails," because it's common practice for people to forward them or share them. It's an extremely gossip-ey place with some groups (litigation/restructuring) being worse than others for it (funds, M&A due to sheer volume of work and size of teams).

The description "cutthroat" is accurate. It's a function of two things: (a) scarce partners -- at Kirkland the model is built off of you ingratiating yourself to a partner ASAP so you can be protected from the bad aspects of being out for yourself at a 2,500 person firm, which the OAS basically guarantees will result to any incoming associate that doesn't have good connections, made a connection with a partner who then left the firm etc., etc.; (b) scarce work throughout various groups -- not only are people competing to work for the best partners they want to work for the best partners on the best deals and have no qualms with bad behavior to get there.

(5) The person who said there is zero competition is half-true. There isn't a lot of competition between lateral associates. For instance, first-years don't really compete with first-years because they're all afraid. But, what you have to consider is how juniors all substantively do the same work. If you have three second years who do okay work, and three first-years who do better work, the second years will be passed over for the next assignments. That's fine if based on meritocracy, I suppose maybe not everyone's cup of tea but fine, but nevertheless that environment encourages competition between people who are barely your senior and the more junior team members. I know it's true because I experienced it. Everyone competes at Kirkland. If you join be ready for that.

If you want more info we can find an anon way to connect. Good luck!

I am happy this environment exists for people who thrive in it, but that's gonna be a no from me, dawg.

Not at K&E, but I have a lot of friends at K&E NY and this has not been their experience whatsoever lol. From what I can gather, it's just a terribly incohesive mess, meaning that you don't get a lot of support as a junior because the firm is too disorganized to have proper precedents/know-how/etc. This is what leads to sink-or-swim because some people are better at learning on their own while others need more top-down guidance.

OP makes it sound like it's an all out war to the top where the best path forward is to get in the good graces of the local warlord (partner) lol

[Ultramar vistas]

Thread is so funny as a Kirkland associate because there are so many valid reasons to shit on K&E, of which none are named above.

Disorganized mess? Our precedent aggregation and post-deal questionnaire system mean we probably have one of the most organized and easy to search precedent libraries out there. Just wildly untrue. There’s constant trainings on how to use the support systems (I know because the calendar invites incite internal rage at this point) so if you can’t be bothered to attend one, that’s on you.

[Prudent_Jurist]

https://abovethelaw.com/2021/08/the-chu ... glaw-firm/

[Anonymous User]

(1) High attrition rates? Kirkland is up or out. No deniability here for anyone at Kirkland. That's the business model. They pull in as many bodies as they can and wait for those bodies to whittle themselves down on autopilot before deciding who to invest in across an associate class.

Hire 50 in a group, 10ish will leave before the first year is out, then decide from the 40 left who will be a worthy associate for investment vs. hiring based on your team's needs for concrete/existing positions. This is why the competition is so bad, even if you have a job if your group is slow you're still going to be competing to keep it.

If they don't pick you then you'll more or less stagnate in your career unless you're willing to switch directions. You should know which you are relatively quickly based on your reaction to other firm-dependent variables that you've listed.

(2) free assignment system is plus/negative; plus is that you can turn down work from NSPs and partners that have made your life miserable.

The negative is that the onus is on junior staffing to say no and to basically fire bad NSPs for the firm by collectively refusing to work with them. Negative: It goes out the window pretty quickly if you're being forced staffed to a busy group with an NSP or partner juniors absolutely refuse to work for.

Plus, the idea that it will help you, likely going to be a hybrid virtual first-year, define your career is bullshit for the most part unless you are the type to hunt down every assignment and go the extra mile just to get work in a slower group. Very, very easy to fall through the cracks and be assigned nothing for substantial stretches of time which can make it hard to reach the unofficial 1900 hours target. Not so much a problem if your group is busy like M&A/P&E right now. OAS is nice in person, online it's very difficult to manage as an incoming associate from what I have seen.

(3) strong all-around corporate? If you can stomach corporate, just join M&A. Unless you have a niche group that you have a strong reason to pursue at Kirkland it will probably not be worth it to join outside of the juggernaut practice. Personalities tend to be so-so outside of funds/exec comp (have heard that's where the nice people live).

(4) People are nice? I mean they're nice enough. Everyone is young and pretty and easy to talk to. The entire feel of the place is "entrepreneurial" which is very true in some senses. You're probably not going to get cussed out very often at Kirkland as it wouldn't be very on-brand. But, there are other ways to be unkind or passive-aggressive. Everyone will universally warn you to "be careful about emails," because it's common practice for people to forward them or share them. It's an extremely gossip-ey place with some groups (litigation/restructuring) being worse than others for it (funds, M&A due to sheer volume of work and size of teams).

The description "cutthroat" is accurate. It's a function of two things: (a) scarce partners -- at Kirkland the model is built off of you ingratiating yourself to a partner ASAP so you can be protected from the bad aspects of being out for yourself at a 2,500 person firm, which the OAS basically guarantees will result to any incoming associate that doesn't have good connections, made a connection with a partner who then left the firm etc., etc.; (b) scarce work throughout various groups -- not only are people competing to work for the best partners they want to work for the best partners on the best deals and have no qualms with bad behavior to get there.

(5) The person who said there is zero competition is half-true. There isn't a lot of competition between lateral associates. For instance, first-years don't really compete with first-years because they're all afraid. But, what you have to consider is how juniors all substantively do the same work. If you have three second years who do okay work, and three first-years who do better work, the second years will be passed over for the next assignments. That's fine if based on meritocracy, I suppose maybe not everyone's cup of tea but fine, but nevertheless that environment encourages competition between people who are barely your senior and the more junior team members. I know it's true because I experienced it. Everyone competes at Kirkland. If you join be ready for that.

If you want more info we can find an anon way to connect. Good luck!

I am happy this environment exists for people who thrive in it, but that's gonna be a no from me, dawg.

I’m at KE and this is pretty much nothing like my experience. Same with the 2400 to protect your job thing lol. It’s biglaw so it sucks but it’s basically like any other shop and we get a little premium on our bonus at the end of the year, so that’s nice. I had a slow year of around 1800 hours and I received an above market bonus and the reviewing partners took responsibility in my review for not bringing in more work to engage me. That is also probably not par for the course at KE but I appreciated it all the same.

[Anonymous User]

Thread is so funny as a Kirkland associate because there are so many valid reasons to shit on K&E, of which none are named above.

Disorganized mess? Our precedent aggregation and post-deal questionnaire system mean we probably have one of the most organized and easy to search precedent libraries out there. Just wildly untrue. There’s constant trainings on how to use the support systems (I know because the calendar invites incite internal rage at this point) so if you can’t be bothered to attend one, that’s on you.

Fair - I'm just an outsider looking in and that's what I've gathered from my friends in the NY office. I thought I was defending you guys from that other K&E associate that described the entire place as a toxic shitshow where you need to ingratiate yourself with a powerful partner or be pushed out lol

[Anonymous User]

Curious is this the same for Kirkland dc?

[Anonymous User]

Lots of mixed messages here, although it seems all the people actually at KE don't agree with the general reputation... Just an observation.

[Anonymous User]

Lots of mixed messages here, although it seems all the people actually at KE don't agree with the general reputation... Just an observation.

This is the issue...maybe 10% of people with opinions on KE actually work/worked there. Lots of TLS is just parroting the same stuff that's been passed down from a decade+ ago. There are KE associates on both sides of the argument, which just goes to show that one's experience at KE is largely partner-dependent, practice-dependent, and/or office-dependent. Wait, that's every firm.

Regardless, it's no secret that people at KE work a lot. The question is whether or not it's notably worse than any other large firm (especially in NY). I really don't think it is...

Also for those spouting anecdotal evidence from your friends/acquaintances, pretty sure everyone commiserates with one another when they meet up for food/drinks, one-upping their misery like it's some form of oppression olympics. Might be hyperbolic, might not.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

I’ve heard that the competitiveness and insane pay disparities are what make Kirkland so brutal. The income partner thread cites a non-equity partner at Kirkland making $400k which is less than a senior associate at a lockstep firm. The biggest rainmakers are making 8 figures. I’ve worked in big law NYC for six years and I would not want to work in that kind of environment.

[eastcoast_iub]

Why should people not be rewarded according to their worth?

Why should a rainmaker be making the same as a service partner?

The model speaks for itself, K&E has stolen many a top performer from firms with a flatter equity payout structure.

[Anonymous User]

You need to make 15 calls to even staff a 1-3rd year associate on a deal right now, so lol at the notion that there is some sort of cutthroat competition among associates for work.

[Ultramar vistas]

I’ve heard that the competitiveness and insane pay disparities are what make Kirkland so brutal. The income partner thread cites a non-equity partner at Kirkland making $400k which is less than a senior associate at a lockstep firm. The biggest rainmakers are making 8 figures. I’ve worked in big law NYC for six years and I would not want to work in that kind of environment.

NSPs make lockstep at minimum. Check the data behind that thread - I did. It’s coming from self-reported financials from people going into the Trump administration, and required them to cite their income that year. Did not appear to include bonus in their self reporting, because I can absolutely 100% guarantee you right now that no NSP at Kirkland is making less than lockstep base + bonus, which is more than $400k.

If Kirkland has an especially bad culture (it doesn’t), it has no more to do with pay disparities than that factor has to do with poor culture across biglaw generally these days because FYI, the majority of firms now have a two tier system. Kind of bored of hearing that K&E’s system is special or different because that hasn’t been the case for a decade now.

If there’s a difference in approaches, it’s that K&E’s system is transparent (7th year associates are NSPs, and the process to get equity is as difficult as it is to get a $2.2m salary at any other job), and other firms still have an element of black box to getting even NSP. We can debate the merits of either approach but not a single 7th or 8th year is mad about not making millions of dollars because that’s not in the cards anywhere; and it’s never been in the cards. Are there some hardworking 10th year NSPs that deserve equity but aren’t getting it, and are mad about that? No doubt, that is the story of biglaw for time immemorial, but if you think that directly contributes to poor culture then you have a weird understanding of office culture generally.

[Anonymous User]

I’ve heard that the competitiveness and insane pay disparities are what make Kirkland so brutal. The income partner thread cites a non-equity partner at Kirkland making $400k which is less than a senior associate at a lockstep firm. The biggest rainmakers are making 8 figures. I’ve worked in big law NYC for six years and I would not want to work in that kind of environment.

I see this was already covered and the $400k figure is incorrect but, just for clarity, you make non-equity partner at Kirkland as a 7th year. I have colleagues who intend to stay that long because they view the title as more portable on the in-house market than "Senior Associate" from their class peers at other firms would be. Externally, Kirkland doesn't distinguish between non-equity partner and the big ones; there are C/O 2015s who are a few months away from having the same external title as the very most senior rainmakers at the firm. And they like that.