2021 End of Year Bonuses Forum

[Anonymous User]

Cravath is about to get cucked by DPW.

[TigerIsBack]

2022 Vault Rankings:

1. Wachtell
2. DPW
3. Milbank
....
50. Mintz Levin
51. Cravath

[Anonymous User]

2022 Vault Rankings:

1. Wachtell
2. DPW
3. Milbank
....
50. Mintz Levin
51. Cravath

1. Wachtell
2. DPW
3. Milbank
4. STB/Willkie/Cooley
5. K&E + any other firm with variable bonuses above market
6. All the firms that match
....
50. Mintz Levin
51. S&C (for fucking over their summers last year)
52. Cravath

[Anonymous User]

2022 Vault Rankings:

1. Wachtell
2. DPW
3. Milbank
....
50. Mintz Levin
51. Cravath

1. Wachtell
2. DPW
3. Milbank
4. STB/Willkie/Cooley
5. K&E + any other firm with variable bonuses above market
6. All the firms that match
....
50. Mintz Levin
51. S&C (for fucking over their summers last year)
52. Cravath

999. Cadwalader

[Anonymous User]

2022 Vault Rankings:

1. Wachtell
2. DPW
3. Milbank
....
50. Mintz Levin
51. Cravath

1. Wachtell
2. DPW
3. Milbank
4. STB/Willkie/Cooley
5. K&E + any other firm with variable bonuses above market
6. All the firms that match
....
50. Mintz Levin
51. S&C (for fucking over their summers last year)
52. Cravath

999. Cadwalader

For docking base pay of many associates last year.

[Anonymous User]

999. Cadwalader

For docking base pay of many associates last year.

Wasn't that only for people who billed below 1400 hours or some other low number?

[Anonymous User]

Boies announced https://abovethelaw.com/2021/11/boies-match/

[Anonymous User]

Boies announced https://abovethelaw.com/2021/11/boies-match/

All their money for bonuses went to TTTheranos.

[Anonymous User]

Cravath what a joke it has become. They remind me of Baker Mckenzie.

[Anonymous User]

999. Cadwalader

For docking base pay of many associates last year.

Wasn't that only for people who billed below 1400 hours or some other low number?

And? Did any other firm do that? The target number (or the fact that a target existed at all) was also announced after the fact and the group that was most affected is extraordinarily busy this year.

[Anonymous User]

999. Cadwalader

For docking base pay of many associates last year.

Wasn't that only for people who billed below 1400 hours or some other low number?

When there's a downturn there's just not enough work for everyone to get hours. Penalizing people for not making hours by docking base pay is functionally equivalent to docking pay for economic downturn. It's okay for us to remember who did that.

[Anonymous User]

So reading the tea leaves . . . we might get a smattering of matches over the next couple days, but we should not expect a bump (if any is forthcoming) until next week after the holiday?

[Anonymous User]

People, pay more attention. Boies' announcement seems to include the release of spring and fall bonuses for 2022, I believe at the same scale as 2021, payable in May and November. That is the first indication we're getting that we're going to get at least a firm commitment of another spring/fall bonus round through this end of year bonus cycle.

[Anonymous User]

So reading the tea leaves . . . we might get a smattering of matches over the next couple days, but we should not expect a bump (if any is forthcoming) until next week after the holiday?

I feel like once the first announcement comes out then it's no holds barred. Meaning when you get beat announcements seems to happen somewhat randomly and more tied to the bureaucracy of the relevant firm than anything else. DPW might beat this evening for all we know. I don't think you can reliably say because it's Tuesday afternoon that this means a beat won't happen until next week.

[Anonymous User]

So reading the tea leaves . . . we might get a smattering of matches over the next couple days, but we should not expect a bump (if any is forthcoming) until next week after the holiday?

Chances of a bump this week are very very slim. Chance of a bump at all are sub 50%.

[Anonymous User]

People, pay more attention. Boies' announcement seems to include the release of spring and fall bonuses for 2022, I believe at the same scale as 2021, payable in May and November. That is the first indication we're getting that we're going to get at least a firm commitment of another spring/fall bonus round through this end of year bonus cycle.

The text of the Boies memo refers to the 2021 special bonuses that were announced in April 2021 and paid in May and November of 2021. No reference to 2022.

[Anonymous User]

People, pay more attention. Boies' announcement seems to include the release of spring and fall bonuses for 2022, I believe at the same scale as 2021, payable in May and November. That is the first indication we're getting that we're going to get at least a firm commitment of another spring/fall bonus round through this end of year bonus cycle.

No, that is incorrect. You're probably referring to the right-most column (labeled "Special Bonus") in the table/graphic reproduced in the ATL article? Those figures are just reminders of the 2021 special bonuses that BSF is paying, not any promise as to 2022 special bonuses.

If you read the full BSF memo (ATL article page two), it says: "The bonuses listed in the first three columns above are in addition to the 2021 special bonus we announced in April (listed in the last column), a portion of which was paid in May and the balance of which will be paid this month."

[almostperfectt]

People, pay more attention. Boies' announcement seems to include the release of spring and fall bonuses for 2022, I believe at the same scale as 2021, payable in May and November. That is the first indication we're getting that we're going to get at least a firm commitment of another spring/fall bonus round through this end of year bonus cycle.

The text of the Boies memo refers to the 2021 special bonuses that were announced in April 2021 and paid in May and November of 2021. No reference to 2022.

Hopefully that misreading gains steam and becomes $$$ in 2022 special bonuses

[Anonymous User]

People, pay more attention. Boies' announcement seems to include the release of spring and fall bonuses for 2022, I believe at the same scale as 2021, payable in May and November. That is the first indication we're getting that we're going to get at least a firm commitment of another spring/fall bonus round through this end of year bonus cycle.

No, that is incorrect. You're probably referring to the right-most column (labeled "Special Bonus") in the table/graphic reproduced in the ATL article? Those figures are just reminders of the 2021 special bonuses that BSF is paying, not any promise as to 2022 special bonuses.

If you read the full BSF memo (ATL article page two), it says: "The bonuses listed in the first three columns above are in addition to the 2021 special bonus we announced in April (listed in the last column), a portion of which was paid in May and the balance of which will be paid this month."

Haha what asses they are to do that. "Sorry we're sticking with the crappy Cravath scale but, hey, member when we paid you in the spring and fall." Sorry for the misread.

[Anonymous User]

People, pay more attention. Boies' announcement seems to include the release of spring and fall bonuses for 2022, I believe at the same scale as 2021, payable in May and November. That is the first indication we're getting that we're going to get at least a firm commitment of another spring/fall bonus round through this end of year bonus cycle.

No, that is incorrect. You're probably referring to the right-most column (labeled "Special Bonus") in the table/graphic reproduced in the ATL article? Those figures are just reminders of the 2021 special bonuses that BSF is paying, not any promise as to 2022 special bonuses.

If you read the full BSF memo (ATL article page two), it says: "The bonuses listed in the first three columns above are in addition to the 2021 special bonus we announced in April (listed in the last column), a portion of which was paid in May and the balance of which will be paid this month."

Haha what asses they are to do that. "Sorry we're sticking with the crappy Cravath scale but, hey, member when we paid you in the spring and fall." Sorry for the misread.

Also kind of odd to list it for the c/o 2021, who definitely didn't get the May one and I assume won't get the November one either

[abcdoremi]

999. Cadwalader

For docking base pay of many associates last year.

Wasn't that only for people who billed below 1400 hours or some other low number?

When there's a downturn there's just not enough work for everyone to get hours. Penalizing people for not making hours by docking base pay is functionally equivalent to docking pay for economic downturn. It's okay for us to remember who did that.

1000. Cleary
1001. Goodwin

At least CWT didn't engage in stealth layoffs like Cleary (its headcount is as low as it's been since the Great Recession), Goodwin, and others allegedly did. Honestly, much better to keep people on at a reduced salary than to fire them. And we all know that firms aren't charities and when things were slow a lot more firms than have been discussed here let people go rather than wait for things to pick back up, which is just one more reason besides attrition why firms are so fucked on headcount now.

[Anonymous User]

1000. Cleary
1001. Goodwin

At least CWT didn't engage in stealth layoffs like Cleary (its headcount is as low as it's been since the Great Recession), Goodwin, and others allegedly did. Honestly, much better to keep people on at a reduced salary than to fire them. And we all know that firms aren't charities and when things were slow a lot more firms than have been discussed here let people go rather than wait for things to pick back up, which is just one more reason besides attrition why firms are so fucked on headcount now.

To be clear: CWT did not keep people on as charity, but because they correctly assumed that the most affected groups would be busy again by late 2021/early 2022. There was also no dire financial need that necessitated these pay cuts (the firm had a fine 2020, even if it was down a bit in profitability from a record 2019). Many of the affected associates belong (or belonged) to one of CWT's historically busiest practice groups, and that group is in the middle of a record 2021.

Tying base pay to hours is such bullshit. It's completely counter to the concept of a salaried employee and the nature of our comp structure (which specifically ties only bonuses to hours, at least at CWT). Also worth mentioning that they didn't announce the decision to hours test backpay until after the most affected group was busy again.

Also let's not make excuses for CWT partners who still took down millions of dollars in 2020 on average.

[Anonymous User]

Cravath can suck and BSF is a tone-deaf clown adding in already paid out special bonuses. Just insulting. I’ve received three more “lateral with us” emails since 2:00… not sure why these firms think this is sufficient to keep people.

[lawanon9]

1000. Cleary
1001. Goodwin

At least CWT didn't engage in stealth layoffs like Cleary (its headcount is as low as it's been since the Great Recession), Goodwin, and others allegedly did. Honestly, much better to keep people on at a reduced salary than to fire them. And we all know that firms aren't charities and when things were slow a lot more firms than have been discussed here let people go rather than wait for things to pick back up, which is just one more reason besides attrition why firms are so fucked on headcount now.

To be clear: CWT did not keep people on as charity, but because they correctly assumed that the most affected groups would be busy again by late 2021/early 2022. There was also no dire financial need that necessitated these pay cuts (the firm had a fine 2020, even if it was down a bit in profitability from a record 2019). Many of the affected associates belong (or belonged) to one of CWT's historically busiest practice groups, and that group is in the middle of a record 2021.

Tying base pay to hours is such bullshit. It's completely counter to the concept of a salaried employee and the nature of our comp structure (which specifically ties only bonuses to hours, at least at CWT). Also worth mentioning that they didn't announce the decision to hours test backpay until after the most affected group was busy again.

Also let's not make excuses for CWT partners who still took down millions of dollars in 2020 on average.

I think the above point was that Cadwalader wasn't acting as a charity, but at least it didn't make the ill-advised decision to fire people like Cleary, Goodwin and many others did and have, including of course CWT in the last recession. They certainly deserve a demerit for it, just odd to single them out when there are firms that actually FIRED people and paid them a wage of $0 during a time of huge social and economic upheavel. Maybe single those firms out? The last lesson we should be teaching firms is that stealthing/firing is a more desirable and PR friendly move than cutting salaries.

I just looked through viewtopic.php?f=23&t=305466&start=150, and the firms that likely stealthed/should be ranked last, if you actually bother to rank and vault isn't dead lol, are Goodwin, Shearman, Reed Smith, Cleary, Ropes & Grey, Polsinelli, Hughes Hubbard, and Paul Hastings.

[Anonymous User]

Cadwalader just announced its matching the Cravath bonus scale