Kirkland Megathread Forum

[Anonymous User]

We should start/pin a Kirkland megathread. Any time a discussion about Kirkland starts, it should move immediately to that thread.

All things Kirkland related should go in this thread so we don't have to suffer through endless debates about Kirkland in unrelated threads.

[Anonymous User]

I really enjoy their high thread count sheets but I feel like their quality has been declining the past couple years. However, I'll still pick up a couple sets when they're on sale so I have spares in case I shit in my bed when I'm drunk.

DISCUSS

[Anonymous User]

I really enjoy their high thread count sheets but I feel like their quality has been declining the past couple years. However, I'll still pick up a couple sets when they're on sale so I have spares in case I shit in my bed when I'm drunk.

DISCUSS

Why do you shit in your bed

[Anonymous User]

I really enjoy their high thread count sheets but I feel like their quality has been declining the past couple years. However, I'll still pick up a couple sets when they're on sale so I have spares in case I shit in my bed when I'm drunk.

DISCUSS

Why do you shit in your bed

(guy who doesn't enjoy the routine pleasure of a good bed shit)

[Anonymous User]

I really enjoy their high thread count sheets but I feel like their quality has been declining the past couple years. However, I'll still pick up a couple sets when they're on sale so I have spares in case I shit in my bed when I'm drunk.

DISCUSS

Why do you shit in your bed

Because they are a K&E associate who fears going to work the next day. QED.

[Anonymous User]

The discussion about NSPs in the milbank raise thread has be concerned as a person with a vested interest in K&E.

Would someone be willing to share the difference in what they took home as a first year NSP and their last year as an associate without the NSP label?

[Anonymous User]

The discussion about NSPs in the milbank raise thread has be concerned as a person with a vested interest in K&E.

Would someone be willing to share the difference in what they took home as a first year NSP and their last year as an associate without the NSP label?

I posted actual numbers once a few months ago and got flamed so hard by KE apologists that I might have deleted them. I think my take home was around $20k less my first NSP year than it was my last associate year if I remember correctly.

[Anonymous User]

Is KE NSP lockstep pay or individual contracts?

[Anonymous User]

The discussion about NSPs in the milbank raise thread has be concerned as a person with a vested interest in K&E.

Would someone be willing to share the difference in what they took home as a first year NSP and their last year as an associate without the NSP label?

I posted actual numbers once a few months ago and got flamed so hard by KE apologists that I might have deleted them. I think my take home was around $20k less my first NSP year than it was my last associate year if I remember correctly.

This is the anon who thinks that amounts contributed to the tax-deferred retirement plan doesn't count as income to him.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone just lay out some numbers for a 1st year NSP? Like $400K salary, $xxK retirement contribution, $xxxK bonus and % you took home after taxes (and as compared to your 6th associate year)

[Anonymous User]

Can someone just lay out some numbers for a 1st year NSP? Like $400K salary, $xxK retirement contribution, $xxxK bonus and % you took home after taxes (and as compared to your 6th associate year)

KE 1st year NSP is paid just like a 7th year Cravath scale associate. KE 2nd year NSP is paid like an 8th year Cravath scale associate.

The bonus will be Cravath market bonus with a multiplier. The multiplier has gone down over time. At this point the smart assumption is the multiplier will be between 1.1-1.2x unless the Firm Committee / Comp. Committees do a major change in response to bad feedback from last year (doubt it). From that total bonus amount, they'll take about $20,000 (1st year NSP) or about $40,000 (2nd year NSP and beyond) and direct it into your 401k. You can calculate the exact amount by looking up 401k max contribution limits each year.

The combination of the bonus withholding into the 401k + paying out of state taxes + no social security subsidies + higher health insurance premiums (although they started subsidizing this a little a few years ago for junior NSPs) means that your all-in take-home pay from the firm may be higher as a 6th year senior associate than it will be as either a 7th year or 8th year NSP. This is especially so because of the multiplier compression; it was easier to "break out" as a junior NSP when the firm was doing 1.3x, 1.5x, 1.7x multipliers in prior years. (Oh, forgot this good one; you'll also have to route your tax return through the firm's preferred tax accounting firm, which entails a 2k+ bill every year.)

I'm as you can tell an NSP. I think I & most of my colleagues recognize that the whole NSP thing is sort of a racket. I don't know who came up with the brilliant idea back in the mists of time. I believe it gives the firm major tax benefits because the comp. is treated as partnership income rather than employee income and so it may have been a really smart move from a profitability perspective (e: but I'm not a tax attorney so maybe this is off base). NSPs are also huge profit centers for the firm.

[Anonymous User]

The discussion about NSPs in the milbank raise thread has be concerned as a person with a vested interest in K&E.

Would someone be willing to share the difference in what they took home as a first year NSP and their last year as an associate without the NSP label?

I posted actual numbers once a few months ago and got flamed so hard by KE apologists that I might have deleted them. I think my take home was around $20k less my first NSP year than it was my last associate year if I remember correctly.

This is the anon who thinks that amounts contributed to the tax-deferred retirement plan doesn't count as income to him.

No, I’m the anon who was specific about the NSP 401k contribution amount and was flamed for being too nit picky or something.

[Anonymous User]

The discussion about NSPs in the milbank raise thread has be concerned as a person with a vested interest in K&E.

Would someone be willing to share the difference in what they took home as a first year NSP and their last year as an associate without the NSP label?

I posted actual numbers once a few months ago and got flamed so hard by KE apologists that I might have deleted them. I think my take home was around $20k less my first NSP year than it was my last associate year if I remember correctly.

This is the anon who thinks that amounts contributed to the tax-deferred retirement plan doesn't count as income to him.

No, I’m the anon who was specific about the NSP 401k contribution amount and was flamed for being too nit picky or something.

To be specific, it's $38,500 for NSPs beyond 1st year this year.

[Lawsohard99]

This is an impossible exercise given special bonuses and every tax situation is different but my household effective tax rate went from 24% to 28% (when factoring in the bonus put into the 401k plan as comp for the specific year, otherwise it was around 29% tax rate) between 2019 and 2020. That being said gross comp also went up about 65k between those years. Ended up with about 28k more post tax (counting the 401k contribution as income) as an NSP than an associate in a year gross comp went up 65k.

[Anonymous User]

I'm all for monkey-cage-fight.gif KE on KE action, but I'm also curious about actual numbers. How did one NSP made more money than the previous year, and another made less, when there's lockstep comp and both face the same payroll taxes, HC etc? This isn't adding up. Can we get to the bottom of this with minimal name calling?

[Anonymous User]

Can someone just lay out some numbers for a 1st year NSP? Like $400K salary, $xxK retirement contribution, $xxxK bonus and % you took home after taxes (and as compared to your 6th associate year)

KE 1st year NSP is paid just like a 7th year Cravath scale associate. KE 2nd year NSP is paid like an 8th year Cravath scale associate.

The bonus will be Cravath market bonus with a multiplier. The multiplier has gone down over time. At this point the smart assumption is the multiplier will be between 1.1-1.2x unless the Firm Committee / Comp. Committees do a major change in response to bad feedback from last year (doubt it). From that total bonus amount, they'll take about $20,000 (1st year NSP) or about $40,000 (2nd year NSP and beyond) and direct it into your 401k. You can calculate the exact amount by looking up 401k max contribution limits each year.

The combination of the bonus withholding into the 401k + paying out of state taxes + no social security subsidies + higher health insurance premiums (although they started subsidizing this a little a few years ago for junior NSPs) means that your all-in take-home pay from the firm may be higher as a 6th year senior associate than it will be as either a 7th year or 8th year NSP. This is especially so because of the multiplier compression; it was easier to "break out" as a junior NSP when the firm was doing 1.3x, 1.5x, 1.7x multipliers in prior years. (Oh, forgot this good one; you'll also have to route your tax return through the firm's preferred tax accounting firm, which entails a 2k+ bill every year.)

I'm as you can tell an NSP. I think I & most of my colleagues recognize that the whole NSP thing is sort of a racket. I don't know who came up with the brilliant idea back in the mists of time. I believe it gives the firm major tax benefits because the comp. is treated as partnership income rather than employee income and so it may have been a really smart move from a profitability perspective. NSPs are also huge profit centers for the firm.

Thank you for this. Haven’t seen all this information in one place. What changes in year 9 (other than the chance to make shares)? Do salaries individualize or otherwise break away from the Cravath grid?

[Anonymous User]

I'm all for monkey-cage-fight.gif KE on KE action, but I'm also curious about actual numbers. How did one NSP made more money than the previous year, and another made less, when there's lockstep comp and both face the same payroll taxes, HC etc? This isn't adding up. Can we get to the bottom of this with minimal name calling?

There isn't lockstep comp; 6th year associate comp in particular can vary quite widely based on bonus multipler. Some 6th years will have high hours and get a 1 rating, resulting in a big bonus; others will have average hours and a 2 rating. (At least I think 6th years can still move along to NSP without getting a 1.) And even 1st year NSPs (i.e. 7th years) can have different comp based on hours even though the merit component will reset and so 7th years are likely to get a 3 merit rating no matter how good they are. Kirkland bonuses are a function of hours and merit rating along a grid.

So if I bill 2900 and get a 1 as a 6th year, and then the next year I bill 2000 and get a 3 as an NSP, my situation could look different than someone who bills 2000 and gets a 2 as a 6th year and then bills 2900 the next year as an NSP.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone just lay out some numbers for a 1st year NSP? Like $400K salary, $xxK retirement contribution, $xxxK bonus and % you took home after taxes (and as compared to your 6th associate year)

KE 1st year NSP is paid just like a 7th year Cravath scale associate. KE 2nd year NSP is paid like an 8th year Cravath scale associate.

The bonus will be Cravath market bonus with a multiplier. The multiplier has gone down over time. At this point the smart assumption is the multiplier will be between 1.1-1.2x unless the Firm Committee / Comp. Committees do a major change in response to bad feedback from last year (doubt it). From that total bonus amount, they'll take about $20,000 (1st year NSP) or about $40,000 (2nd year NSP and beyond) and direct it into your 401k. You can calculate the exact amount by looking up 401k max contribution limits each year.

The combination of the bonus withholding into the 401k + paying out of state taxes + no social security subsidies + higher health insurance premiums (although they started subsidizing this a little a few years ago for junior NSPs) means that your all-in take-home pay from the firm may be higher as a 6th year senior associate than it will be as either a 7th year or 8th year NSP. This is especially so because of the multiplier compression; it was easier to "break out" as a junior NSP when the firm was doing 1.3x, 1.5x, 1.7x multipliers in prior years. (Oh, forgot this good one; you'll also have to route your tax return through the firm's preferred tax accounting firm, which entails a 2k+ bill every year.)

I'm as you can tell an NSP. I think I & most of my colleagues recognize that the whole NSP thing is sort of a racket. I don't know who came up with the brilliant idea back in the mists of time. I believe it gives the firm major tax benefits because the comp. is treated as partnership income rather than employee income and so it may have been a really smart move from a profitability perspective. NSPs are also huge profit centers for the firm.

Thank you for this. Haven’t seen all this information in one place. What changes in year 9 (other than the chance to make shares)? Do salaries individualize or otherwise break away from the Cravath grid?

This is a mystery to all of us because there isn't an official firm policy. (To be fair, it's like this at most other biglaw firms too after your 8th year.) Interested to see how many people weigh in on this and start creating actual data. Broad brush, my impression is salaries continue to rise, albeit more slowly vs. your associate years, with the exception being if you're in a tiny minority where they are signaling to you that you're soon going to get shares (and there's less reason to do that now that technically you can get shares after your 9th year). Total ballpark but my feeling is, depending on what your trajectory is, you're getting raises somewhere between 5k-25k per year? But that's based on a sample size of like 4 conversations over several years so others may have a different impression.

I will say generally speaking there's this idea, somewhat by perpetuated by Kirkland itself, that NSPs are making crazy money versus our peers and it really isn't the case. I think junior associates think (or used to think) that being an NSP meant you were making, you know, a million bucks and just a step away from equity! lol Becoming an NSP and seeing the reality of it disabuses you of that notion very fast. There is some separation from market over time as your salary keeps going up but it takes time and isn't anything insane.

[Anonymous User]

Think I know the answer from above but as I consider lateraling in, it’d be a bad financial decision to ask for the NSP title a year early or to negotiate to be made NSP after 5 YOE instead of 6?

[Anonymous User]

Bottom line is this - even with the increased expenses and taxes, you will still make more as a 7th year (1st year NSP) than you did as a 6th year, assuming the bonus scale doesn't decrease due to market conditions. This is because your increase in base + bonus bracket is greater than the added taxes and expense.

The person who claimed to have made LESS as as 7th year than a 6th year either (1) received an outsize bonus as a 6th year which did not repeat in year 7 or (2) thinks that tax deferred compensation paid into a retirement account doesn't count as compensation (which is foolish).

[Anonymous User]

Bottom line is this - even with the increased expenses and taxes, you will still make more as a 7th year (1st year NSP) than you did as a 6th year, assuming the bonus scale doesn't decrease due to market conditions. This is because your increase in base + bonus bracket is greater than the added taxes and expense.

The person who claimed to have made LESS as as 7th year than a 6th year either (1) received an outsize bonus as a 6th year which did not repeat in year 7 or (2) thinks that tax deferred compensation paid into a retirement account doesn't count as compensation (which is foolish).

I've run the math and I made slightly less my 7th year vs. my 6th year, all-in (and that includes the half share they put in the bonus figure but goes right into the 401k; if you don't count that, it looks even worse obv). I think you're underestimating how badly you get hit on the combo of insurance + out of state taxes + no SS subsidy. Part of the issue is that by the time you're a 6th year, you're past the huge leaps in pay that you experience as a midlevel; it's not that much of an increase in base or bonus between 6th to 7th year all else equal.

I do agree it's extreme to claim that you'll make less as a 2nd year NSP (8th year) than you do as a 6th year associate--that's not right. But the point that's getting lost anyway from this discussion isn't so much the within-Kirkland comparison as the comparison versus other firms: our peers with an equivalent level of seniority are getting more each paycheck because they're not in an "NSP" structure where they're being paid on a K-1 and treated like partners (with all the downside and none of the upside).

[Anonymous User]

Bottom line is this - even with the increased expenses and taxes, you will still make more as a 7th year (1st year NSP) than you did as a 6th year, assuming the bonus scale doesn't decrease due to market conditions. This is because your increase in base + bonus bracket is greater than the added taxes and expense.

The person who claimed to have made LESS as as 7th year than a 6th year either (1) received an outsize bonus as a 6th year which did not repeat in year 7 or (2) thinks that tax deferred compensation paid into a retirement account doesn't count as compensation (which is foolish).

I've run the math and I made slightly less my 7th year vs. my 6th year, all-in (and that includes the half share they put in the bonus figure but goes right into the 401k; if you don't count that, it looks even worse obv). I think you're underestimating how badly you get hit on the combo of insurance + out of state taxes + no SS subsidy. Part of the issue is that by the time you're a 6th year, you're past the huge leaps in pay that you experience as a midlevel; it's not that much of an increase in base or bonus between 6th to 7th year all else equal.

I do agree it's extreme to claim that you'll make less as a 2nd year NSP (8th year) than you do as a 6th year associate--that's not right. But the point that's getting lost anyway from this discussion isn't so much the within-Kirkland comparison as the comparison versus other firms: our peers with an equivalent level of seniority are getting more each paycheck because they're not in an "NSP" structure where they're being paid on a K-1 and treated like partners (with all the downside and none of the upside).

EXACTLY THIS: But the point that's getting lost anyway from this discussion isn't so much the within-Kirkland comparison as the comparison versus other firms: our peers with an equivalent level of seniority are getting more each paycheck because they're not in an "NSP" structure where they're being paid on a K-1 and treated like partners (with all the downside and none of the upside).
__

On top of it, Sidley and other firms now also have better multipliers at 2300 hours and above.

[Anonymous User]

Bottom line is this - even with the increased expenses and taxes, you will still make more as a 7th year (1st year NSP) than you did as a 6th year, assuming the bonus scale doesn't decrease due to market conditions. This is because your increase in base + bonus bracket is greater than the added taxes and expense.

The person who claimed to have made LESS as as 7th year than a 6th year either (1) received an outsize bonus as a 6th year which did not repeat in year 7 or (2) thinks that tax deferred compensation paid into a retirement account doesn't count as compensation (which is foolish).

I've run the math and I made slightly less my 7th year vs. my 6th year, all-in (and that includes the half share they put in the bonus figure but goes right into the 401k; if you don't count that, it looks even worse obv). I think you're underestimating how badly you get hit on the combo of insurance + out of state taxes + no SS subsidy. Part of the issue is that by the time you're a 6th year, you're past the huge leaps in pay that you experience as a midlevel; it's not that much of an increase in base or bonus between 6th to 7th year all else equal.

I do agree it's extreme to claim that you'll make less as a 2nd year NSP (8th year) than you do as a 6th year associate--that's not right. But the point that's getting lost anyway from this discussion isn't so much the within-Kirkland comparison as the comparison versus other firms: our peers with an equivalent level of seniority are getting more each paycheck because they're not in an "NSP" structure where they're being paid on a K-1 and treated like partners (with all the downside and none of the upside).

EXACTLY THIS: But the point that's getting lost anyway from this discussion isn't so much the within-Kirkland comparison as the comparison versus other firms: our peers with an equivalent level of seniority are getting more each paycheck because they're not in an "NSP" structure where they're being paid on a K-1 and treated like partners (with all the downside and none of the upside).
__

On top of it, Sidley and other firms now also have better multipliers at 2300 hours and above.

I disagree with this take. It’s 20-25k base increase between years (before market movement) and if anything the bonus multipliers were disappointing last year but they don’t compress base the way other firms just put 2014+ in the same group (spoken from a 2013).

[Anonymous User]

I'll be in Kirkland's chicago office as a corporate summer this year. When do I have to choose a practice area?

And would anyone be willing to shed some light on their experience / impression of the corporate practice groups? I know that individual experiences are subjective but I'm still interested.

[Anonymous User]

Has the summer program in recent years (pre covid) been very structured?