Firms that pay stub bonuses? Forum

[theneuro]

Does anyone know which firms pay stub bonuses? Especially boutiques—Susman or Hueston Hennigan?

Not making my firm decision based on this, but it’s a factor to consider on the margins!

[Anonymous User]

Susman does.

[ChickenSalad]

I can’t imagine how a prorated bonus would make a difference even on the margins.

The second year bonus is like 15k. Even if a firm offers a stub bonus and even if it’s the same for first years, prorated it’s like 3k before taxes. Are you picking a firm based on that?

If you can get an offer from somewhere like Susman, I’d take it but that isn’t the reason why

[theneuro]

I can’t imagine how a prorated bonus would make a difference even on the margins.

The second year bonus is like 15k. Even if a firm offers a stub bonus and even if it’s the same for first years, prorated it’s like 3k before taxes. Are you picking a firm based on that?

If you can get an offer from somewhere like Susman, I’d take it but that isn’t the reason why

No. For me, assuming a median bonus, we are talking about more like $25,000.

[Moneytrees]

Does anyone know which firms pay stub bonuses? Especially boutiques—Susman or Hueston Hennigan?

Not making my firm decision based on this, but it’s a factor to consider on the margins!

It should not play any factor in your decision-making, not even at the margins.

[Anonymous User]

STB does - but agree that it is pretty meager after taxes and prorated.

[Anonymizer]

Agree with others. Seems odd to base your decision on stub year bonus. Any number of factors are prob more pertinent to your early-/mid-term success (e.g., attorney responsiveness, library resources, location). If 25k is enough to move you to one shop or another, you might consider taking a closer look.

[Sackboy]

The person saying $25k must have misunderstood this thread. No firm is giving out $25k bonuses to attorneys who have been practicing for 2-3 months.

[glitched]

I assume OP means pro-rated bonuses for laterals. Most firms pay pro-rated or even full bonuses, but should be confirmed in writing prior to starting.

[Anonymous User]

I assume OP means pro-rated bonuses for laterals. Most firms pay pro-rated or even full bonuses, but should be confirmed in writing prior to starting.

Yes, my pre-clerkships firm certainly paid 1/4 of the year-end bonus--which was significant for people who had done several clerkships--to new starts who'd been there for three months.

[ChickenSalad]

I can’t imagine how a prorated bonus would make a difference even on the margins.

The second year bonus is like 15k. Even if a firm offers a stub bonus and even if it’s the same for first years, prorated it’s like 3k before taxes. Are you picking a firm based on that?

If you can get an offer from somewhere like Susman, I’d take it but that isn’t the reason why

No. For me, assuming a median bonus, we are talking about more like $25,000.

One of two things is going on here.

A. You mean “stub year” to mean what it actually does— first year attorneys who start around Oct 1 give or take depending on the firm. In that case, a 15k (or even 25k) bonus is prorated and you’d be getting 1/4 of that before taxes. So 4-5k pre-tax.

B. You mean “stub year” to mean a lateral of any year who joins mid year. I don’t understand why you’d mean this but sure if you’re, say, a 4th year joining in June you’d get a prorated bonus at the end of the year. So I dunno, ~25k pretax?

If you mean A, then very few firms offer a prorated bonus to lawyers who have been practicing for three months. Even if they do, it would be 5k-ish before tax. So not relevant to choosing firms

If you mean B, then yeah every firm does that. You’d get a prorated bonus. Which is why it shouldn’t factor into your decision about choosing between law firms

I suspect you are ignoring what “prorated” means

[theneuro]

I can’t imagine how a prorated bonus would make a difference even on the margins.

The second year bonus is like 15k. Even if a firm offers a stub bonus and even if it’s the same for first years, prorated it’s like 3k before taxes. Are you picking a firm based on that?

If you can get an offer from somewhere like Susman, I’d take it but that isn’t the reason why

No. For me, assuming a median bonus, we are talking about more like $25,000.

One of two things is going on here.

A. You mean “stub year” to mean what it actually does— first year attorneys who start around Oct 1 give or take depending on the firm. In that case, a 15k (or even 25k) bonus is prorated and you’d be getting 1/4 of that before taxes. So 4-5k pre-tax.

B. You mean “stub year” to mean a lateral of any year who joins mid year. I don’t understand why you’d mean this but sure if you’re, say, a 4th year joining in June you’d get a prorated bonus at the end of the year. So I dunno, ~25k pretax?

If you mean A, then very few firms offer a prorated bonus to lawyers who have been practicing for three months. Even if they do, it would be 5k-ish before tax. So not relevant to choosing firms

If you mean B, then yeah every firm does that. You’d get a prorated bonus. Which is why it shouldn’t factor into your decision about choosing between law firms

I suspect you are ignoring what “prorated” means

Ah, I thought “stub year” meant the year where you start at a firm with all your fellow new associates. So at a litigation boutique, where the bulk of those in the new class of associates starting that year are coming off clerkships, I thought that “stub year” meant the first year at the firm—where you’re at the firm for only three months along with everyone else in your “starting class.” Is that not a stub year?

[Bosque]

Does anyone know which firms pay stub bonuses? Especially boutiques—Susman or Hueston Hennigan?

Not making my firm decision based on this, but it’s a factor to consider on the margins!

I’ve found that firms who do things like this (stub year bonus, extra 5k starting salary to “beat market,” ect) are usually doing it to compensate for some competitive disadvantage in later years. So you make a little more as a first year, but at fifth you are 40k behind market (or something like that).

Not universal, but I’d look carefully before assuming it’s 100% a good thing.

[Bosque]

I can’t imagine how a prorated bonus would make a difference even on the margins.

The second year bonus is like 15k. Even if a firm offers a stub bonus and even if it’s the same for first years, prorated it’s like 3k before taxes. Are you picking a firm based on that?

If you can get an offer from somewhere like Susman, I’d take it but that isn’t the reason why

No. For me, assuming a median bonus, we are talking about more like $25,000.

One of two things is going on here.

A. You mean “stub year” to mean what it actually does— first year attorneys who start around Oct 1 give or take depending on the firm. In that case, a 15k (or even 25k) bonus is prorated and you’d be getting 1/4 of that before taxes. So 4-5k pre-tax.

B. You mean “stub year” to mean a lateral of any year who joins mid year. I don’t understand why you’d mean this but sure if you’re, say, a 4th year joining in June you’d get a prorated bonus at the end of the year. So I dunno, ~25k pretax?

If you mean A, then very few firms offer a prorated bonus to lawyers who have been practicing for three months. Even if they do, it would be 5k-ish before tax. So not relevant to choosing firms

If you mean B, then yeah every firm does that. You’d get a prorated bonus. Which is why it shouldn’t factor into your decision about choosing between law firms

I suspect you are ignoring what “prorated” means

Ah, I thought “stub year” meant the year where you start at a firm with all your fellow new associates. So at a litigation boutique, where the bulk of those in the new class of associates starting that year are coming off clerkships, I thought that “stub year” meant the first year at the firm—where you’re at the firm for only three months along with everyone else in your “starting class.” Is that not a stub year?

Stub year as I have always heard it refers to the four months or so first year associates work at the firm after they graduate and take the bar until the new year begins. Then the next year they are there for a full year is their “first year.”

A clerk coming on board would not be in a stub year, nor would a lateral. They are just in whatever year they are classified as.

[theneuro]

I can’t imagine how a prorated bonus would make a difference even on the margins.

The second year bonus is like 15k. Even if a firm offers a stub bonus and even if it’s the same for first years, prorated it’s like 3k before taxes. Are you picking a firm based on that?

If you can get an offer from somewhere like Susman, I’d take it but that isn’t the reason why

No. For me, assuming a median bonus, we are talking about more like $25,000.

One of two things is going on here.

A. You mean “stub year” to mean what it actually does— first year attorneys who start around Oct 1 give or take depending on the firm. In that case, a 15k (or even 25k) bonus is prorated and you’d be getting 1/4 of that before taxes. So 4-5k pre-tax.

B. You mean “stub year” to mean a lateral of any year who joins mid year. I don’t understand why you’d mean this but sure if you’re, say, a 4th year joining in June you’d get a prorated bonus at the end of the year. So I dunno, ~25k pretax?

If you mean A, then very few firms offer a prorated bonus to lawyers who have been practicing for three months. Even if they do, it would be 5k-ish before tax. So not relevant to choosing firms

If you mean B, then yeah every firm does that. You’d get a prorated bonus. Which is why it shouldn’t factor into your decision about choosing between law firms

I suspect you are ignoring what “prorated” means

Ah, I thought “stub year” meant the year where you start at a firm with all your fellow new associates. So at a litigation boutique, where the bulk of those in the new class of associates starting that year are coming off clerkships, I thought that “stub year” meant the first year at the firm—where you’re at the firm for only three months along with everyone else in your “starting class.” Is that not a stub year?

Stub year as I have always heard it refers to the four months or so first year associates work at the firm after they graduate and take the bar until the new year begins. Then the next year they are there for a full year is their “first year.”

A clerk coming on board would not be in a stub year, nor would a lateral. They are just in whatever year they are classified as.

Ah, then I am mistaken and the cause of the confusion!