Shearman Bonuses Forum

[Anonymous User]

In light of the ATL article, anyone willing to share if they heard about bonuses and if so, what they got?

[Anonymous User]

The change to the Shearman bonus program from discretionary to hours based (1900 base + 25 pro bono + 100 "other" hours (pro bono/billable/bus dev/etc) is for next year's bonus calculation. Not this year. It wasn't a rug pull in that regard.

The word on the grapevine is the firm had a bad year, missed a lot of targets. Instead of being purely discretionary by group this year (i.e., not the new hours based program for next year), bonuses were heavily heavily influenced by utilization rates. From what I have heard: almost all people under 85-90% are not getting a bonus. 90-99% are getting a reduced bonus. 100% utilization is getting full bonus.

I was in the 90ish% range for utilization and I got 75% of market bonus.

I personally feel screwed over and I expect there to be a lot of departures early next year. I had great reviews all year, billing pretty darn close to their next year targets and literally 0 indication at all from my direct partners (one of whom is my group chair) that I was in danger of not getting a full bonus.

The kicker is we were supposed to be paid out tomorrow, and I was only told about my reduced bonus yesterday.

[Anonymous User]

I was told I would receive 75% but did not receive any payment today, so interested to see if others have received anything.

It’s frustrating because it appears the hard hours cutoff is higher than the new 1900 cutoff that was supposed to start next year.

[Anonymous User]

According to fishbowl, nobody received a bonus and HR indicated that payments would be made next week. The firm is such a toilet…

[Anonymous User]

I guess this must mean that the merger is a done deal, because how the hell will Shearman be able to recruit decent law students or laterals again after this absolutely dumpster fire of a display?

[Wanderingdrock]

I guess this must mean that the merger is a done deal, because how the hell will Shearman be able to recruit decent law students or laterals again after this absolutely dumpster fire of a display?

More likely that the two firms put out statements next week saying "We've decided to go different directions" and then the off-the-record indications are that Hogan Lovells found out how shit Shearman's financials were.

[Anonymous User]

I was told I would receive 75% but did not receive any payment today, so interested to see if others have received anything.

It’s frustrating because it appears the hard hours cutoff is higher than the new 1900 cutoff that was supposed to start next year.

I got payment this morning (didn't show up in the ADP online thing but hit my account).

Also - the 1900 hour is a ruse. I was very strongly told during the call about the new memo that while 1900 is the "base", the "other hours" category we have now can and should be filled with billable hours.

The firm hasn't even released a written memo on the policy change yet (maybe never will) and I fully expect them to make some radical changes to it before year-end, despite this billing year already being in effect. I guarantee they will try and deny a bonus next year to an associate for hitting 1905 billables and 150 pro bono because their utilization rate sucks with all of their pro bono/non-billable work.

[Anonymous User]

I guess this must mean that the merger is a done deal, because how the hell will Shearman be able to recruit decent law students or laterals again after this absolutely dumpster fire of a display?

More likely that the two firms put out statements next week saying "We've decided to go different directions" and then the off-the-record indications are that Hogan Lovells found out how shit Shearman's financials were.

Confirmed financials were shit this year. Heard from a Shearman partner directly.

[Anonymous User]

Confirmed financials were shit this year. Heard from a Shearman partner directly.

Is this... Normal for a firm in Shearman's shoes? That is, is a firm heavily dependent on one practice area (in this case M&A) expected to have cashflow issues because it had a lean year?

My understanding is that firms pay out all profits to partners and doesn't retain anything year-on-year, so do other firms in a similar situation just obtain a loan to tide them over?

[Anonymous User]

Confirmed financials were shit this year. Heard from a Shearman partner directly.

Is this... Normal for a firm in Shearman's shoes? That is, is a firm heavily dependent on one practice area (in this case M&A) expected to have cashflow issues because it had a lean year?

My understanding is that firms pay out all profits to partners and doesn't retain anything year-on-year, so do other firms in a similar situation just obtain a loan to tide them over?

Financials being shit = / = actual cash flow issues. It just means you made less money this fiscal year than last year and won't be as much profits to spread around for bonuses, partner draws, etc. finding bs excuses to not pay out full bonuses is simply a way for the partners to reduce expenses leaving more money for themselves.