Discuss Changes in Biglaw Past Decade
| contagious twinkling prole | 12/09/18 | | lascivious masturbator | 12/09/18 | | Razzmatazz native | 12/09/18 | | black thriller field | 12/09/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/10/18 | | Bistre Pisswyrm Background Story | 12/12/18 | | brilliant school cafeteria | 12/09/18 | | black thriller field | 12/09/18 | | Startling umber marketing idea abode | 12/09/18 | | adulterous dun corn cake | 12/09/18 | | lascivious masturbator | 12/09/18 | | brilliant school cafeteria | 12/09/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/10/18 | | Out-of-control school laser beams | 12/10/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/10/18 | | racy crimson tattoo | 12/10/18 | | adulterous dun corn cake | 12/10/18 | | dark provocative pocket flask | 12/10/18 | | Turquoise know-it-all sandwich plaza | 12/10/18 | | dark provocative pocket flask | 12/10/18 | | Turquoise know-it-all sandwich plaza | 12/10/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/10/18 | | dark provocative pocket flask | 12/10/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/10/18 | | dark provocative pocket flask | 12/10/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/10/18 | | dark provocative pocket flask | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/10/18 | | heady fiercely-loyal forum depressive | 12/11/18 | | Hateful dog poop | 12/11/18 | | floppy lay police squad | 12/11/18 | | territorial casino chad | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Ruddy costumed main people headpube | 12/12/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/12/18 | | Ruddy costumed main people headpube | 12/12/18 | | territorial casino chad | 12/12/18 | | Turquoise know-it-all sandwich plaza | 12/10/18 | | Pearl abusive point yarmulke | 12/10/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/10/18 | | dark provocative pocket flask | 12/10/18 | | swashbuckling cumskin station | 12/12/18 | | Adventurous Doctorate Jew | 12/10/18 | | vengeful gaping hell | 12/10/18 | | marvelous grizzly box office scourge upon the earth | 12/10/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/10/18 | | adulterous dun corn cake | 12/10/18 | | marvelous grizzly box office scourge upon the earth | 12/10/18 | | Hideous Organic Girlfriend Stage | 12/11/18 | | Submissive violent nursing home volcanic crater | 12/10/18 | | Cracking Ungodly Parlour Mad-dog Skullcap | 12/10/18 | | Gold Hairraiser Potus Spot | 12/10/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/10/18 | | Mint Shivering Piazza Idiot | 12/10/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | rebellious dashing personal credit line | 12/10/18 | | Turquoise know-it-all sandwich plaza | 12/10/18 | | Silver infuriating tanning salon | 12/10/18 | | dark provocative pocket flask | 12/10/18 | | Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol | 12/11/18 | | fishy market stock car | 12/11/18 | | Razzmatazz native | 12/10/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/10/18 | | yellow stead | 12/11/18 | | Internet-worthy rusted business firm | 12/11/18 | | Hideous Organic Girlfriend Stage | 12/11/18 | | Laughsome nofapping ceo | 12/11/18 | | canary jet-lagged messiness | 12/12/18 | | Laughsome nofapping ceo | 12/11/18 | | Appetizing ticket booth boistinker | 12/11/18 | | dark provocative pocket flask | 12/11/18 | | fishy market stock car | 12/11/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/11/18 | | Kink-friendly step-uncle's house black woman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Silver infuriating tanning salon | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | Laughsome nofapping ceo | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | floppy lay police squad | 12/11/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Gold Hairraiser Potus Spot | 12/12/18 | | Electric doobsian legal warrant toilet seat | 12/11/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | Saffron menage | 12/11/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/11/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/11/18 | | flickering property idea he suggested | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Frozen love of her life rehab | 12/12/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/11/18 | | bateful carnelian indirect expression deer antler | 12/11/18 | | Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Laughsome nofapping ceo | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | Hateful dog poop | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | magenta lodge juggernaut | 12/29/18 | | marvelous grizzly box office scourge upon the earth | 12/11/18 | | Odious idiotic gas station | 12/12/18 | | Frozen love of her life rehab | 12/12/18 | | Electric doobsian legal warrant toilet seat | 12/11/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/11/18 | | twisted vivacious senate mexican | 12/11/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | twisted vivacious senate mexican | 12/12/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/12/18 | | exciting pale church | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Flesh church building skinny woman | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | excitant milk | 12/11/18 | | Federal peach state | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Purple dysfunction center | 12/12/18 | | Razzmatazz native | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | excitant milk | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | excitant milk | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | excitant milk | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | Soul-stirring chest-beating brunch | 12/15/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/16/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | coiffed dopamine | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/12/18 | | Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/11/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | Purple dysfunction center | 12/12/18 | | Galvanic red orchestra pit gay wizard | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | floppy lay police squad | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | Purple dysfunction center | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | Purple dysfunction center | 12/13/18 | | floppy lay police squad | 12/13/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/14/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/14/18 | | Purple dysfunction center | 12/14/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/15/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | Purple dysfunction center | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/13/18 | | Purple dysfunction center | 12/13/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/16/18 | | adulterous dun corn cake | 12/12/18 | | Gold Hairraiser Potus Spot | 12/12/18 | | jade tantric range patrolman | 12/11/18 | | Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | floppy lay police squad | 12/12/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/11/18 | | Beta Telephone Resort | 12/12/18 | | Turquoise know-it-all sandwich plaza | 12/12/18 | | Curious heaven | 12/11/18 | | excitant milk | 12/11/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/11/18 | | excitant milk | 12/11/18 | | Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol | 12/11/18 | | bonkers titillating national security agency | 12/12/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/12/18 | | Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol | 12/12/18 | | Razzmatazz native | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/11/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/12/18 | | floppy lay police squad | 12/12/18 | | Hideous Organic Girlfriend Stage | 12/12/18 | | brilliant school cafeteria | 12/12/18 | | Laughsome nofapping ceo | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/12/18 | | brilliant school cafeteria | 12/12/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/12/18 | | Gold Hairraiser Potus Spot | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/12/18 | | Gold Hairraiser Potus Spot | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/12/18 | | Gold Hairraiser Potus Spot | 12/12/18 | | Scarlet elastic band | 12/12/18 | | brilliant school cafeteria | 12/12/18 | | yapping autistic corner | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/12/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/12/18 | | yapping autistic corner | 12/12/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/12/18 | | ultramarine associate boltzmann | 12/12/18 | | Kink-friendly step-uncle's house black woman | 12/12/18 | | Gold Hairraiser Potus Spot | 12/12/18 | | coiffed dopamine | 12/12/18 | | coiffed dopamine | 12/12/18 | | Kink-friendly step-uncle's house black woman | 12/12/18 | | coiffed dopamine | 12/12/18 | | Kink-friendly step-uncle's house black woman | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/12/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/12/18 | | coiffed dopamine | 12/12/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/12/18 | | Silver infuriating tanning salon | 12/12/18 | | light cruel-hearted ape goal in life | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/12/18 | | Kink-friendly step-uncle's house black woman | 12/12/18 | | Balding National Friendly Grandma | 12/12/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/12/18 | | floppy lay police squad | 12/12/18 | | Balding National Friendly Grandma | 12/12/18 | | Balding National Friendly Grandma | 12/12/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/12/18 | | Coral Circlehead Pervert | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/12/18 | | coiffed dopamine | 12/12/18 | | Mint Shivering Piazza Idiot | 12/12/18 | | fantasy-prone kitty cat | 12/12/18 | | Silver infuriating tanning salon | 12/12/18 | | Crystalline Site | 12/12/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | Ivory antidepressant drug | 12/12/18 | | canary jet-lagged messiness | 12/13/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 | | Underhanded beady-eyed house | 12/12/18 | | contagious twinkling prole | 12/12/18 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 9th, 2018 11:34 PM Author: contagious twinkling prole
1. "Going to the printers" does not seem to be a "thing" anymore.
2. Increasing use of Microsoft Word track changes as opposed to deltaview/workshare to run blacklines
3. Massive increase in mega firms like DLA, Dentons, CMS
4. Firms switching to iPhone
5. People seem to dress better - less dominance of BB and CT dress shirts and Park Avenues
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37380606) |
Date: December 9th, 2018 11:50 PM Author: lascivious masturbator
The big "change" has been that demand for legal services has remained flat since the crash. In-house does more, every practice group is thinner, litigation has outsourced all first level doc review, staff attorney departments have become much bigger.
Growth now comes exclusively at the expense at other firms. Which means enormous guarantees for lateral partners of the kind that led to DL to fail in 08. Next crash should be very interesting.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37380692) |
Date: December 9th, 2018 11:54 PM Author: brilliant school cafeteria
2008: sense that the firm was a living place worthy of growth and development
2018: firm exists as a borg colony for partners to link up to, then move onward to a different colony if need be.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37380722) |
Date: December 10th, 2018 10:42 AM Author: fantasy-prone kitty cat
1. Shrinking of the equity partner class in order to maintain/grow PPP
2. Rise of “of counsel” positions and non-equity partnership as a permanent job
3. Decline of grunt work, clients won’t pay for it anymore
4. Permanent shrinking of associate classes
5. Decline of partner quality/of counsel quality resulting from promotions based mainly on diversity
6. Big growth of in-house practice groups
7. Decline of litigation at big law firms in favor of M&A work, which is more profitable and does not create as many conflicts
8. Rising ambivalence among associates, almost none of them are gunning for partner any more
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37382146) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2018 1:48 PM Author: dark provocative pocket flask
cr list. #8 seems very true. Big shift in the past 10-15 years: Partnership isn't seen as the goal (and I can't blame them; it's true 24/7 shit, the path is longer, and there's so little collegiality once you get there because the concept of the firm is largely dead and you're constantly having to prove yourself and looking over your shoulder at one of your "partners" trying to fuck you with a smile on his face because your mini-group has had a slow quarter while his had a good quarter).
I'd also add:
9. Continuing rise of boutiques and other alternative firm models poaching lower-level biglaw work. Lots of attorneys in the Bay Area and LA working on deals from home in pajama pants.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37383235) |
Date: December 10th, 2018 10:52 AM Author: Pearl abusive point yarmulke
is more analytics a thing now?
like legal software
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37382180) |
Date: December 10th, 2018 2:21 PM Author: Gold Hairraiser Potus Spot
People seem to dress better - less dominance of BB and CT dress shirts and Park Avenues
what are people wearing instead
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37383442) |
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 9:22 PM Author: contagious twinkling prole
Back when I first started the standard uniform was a rather ill-fitting brooks brothers suit and those really baggy non-iron shirts, or maybe the CT shirts with lame stripes and patterns that had a very awkward fit. Park Avenues were everywhere.
People these days seem to be wearing better fitting and more classic styled clothes. Less of those zany ugly green stripes or obnoxious checkered shirts, more solid whites and blues, or better striped/checked shirts.
For whatever it's worth, newer associates seem less fat as well.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37392495) |
Date: December 10th, 2018 4:40 PM Author: Turquoise know-it-all sandwich plaza
biglaw firms EMBRACING shitlibbery, rather than giving it lip-service
a decade ago, firm management gave diversity and shitlibbery lip service. a useless committee here, a diversity fellowship there. now, firms are following the rest of corporate america and going full-on with the sjw agenda.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37384244) |
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 2:34 AM Author: Laughsome nofapping ceo
when offering docs and other docs that are going to be widely distributed are almost ready to go out, they are sent to a 'financial printer' to be typeset in a particular format. this means you can no longer make changes in microsoft word, you need to send the changes you want made to the financial printer, and they will make the change on their typeset system. they typically take much longer to process changes than a lawyer sitting in front of his computer would.
traditionally, the working group would gather at the printers office for the final check of the document, essentially a final drafting session. printing business was lucrative, so the printers would pull out all the stops---great food, booze, playstations, big screen tvs everywhere, massage chairs etc, to make people want to choose them as the printers. now everyone just sends pdf markups and handles this all remotely. also, people realize these printers are ripoffs, so competitors have come into the marketplace
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37387490) |
Date: December 11th, 2018 3:31 AM Author: Underhanded beady-eyed house
Has conference call technology gotten less painful? Any firms use Slack yet?
Why isn't there a browser based legal Google Docs type thing for law that was secure and easy to collaborate on?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37387574) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 12:15 AM Author: Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol
WHO JUST JOINED
NO YOU GO AHEAD
SORRY
FINE
OK
NO GO AHEAD
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393428) |
Date: December 11th, 2018 4:06 AM Author: Underhanded beady-eyed house
Toys �R� Us bankruptcy lawyers from Kirkland & Ellis said in a court filing last year that they were charging as much as $1,745 an hour in the case. That was 25 percent more than the average highest rate in 10 of the largest bankruptcies in 2017, according to an analysis by The New York Times.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/11/business/toys-r-us-bankruptcy.html
Doesn't seem like an industry in peril.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37387607) |
Date: December 11th, 2018 10:54 PM Author: excitant milk
Dumb question here. Where does all the money go? You've got lots of associates billing 2000 hours a year at what? $400, $500 per hour or more? A million dollars a year in revenue?
The associates obviously ain't getting a million dollars a year or anywhere close to that. Some has to go to overhead, but is overhead really all that much? Are there just lots of equity partners barely working and making millions off the associates?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37392985) |
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 11:02 PM Author: Crystalline Site
Figure average associate billing rate of $750 per hour at top firms
Most associates at top firms bill about 1700 to real billable work (in subtracting pro bono).
Realization rate is probably 70% (amount that is actually billed and collected from clients)
So (750*1700)*.7 = $892,000 per associate. Pay the associates an average of 300,000, left with 592,000, subtract other overhead (at least 150,000 a head) that’s 442,000 a head profit.
If PPP is 3 million, then you need about 6 associates with these figures to pay one partner. 6 to 1 leverage is VERY rare these days though.
Of course the partner will bill too. Figure $1500 per hour for 1,500 billables, that’s 2.25 mil. So 1 busy partner plus two associates can do it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393033) |
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 11:08 PM Author: Coral Circlehead Pervert
1st year billable rate in NYC is now like 525. 10th year is 950. Partner 1000-1500.
A first year bills 2200. Firm collects 2100 hours. $1.1 M. Salary and bonus is 200k. Of remaining 900k, 200-350k goes to firm overhead (benefits, support staff, office space, debt, etc.). 540k in profit left, but has to be split many ways.
Yes, there are equity partners who are barely working, but most of them are busting ass trying to get new business that the firm can service, and trying to put in enough face time for current clients not to fire them.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393053) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 12:06 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
On major matters for big clients, we don't write off any time unless it's something egregious like the following:
Review documents in data room 19.8
Review comments to SPA 12.4
Prepare initial draft of big boy letter 8.1.
Ljl.
On smaller transactions we typically expect the client to ask for a discount so we just offer them our standard 10-15% and the client happily pays.
On aborted deals or bids that lose, we typically start with a 20% discount which gets negotiated to 25-30% and is obviously very bad for our bottom line. That's why we try to avoid representing buy-side with low chance of success and use our market intel to figure out who the best horses are and represent them. Helps having friends at the IBs who have all this data. In my experience this level of discount for my team only happens 2 or 3 times a year.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393368) |
|
Date: December 16th, 2018 1:13 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
There is a company that is going to go for sale soon. You hear about this through the grapevine from your IB/buyside bros. First, you try to represent the company. Representing sell-side in an auction is 180 b/c you have guaranteed deal closure and a company up for sale is less-likely to be stingy about legal fees since it's not really their money anymore.
Assuming you miss out on the sell-side representation, within a few weeks everyone knows who the major bidders are. You ask your IB friends for the identity of the bidders and chances of winning. You factor in things like how much cash they have, recent deal experience, track record, support of management to make a high bid, etc.
At a top-shop, you will often have multiple bidders asking you to represent you. You choose the one that you think has the highest chance of winning the bid.
/end
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37415124)
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 10:57 PM Author: Coral Circlehead Pervert
1. Constant availability. No longer just psycho partners expect you to be checking phone ever 10 minutes at night. The norm is you are reachable from 8 AM until 11:30 PM. Later if you are on an active case/deal.
2. Outsourced/Managed Doc Review. No client or insurer will pay for first years to do the first cut on a doc review unless it's really small. Some clients even have their own "managed reviews" with teams in India doing the first pass review. Their red tape bullshit is insane and you need some in-house loser like Are Reptile to approve you doing even the most mundane task like re-coding responsiveness decisions.
3. Swell in amount of data. The amount of data we collect on big litigations is insane now and even with not doing the first pass of review in-house, there are still plenty of hours to bill second level reviewing it and reviewing it to understand what we are producing. Producing over a million pages used to be rare and it is now the norm in big cases.
4. Partnership Track Extended. Used to be 8 years, now 10 with many waiting longer. Not a single person at a V10 firm thinks they will make partner. Many more people can stay on indefinitely as senior associates, counsel, or fake non-equity partners.
5. Rate Pressure. Firms now have to start with rates at like $1,500 per hour for senior partners because clients expect them to be discounted 10-15%.
6. Work from home. Associates clear out of the office now by 7:00 PM and log back on at home. Hours have stayed the same, people (especially non-M&A) just aren't working them from the office. Seamless usage is way, way down.
7. Diversity Kool-Aid. As DBG said above, firms used to pay diversity lip service but now are true believers, especially in gender stuff and #metoo. Women have shit like "mentorship circles" and are considered first for partnership. Some shitlib clients set quotas for how many women, minorities, and gays have to work on their matters. Men are considered a threat/liability to existing partners and are treated like rape suspects. (Existing non-shitlib partners just use this as an excuse to prevent having to make partners who might be a threat to them.) They are desperate to have qualified, hard-working minority partner candidates but the reality is most of them leave for cushier jobs because F500s are even more desperate and offer better work/life.
8. Dumb Lazy Associates. Law schools are not filled with the best and brightest given LSAT decline that happened post-ITE. Many people who start now are low IQ, lazy, or simply not interested in working hard because they do not believe it is possible to be promoted within a law firm. It is nearly impossible to motivate them. Money is not enough - they want work from home, social justice, and other dumb shit like in-firm yoga classes.
9. Tale of Two Cities. The spread between equity partners and non-equity is becoming wider every year, and the potential of firms like K&E to lure profitable partners away keeps managing partners up at night. The genie is out of the bottle and there is not such thing as loyalty at all. Firms have learned nothing from Dewey and think they can just buy their way to mega firm status. Similarly, non-elite law firms will continue to struggle as elite firms will rake in money hand over fist.
10. Cut Support Staff. Firms are moving support staff to satellite offices and making more people share fewer resources. In 2008 secretaries had 3 attorneys. They now have 5-6. They are still worthless by and large.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393011) |
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 11:27 PM Author: contagious twinkling prole
Jesus Christ this hits home - do we work at the same firm? Ljl.
"4. Partnership Track Extended. Used to be 8 years, now 10 with many waiting longer. Not a single person at a V10 firm thinks they will make partner. Many more people can stay on indefinitely as senior associates, counsel, or fake non-equity partners."
The number of "permanent" of-counsels I've encountered is mind-boggling.
"6. Work from home. Associates clear out of the office now by 7:00 PM and log back on at home. Hours have stayed the same, people (especially non-M&A) just aren't working them from the office. Seamless usage is way, way down."
Very true. The worst though are the associates who say they'll be working from home but aren't reachable or are slow and clearly not working from home.
"8. Dumb Lazy Associates. Law schools are not filled with the best and brightest given LSAT decline that happened post-ITE. Many people who start now are low IQ, lazy, or simply not interested in working hard because they do not believe it is possible to be promoted within a law firm. It is nearly impossible to motivate them. Money is not enough - they want work from home, social justice, and other dumb shit like in-firm yoga classes."
Completely agree that partners have basically given up on associates and it's tough to fire people b/c we still need the bodies to bill.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393131)
|
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 11:49 PM Author: contagious twinkling prole
You're an idiot who can't do basic math. Read the OP. I said past 10 years.
Pay raises and bonuses have outpaced the increase in law school tuition over the past decade. It's not even comparable.
2008:
45k tuition, 160K starting base + 15K bonuses for midlevels
2018:
65k tution, 190 starting base + 100K bonuses
Do the maths.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393251) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 12:19 AM Author: jade tantric range patrolman
2008 T14 Non-Resident Tuition = $39k; 2018 = $62k. That's almost a 60% increase. Federal income tax also up 4%.
2008 First year comp = $160k (say no bonus); 2018 = $190k + $5k bonus (prorated stub year). That's a 22% increase.
Not to mention rent increases in major cities, especially NYC.
And why are you comparing 2018 senior bonuses to first year comp? Apples to apples, brother.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393459) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 1:44 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
Why are you using percentages of increases? That's completely irrelevant. I used upper-end bonuses just to get my point across, but let's do apples to apples and compare a 2008 4th year to a 2018 4th year to see who is better off:
2008 4th year:
210K base, 22.5K bonus = 232.5K all-in.
Law school tution: 40K (your estimate)
2018 4th year:
255K base, 50K bonus = 305K all-in (not counting special or spring or summer bonuses)
Law school tution: 62K (your estimate)
The difference of comp between 2008 and 2018 get lulzier the more senior you get.
So in conclusion, a 2018 4th-year associate is making 72.5K more a year than a 2008 4th-year associate, while having paid only (roughly) 22K more in tuition per year.
Increase in debt/tuition as a justification for crappier and unhappier associates is lulzy and you using percentages of increases is even lulzier b/c a 4th year today has roughly 50K more a year to play with (after offsetting law school tuition) than a decade ago. You scale this over say a period of 5 years and it's a very significant increase in financial well-being.
To put it in even better perspective, an attorney practicing from 2008-2018 will have earned well-over $500,000 more than an attorney practicing from 2000-2010. Now unless you are going to claim that law school tuituion has increased by half a million dollars since 2000, you should just let this one slide.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393761) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 2:19 AM Author: jade tantric range patrolman
you use percentages so you can compare changes in cost (tuition) to changes in revenue (salary) on the same scale. a first year associate in 2018 paid 60% more than his 2008 counterpart for a 22% improvement in compensation. on day 1, this is a shitty deal.
taxes matter because you pay debt with after tax dollars, which means debt service eats up a larger percentage of the 2018 associate's disposable income than it did for the 2008 associate, which is the most straightforward measure of financial strain.
if you do not understand these concepts, i cannot help you.
to your point about the associate's situation improving over time, i agree. to calculate the point at which the 2018 and 2008 associate break even, you'd need to discount earnings for each for some period (say 10 years) and compare present value against costs. i am not going to do that this evening.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393849) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 2:21 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
This is utterly idiotic.
BRO my laundry expenses increased by 1000% over the past decade and therefore my crap 10% pay increase from 10 million to 11 million is worthless! What a shitty deal!
A 2018 first year paid something like 60K more in law school tuition over 3 years compared to a 2008 first year, in exchange for 30K more in base plus more bonus just in the first year, and this scales as you continue on.
And LJL at taxes or rent having increased so much from 2008 to 2018 to completely wipe out the net 40-100K extra you have left over each year after accounting for tuition increase. What are you like 12?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393852) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 2:30 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
This post is absolutely nonsensical.
If you want to get into accounting, let's talk accounting.
BigCorp sees a 60% increase in capital expenditures equal to $5 million because of extra investments in its factories. That same year, BigCorp sees a 10% increase in revenue equal to $100 million as a result of the capital expenditures made to upgrade their factories.
Are the shareholders of BigCorp happy or unhappy? From either a valuation, cashflow, balance sheet or income statement perspective, is BigCorp better off before or after the capital expenditure?
From an accounting perspective, top line (revenue/income/assets) and bottom line (net) numbers are always the most important metrics of measuring financial condition, which is why all valuation models are centered on some combination of cash flow, revenues and total assets to come up with enterprise value. Expenditures/investments are a secondary concern (for purposes of identifying how much was spent where to get to the top line number) and are NEVER compared apples-to-apples with top/bottom line numbers like you're attempting to do.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393875) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 10:47 AM Author: jade tantric range patrolman
The incremental return on the new money investment is lower than the first dollars put into the company. You’ve decreased gross margin. Are investors still happy? Sure, because your incremental investment has 95% gross margin, which beats the hell out of anything else in the market. But the new dollars are doing worse than the old dollars.
Your example is not a useful comparison for a law degree, where the margins are much lower. Look at the ROI (gain-cost)/cost. On day 1 as a 2018 associate, your gain relative to 2008 has increased 22% while your cost has increased 60%, making ROI obviously lower for the 2018 associate. To put it in absolute numbers, your day 1 after tax income is about $130k on $186k debt (compared with $115k after tax income against $117k debt of 2008 associate). The 2018 associate has to stay in the game longer to recoup the cost of his investment.
The comparison may be different for associates that stick it out 10 years. I haven’t done the math on that. But first/second/third years who paid sticker with their own money (with student loans) are absolutely getting it up the ass worse than their counterparts from 10 years ago.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37394839) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 11:28 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
I agree I used an extreme example, but that was in response to your nonsensical point regarding comparing percentage changes of expenses to income. ROI, which you are now using, is a much fairer metric.
And yes, from an ROI perspective the yield of a first year associate is poorer now than 2008. However, if we are looking at the whole picture on a holistic basis, we can easily conclcude that within 2 or 3 years the ROI of a 2018 associate surpasses that of a 2008 associate. Just in the 4th year alone a 2018 associate makes more than a 2008 4th year to nearly offset the extra tuition costs for 3 years of law school. This is not even considering the significant job security aspect which was absent in 2008.
You severely discount the impact of bonuses as well. Bonus have risen 2-3x of 2008 levels.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37395101) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 1:09 PM Author: Purple dysfunction center
2008 was a weird year where skadden offered better bonuses but most followed cravath’s scale:
https://abovethelaw.com/2008/12/associate-bonus-watch-davis-polk-wardwell-joins-cravathsimpson-in-race-to-the-bottom/
Also, as I pointed out below, any calculation needs to account for COL expenses during law school since nobody is just paying tuition. My total cost in 2007 was $55k v $96k estimated budget on the school website for 2018.
My suspicion is that one needs to stay longer in biglaw to break even but once you go past the break even point, your ROI increases quite a bit due to bigger senior associate bonuses. So biglaw may be a better deal if you have plans to stay past year 4 or 5, but most people do not have such plans and would rather pay off their debt quickly by year 3 or so and leave and the astronomical rise of law school attendance costs traps people for longer than they desire.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37395822)
|
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 11:22 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
The post I was responding to tried to double dip rent by doing a CGI adjustment and then subsequently factoring in rent increases.
If you want to get back to my original point:
1) 2018 associates make more than 2008 associates
2) 2018 associates have far more job security
3) 2018 associates pay will increase at a far higher rate due to higher pay scale and massive bonus increases, which will quickly more than offset the initial extra investment in tuition costs
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37395041) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 1:23 PM Author: Purple dysfunction center
It’s a bit disingenuous to take a snapshot as a 2018 associate when salaries were stuck at $160k from 2006-2016 and only moved to $190k this year. I haven’t paid attention to biglaw bonuses in forever but I suspect they didn’t really rise meaningfully until the last few years when PPP went so high that there were really no excuses not to pay more to the associates.
So really, if you’re an associate that graduated anywhere btwn 2008-2016, your tuition and COL costs were rising at a much more rapid rate than biglaw comp was rising. If you’re a new grad in 2017-2018, you’re getting a great deal in the same way 2005-2007 grads got a great deal when it went rapidly from $125k to $145k to $160k and special bonuses were all over, but youre cherry picking by choosing 2018 as the baseline.
Biglaw salaries are unlikely to rise in the next 5 years (mostly likely a decade) and the bonuses will not go up rapidly either and will mostly likely go down as the economy slows down. Meanwhile tuition and COL costs will continue to march up at the usual rate.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37395927) |
|
Date: December 13th, 2018 12:46 PM Author: Purple dysfunction center
Yes you want to argue 2008 v 2018 because those numbers suit you. You don’t want to do 2007 v 2017 because 2007 was an insane year for bonuses and 2017 was pre-$190k scale. But you cant make a sweeping claim that associates are way better off now than a decade ago in terms of money and only look at one year. And of course, it’s hard to predict what happens over the next few years. After all it was only a few years after $160k that everything crashed.
The bonuses being huge since 2013 is just wrong. Here’s 2018:
https://abovethelaw.com/2018/11/breaking-cravath-announces-annual-bonuses/
Compare to 2008:
https://abovethelaw.com/2008/11/associate-bonus-watch-cravath-offers-less-than-skadden/
The main difference is that as you advance into midlevel and senior ranks, you are getting much better bonuses. But most associates don’t go past year 4 or 5, if that.
But of course, you’re looking at an average biglawyer who now pays at least $120k more to attend law school over 3 years. The bonuses and salary increases from 2008 to 2018 aren’t so dramatic that you’re truly getting more money until you hit the point where everyone starts to leave anyway because now they’ve finally paid off their debts. And you’re only looking at a minority of firms with no hours req for bonus. Of course, outside v10, most firms like Gibson and Latham have minimum hour requirements where not everyone gets a bonus. So at best, it’s still a wash for the vast majority of biglawyers. I won’t even factor in COL after law school into it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37401772)
|
|
Date: December 14th, 2018 4:22 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
No, I am doing 2008 vs. 2018 b/c my OP was specifically "last decade." Also, I thought I was being generous starting at 2008 b/c that's when they first raised to 160K. But if you want, we can do 2007 (145K) vs. 2017 (180K), not that it will make any difference.
The BS CPI adjustment argument (which I address in my post further down) and all these tired and flawed arguments are bordering on moronic. For example your logic about everyone leaving is just ludicrous. Back in 2008 a lot of people got fired and had nowhere to go b/c of ITE, but hey, you don't even consider that in your calculus. Whereas today, attrition still occurs but a lot of that attrition is to other biglaw firms or high-paying inhouse jobs. Also whether someone chooses to quit or not has nothing to do with my argument that associates today are financially far better off than their counterparts a decade ago. Quitting or lateralling is a voluntary choice, and the options for someone quitting in 2018 far surpasses options in 2008. In other words, whether you choose to stay in biglaw or leave in 2018, you are far better off financially than your equivalent in 2008.
But it's stupid to get into hypos about who quits when or whether you meet hours requirements or not or whether you're working at a V5 or a V100. I'm looking solely at objective quantifiable measures in terms of raw numbers for a standard biglaw associate at a market firm.
Copying and pasting from the post below:
A 1st year associate (full year) who started in 2008 and spent 5 years in biglaw will have made a total of $1,051,500.
Compared to a 1st year associate who started in 2014 and remains in biglaw through the end of 2018, will have made a total of $1,290,000.
That's a $238,500 difference achieved in just 5 years. The difference balloons at an expontial rate from years 6 through 10 to well over half a million dollars, but I assumed the average biglawyer isn't sticking around years 6 through 10 so I won't bring those numbers into this particular analysis. This is a very dramatic difference and cannot be mitigated by any marginal changes in cost of living or inflation over the same period.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37406154)
|
|
Date: December 14th, 2018 4:54 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
Also LJL at a biglawyer paying $120K more to attend law school now. Are you just pulling numbers out of your ass now?
Based on data from law school transparency, a student entering law school in 2005 paid a total of $91,887 at a private law school.
Someone who started law school in 2015 paid a total of $135,248, or $43,361 more in non-inflated dollars.
The 2005 numbers are not adjusted for inflation, CPI or whatever other shit which would only make the difference even less.
Now I won't get into rent/COL b/c it differs so much between whether you went to Michigan or NYU or Yale, but I will say it is lulzy that:
-you think law students pay $76,639 more in rent/food in 2018 than they did in 2008, not to mention that law school rents are for 8 months (sorry, rents in NYC, Michigan, Duke, Cornell, etc., and the price of Chipotle didn't even increase to the tune of 76K)
-you're not factoring in the substantially higher summer associate pay (based on my rough calculations a SA makes $15K more now than they did back then)
-you're not bothering to inflation/CPI adjust 2005-2008 tuition/COL dollars but you insist on adjusting income ljl
The simple fact is law students are probably paying around $50-70K more for law school now (in non-inflation adjusted dollars), but in return:
-You will have made 13K more after year 2
-You will have made 72.5K more after year 3, completely offsetting any extra expenditures in law school
-You will have made 142.5K more after year 4, which is getting luzly
-You will have made 238.5K more after year 5!
-If I continue, the lulziness increases
You start from the lazy premise that "oh they will quit after 2 years before they break even" which is lulzy. It is far easier now to stay to year 5, 6 7 8 or 9 than it was a decade ago. It's a matter of choice, which is a major element to assessing one's financial condition. You have the option to stay and make a lot more money than you could have a decade ago. Even if you stay only 3 or 4 years, you are still better off. Thanks to the job market, even if you leave during years 3 or 4, you have much better and higher paying options. These should all be major considerations in assessing financial prospects of a 2018 vs. 2008 associate, but you fail to do so and flail about whining about irrelevant shit.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37406178) |
|
Date: December 14th, 2018 10:13 AM Author: Purple dysfunction center
Biglaw salaries were raised to $160k in 2006 and benefited class of 2006 and beyond. I remember because I was paid on the $160k scale as a summer and when I started in 2007. Also 2007 there were special bonuses and first years were paid $35k.
I don’t know what this law school transparency thing is but you know it’s meaningless to look at some aggregated data of law schools. $91k total in 2005 year is absurd for 3 years full freight and completely inaccurate. It must include people who get fin aid and people with in state tuition at state schools. So is the $135k number.
I initially only looked at sls, which stated $96k/year now versus ~$55k back in 2007. A quick google search shows $85k for yls, $96k for NYU and $96k for HLS. $97k for cls and uchicago. Gee, do you see a pattern emerging? Safe to say majority of those in v10 where you’re going to get a guaranteed bonus with no hours req come from those schools. I’m sure you can go check the cost of attending your school now and it’ll be similar to $95k/year number.
You’re obviously set on stating that young associates have it better financially now than in the past but you just won’t use more realistic numbers about the cost of attending law school. When you’re graduating with close to $300k in debt, it’s really not much better of a deal.
Edit: you yourself previously estimated in a thread that law school costs $90k/year. Very convenient that you’re willing to estimate there on law school rent but refuse to do that in this thread.
http://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4137073&mc=130&forum_id=2
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37406732) |
|
Date: December 15th, 2018 12:00 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
I starting off using thr highest NYC numbers for tuition as a sign of good faith and to round in your favor, but since I got hit by CPI and other BS arguments I returned to using market average data from law school transparency which is probably the biggest source of tuition data available online. Not sure what hole youve been hiding under and no it doesnt include financial aid.
Just look at the marth. A 4th year now will have made hundreds of K more today than a 4th year in 2008. Sorry, tuition has on a average only gone up by a tiny fraction of such gains.
I have provided accurate data of salary and bonus and if you bothered to do the same amount you would be able to determine break even points for an average law school student. Instead youre just arguing using concepts you believe to be true with no data. Tuition at my T3 has gone up by $20k/year (over 3 years) since I attend over a decade ago and checking rent prices is about $500/month more where I used to live. Keep in mind it is luxury real estate that are causing spikes in average COL figures - your shit walkup is not going up in rent by $1,000/month ljl.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37410690) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 9:42 PM Author: contagious twinkling prole
Sorry but no, I am not gojng to try to factor in the vast disparity in COL between NYU and Yale.
And I kept silent on CPI but thats a bullshit metric for high earning professionals. It assumes you will automatically spend a percentage of your pay based on the average percentage of rent increases, which is bullshit. Assuming a 1st year paid a solid $3,000/month in rent in 2008, it is absurd to use the CPI numbers and assume that a 1st year in 2018 is paying $5,0000/month. In fact looking at the building I used to live in 2008, I see that rent has increased from $3,500/month in 2008 to $3,900/month for the same unit.
CPI is somewhat useful as a generic economic measure but is no way reflective of real life.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37398887) |
|
Date: December 16th, 2018 1:09 AM Author: contagious twinkling prole
I do actually factor COL in my other posts, I said I wasn't going to try to distinguish between Michigan/NYU/Stanford/Duke given the massive disparity in COL.
While you flail around with BS arguments about some non-existent walk-up in NYC that supposedly went up $3K/month in rent in the past 10 years (it didn't), nobody is addressing the MFing elephant in the room.
$238,500 in additional income after 5 years in 2018, than in 2008 + much higher job security + much better exit options.
Law School Transparency (the definitive source on tuition data) shows that the average tuition hike at a private school is nowhere near enough to offset the substantially higher earnings today.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37415120)
|
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 12:09 AM Author: adulterous dun corn cake
He does litigation and you do M&A: Is it the case for both that firms need bodies to bill? I've been seeing attrition in my firm's litigation group, which corresponds to the observation above:
"7. Decline of litigation at big law firms in favor of M&A work, which is more profitable and does not create as many conflicts"
I wonder when I can stop living in fear of getting fired.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393381) |
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 11:28 PM Author: jade tantric range patrolman
- Swell in amount of data
- Constant availability
- Cut support staff
I'm a midlevel and these are my three biggest issues. The amount of data collection and analysis I do for this job is unbelievable. I feel like the only reason I survive is because I became an Excel ninja before law school.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393136) |
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 11:42 PM Author: Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol
all of this is credited
the data on even the small cases now is fucking retarded. i'm on a case where almost three million pages have been produced with more to come and both sides still have four person teams and we're halfway through fact discovery and all of us are on multiple cases. who knows what's out there lol
there are just no attorneys at the 2010-2011-2012 levels and it's killing our cases. junior partners are having to do midlevel tasks
my firm fired multiple secretaries and paralegals within the last month
i will say that multiple women that should have been slam dunks for partner didn't make it, partly because they thought they were slam dunks and coasted for the last six months and it pissed off management
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393209) |
|
Date: December 11th, 2018 11:33 PM Author: Coral Circlehead Pervert
They are trying to duck mandatory retirement ages in partnership agreements now. They are supposed to transition business to existing partners, but few are doing a good job letting go of the reigns. They probably will continue to shadow-advise from the sidelines and shit talk the new partners out of their own stubbornness and ego. They would work until they died if they could.
There are some matters in-house legal departments can't handle, like bet-the-company litigation, which is supposed to be big firms' specialties. Absent the word of a long-term relationship partner, they will either (i) hire the big name in the field to handle the case (see Ted Wells with NFL, Mary Jo White with #MeToo, Ted Olson, David Boies, etc.) (see rich get richer); or (ii) do some dumb, uninformed beauty contest.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393155) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 12:13 AM Author: Geriatric glittery whorehouse pistol
and i mean think about how we will end up compared to these guys
some of these guys came in in the mad men era and had typewriters and dictaphones and pinched their secretaries on the ass and shit
we will have billed 40 years of carpe diem entries at 0.1 per
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37393405) |
Date: December 12th, 2018 10:14 AM Author: Coral Circlehead Pervert
Another dramatic change is the billable rates. In 2008, there were only a few partners who had crossed the $1,000/hour barrier. Inflation adjusted, that is $1,165.80. The top partners are now commanding $1,600 per hour, which is over a 30% hike. They have to do that in order for middling partners to charge $1,200 and counsel/senior associates to charge $1,000. The result of this is that first years are now over $550 an hour. At these rates, a lot of stuff has to be delegated and leverage should be increasing, but it is not happening fast enough.
Here is an interesting article on the issue: https://www.law.com/2018/11/15/big-law-should-raise-partner-billing-rates-10-percent-now/
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37394684) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 11:33 AM Author: Balding National Friendly Grandma
It has also been argued that associates really want to be rewarded this way, they like the certainty of knowing that if they put in exactly 2103 hours they will achieve the 2000 bonus and the 2100 extra bonus. This argument proves my point. While there is so much associates hate about our billable hour culture, of course they do like certainty. Everyone likes certainty. And knowing that I've got a lock on an extra $15,000 so long as I spend New Year's Eve in front of a CRT reviewing documents for privilege-guaranteeing compensation that will pay for far more than my midnight champagne makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over. But the certainty that arises from no more than the writing down of a pre-stipulated number of hours is not a desired result. Rather an associate should know that his or her lawyers' hours will be evaluated for quantity for sure, but also for quality, for innovation, for benefit to the client, and that the associate's non-billable hours will be evaluated too, and then -- no certainty here -- the associate may get a bonus if this overall review yields the conclusion that the associate is entitled to a bonus. Is it subjective? To be sure. But we are lawyers, producing legal work, running law firms, preserving a threatened profession, and there is no way a lawyer's contribution to those goals should be evaluated in other than a qualitative, albeit subjective, way. Leave it to the production line employees installing windshields and rearview mirrors to get compensated by purely objective criteria.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37395143) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 11:30 AM Author: Balding National Friendly Grandma
Salaries
Effective July 1, 2006, our starting salary will be $135,000 for all full-time associates. Base salaries for associates in years two through six will increase by $10,000 and in years seven and eight by $15,000 each year.
Elimination of Billable Hour Bonuses
At the same time, we are eliminating any bonus system based solely on billable hours. We recognize that such a system is not only inconsistent with our commitment to our clients, but also both an unfair way of compensating associates and inconsistent with our desire to encourage some of the non-billable activities our firm and our profession must value.
This does not mean we do not expect hard work from our associates. Caldwell & Moore is a business in a competitive marketplace. We pay competitive salaries and expect every associate to be committed to earning such generous compensation. Indeed, bonuses will be awarded to those associates who make an extraordinary commitment in terms of time. It is simply that these bonuses in the future will not be tied automatically to the achievement of any given number of billable hours and will only be granted in light of a number of other factors described more fully below.
The Bonus System
Bonuses can be earned by all but first year associates. Bonuses will be rewarded at the sole discretion of the firm in amounts that will be significant, but without regard to any formula.
Professional Services
With respect to work for clients, associates may earn bonuses not only for the number of hours dedicated, but also for the quality of the work and imaginative ideas that advance the interests of our clients. To consider the latter, *7 we will be asking partners to make an evaluation of each associate's hours in terms of efficiency, diligence, and necessity, and to nominate for bonuses those associates whose initiatives saved clients money or whose ideas enhanced clients' likelihood of achieving their goals.
Firm Activities
It is just as important for the firm to hire, retain and promote a talented, diverse associate corps. To that end, bonuses will be rewarded for recruiting, training and mentoring hours and initiatives in the same way as work on client matters. Similarly, service on the associates committee, if undertaken in a dedicated and effective way, may result in an award of a bonus to the associates involved.
Pro Bono
In the past, the firm “counted” so many hours of pro bono. Beyond that level, the associate had to seek a waiver for the hours to count. We know this misled some associates into believing that pro bono really did not count, discouraging them from undertaking pro bono engagements. It is Caldwell & Moore's policy to encourage and support pro bono endeavors. The firm would like to achieve 100 percent participation by all of its lawyers at a level of 50 hours per year within the next three years. Meanwhile, the firm recognizes that pro bono engagements do not come in 50-hour assignment blocks. Henceforth, once an associate undertakes an approved pro bono matter for the firm, it will be treated like any other firm matter. Associates will be expected to dedicate all necessary time and effort to the matter. And associates can expect that in the evaluation of their commitment and hard work, the firm will count all of their pro bono hours -- so long as they meet the same criteria of necessity and competence as all other hours -- toward the awarding of any bonuses. Our pro bono clients are not second-class citizens, and we do not want any associate to feel that our compensation system is inconsistent with that principle.
Bar Association and Other Civic Endeavors
Our lawyers' obligations do not end with commitment to clients -- both paying and pro bono -- and to the firm. Caldwell & Moore is a leader of the profession. We expect our lawyers to get involved in the organized bar by serving in leadership positions, writing articles and books, presenting at continuing legal education seminars. Similarly, our lawyers should serve as leaders of the larger community. School boards, houses of worship, charitable and arts organizations, and similar endeavors all will benefit from the leadership of Caldwell & Moore lawyers. You can expect to be evaluated on your participation in these activities and for bonuses for outstanding accomplishments in this area to be awarded in the same way as for other achievements.
Work-Life Balance
While Caldwell & Moore expects extra effort from all of its lawyers, we recognize that the number of hours a lawyer is able to devote to all of the activities listed above varies widely because of the necessity of fulfilling even more important personal obligations, such as child-rearing or other family obligations. We also recognize that some of you have made life-style choices that are inconsistent with 2000 or more hours per year of professional time. Though those circumstances or choices may mean that you will not earn bonuses for your number of hours, Caldwell & Moore wants to emphasize that you will still be eligible for bonuses for the quality of your work, your imagination and skill, and for the other firm activities should your qualitative performance warrant it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37395118) |
|
Date: December 12th, 2018 11:51 AM Author: Balding National Friendly Grandma
“Don't do it.”
This was the wise advice of the senior associate I had adopted as my older brother and protector to guide me through the labyrinth of large firm life and politics. I had moseyed into his office, shut the door, and asked the question: “What do you think would happen if I asked about the possibility of going part-time?” A grave look came over his face, his eyes darted about the room, and he lowered his voice to a whisper: “It's professional suicide--don't even ask.”
After three years of working as a full-time litigator, I was tired. At that point, the expected minimum for a full-time associate litigator in New York was at 2000 billable hours. Allotting four weeks total time off for vacation and all holidays, plus a couple of “sick days,” that put the weekly target at about forty-two billable hours, or 8.5 per day. Adding in time for administrative work such as timekeeping, the training courses required for junior litigators, continuing legal education, helping with interviews, firm entertaining, a lunch break, and some time to be sociable with colleagues, it *82 always worked out to be at least a ten or eleven hour workday.1 Every day. And this did not count the effort to emerge from a catatonic state after particularly intense weekends or late-night work running up to a deadline.
In fact, even though I was for the most part working on appellate briefs for pretty slow-moving litigation, the work was increasingly bleeding into weekends and late evenings, so it was becoming difficult to juggle other commitments in my life. I wanted to find a way to protect my evenings and weekends so I could calmly clean the house, cook dinner, attend church, read non-law books, work in the yard, and keep up with friends and community activities outside the law firm. When I would get home at 8:30 or so in the evening, my friends with whom I shared a house had already finished dinner. It was difficult to wind down, and so I frequently had trouble sleeping and was increasingly edgy.
On the other hand, I really enjoyed the cases I was working on. I especially liked being, as one partner described it, a “sticky issues analyst,” and was cultivating a sense of “craft” in drafting arguments and briefs. I wanted to stay, but was hoping to essentially “buy” from the firm a clear understanding which would give more security for my evenings and weekends. I calculated that a target of thirty billable hours per week, or six hours per day, with an additional eight to ten hours per week allotted for other tasks, would bring me to a forty hour work week. And when I looked in the policy manual, there it was--a part-time policy--with exactly my calculations. It sounded great!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37395286) |
Date: December 12th, 2018 11:47 PM Author: contagious twinkling prole
To continue the discussion on 2018 vs. 2008 finances, I present the following numbers (I made an excel spreadsheet filling in numbers from Cravath salary and bonus figures for each year):
[NEW YORK SPECIFIC, DON'T COME CRYING TO ME ABOUT SF OR HONG KONG RENT]
A 1st year associate (full year) who started in 2008 and spent 5 years in biglaw will have made a total of $1,051,500.
Compared to a 1st year associate who started in 2014 and remains in biglaw through the end of 2018, will have made a total of $1,290,000.
That's a $238,500 difference achieved in just 5 years. The difference balloons at an expontial rate from years 6 through 10 to well over half a million dollars, but I assumed the average biglawyer isn't sticking around years 6 through 10 so I won't bring those numbers into this particular analysis. This is a very dramatic difference and cannot be mitigated by any marginal changes in cost of living or inflation over the same period.
I used the Cravath scale for salaries and bonuses. I did not factor in special/summer/spring bonuses or hours requirements. I also did not factor in job security, all of which would have skewed the metrics in favor of the attorney starting in 2014.
I question the validity of using CPI to adjust salaries, b/c CPI assumes that an individual will spend a set percentage of income on fixed expenses. This becomes increasingly inaccurate at higher levels of expenditure. A 1st year in 2018 is not spending $2,000 more a month on rent than a 2008 1st year. If you compare rental prices of a standard walk-up or mid-tier highrise, you will also see that rent prices did not increase dramatically from 2008 to 2018 (my particular highrise building only went up by $500 for a 1br). Biglaw associates also spend a considerable amount of time in the office and eating free food and aren't grocery shopping/eating out as much and have many things subsidized such as gyms, phones and car services. It is incredibly dishonest to use a CPI adjustment to claim that a 1st year in 2018 is somehow spending $30,000/year more on food/rent than a 2008 1st year. That just isn't happening. You know it, I know it.
But if you insist on using a CPI adjustment, at least be intellectually honest and also adjust 2005-2008 law school tuition/expenses into today's dollars. It is inaccurate to only adjust topline income and fail to make the same adjustment for expenses of the same time period.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4152935&forum_id=2#37399718) |
|
|