Breaking: Simpson Thacher Raises Associate Base Salaries!!!
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett has raised associate base salaries across the board. For the most junior classes, the increase is $15,000. New associates arriving at the firm in the fall will now receive a starting salary of $160,000, instead of $145,000.
(You saw the memorandum here first, people — less than ten minutes after it was sent. MSM sources: PLEASE CREDIT ABOVE THE LAW. Thank you.)
The Simpson Thacher memo reprinted below was emailed to us by multiple sources. So we do not doubt its authenticity. It was sent out today by email, at 4:28 PM, by STB executive committee chairman Philip T. (Pete) Ruegger III, to all associates and non-senior counsel.
We are seeking additional comment from STB representatives — namely, Pete Ruegger, who sent the memo, and Susan Bussy, who handles media inquiries. We will let you know if and when we hear back from them.
Without further ado, the memo:
SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
MEMORANDUM TO ALL ASSOCIATES AND COUNSEL
The Firm has been very busy and we expect the high level of activity to continue. We are proud of the results we are helping our clients achieve.
We believe we have the finest legal team of any global law firm. In appreciation of your efforts, we are pleased to increase associate base salaries as follows, effective January 1, 2007:
Class of 2006 - $160,000
Class of 2005 - $170,000
Class of 2004 - $185,000
Class of 2003 - $210,000
Class of 2002 - $230,000
Class of 2001 - $250,000
Class of 2000 - $265,000
Class of 1999 - $280,000
Class of 1998 - $290,000
We are also raising the base salary for the members of the Class of 2007, who will arrive in the fall, to $160,000.
Counsel and classes senior to 1998 will be addressed on an individual basis.
Again, on behalf of the Firm, thank you for your commitment and hard work.
January 22, 2007
Pete Ruegger
*************************
Other firms will surely follow suit and match this base salary increase. As the various firms match, please note their moves in the comments. THANKS!!!
(116) Comments
Comments
First.
First.
I hope it's true. I wonder if other firms will follow suit?
W00T!
Fried Frank has matched.
rumor is that fried frank has already matched or is about to
Fried Frank matched within half an hour?!
anyone know if this is for all offices? or just for ny?
What are the odds that firms will match, given the recent raises and the fact that they didn't cut bonuses? Do people think that Simpson might just become the new Skadden, i.e. higher salaries, lower bonuses?
I bet this is just a Biglaw plot to distract from the Charney fiasco.
i hope it is. charney's probably not getting much $$. at least let the rest of us get our beaks wet.
I think the firms are nervous about competition from IB and PE. It's a bit harder for lawyers to break into hedge funds but given the pay differential between IB/PE and law, I wouldn't be surprised that the firms are feeling a lot of pressure to keep their associates.
You werent first. see:
http://xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=568075&mc=75&forum_id=2#7468285
friend in PA got the bump
Hey Hopeful:
I believe you're referring to a phenomenon called "Skaddenization"? :)
Fried Frank has not matched
Weil raised too
Please credit Above The Law? Seriously, stop embarrassing yourself. http://xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=568075&mc=96&forum_id=2
Nice try for taking credit over something you didn't break. Sheesh.
CWT has matched
I wonder if some other firm - Cravath maybe? - will make it an even $20K bump-up.
Weil has not yet matched. Stop spreading false rumors and sending us all into a frenzy!
For personal reasons, I'd like to think that Cravath would be the firm to one-up STB...but I don't expect it.
FF has not matched
Greedy associates website is down. Must be too much traffic.
Weil has NOT matched
CWT has not matched.
CWT has not matched
KMB matched
Anyone who thinks other firms will match today is nuts. These guys just got ambushed. Don't expect anything until tomorrow, at the very earliest, but probably not before Thursday or Friday.
But we'll get there sooner or later, anyway. $15K, beetches! If you'll excuse me, I've got to go buy my fur coat, pimp hat, and diamond-crusted cane...
At what point can we say this is a hoax?
who is KMB?
No hoax. It's been confirmed (with respect to STB)
Not a hoax for Simpson. I have the email to prove it.
It's not a hoax (at least wrt Simpson). If it is, then it's very well-coordinated, b/c all my friends over there seem to be in on it.
SRV matched
I heard that Sullivan matched.
so did BMW.
Well, geez, everyone knows who KMB is:
www.kmb.hk/english.php
Other acronyms who have matched:
S&M
L&O: SVU
DZ NuTS
I heard that Sullivan matched.
so did BMW.
i don't work there, but someone sent me what they called a "confirmed" report that schulte matched. i have to consider it more credible at this point than half of the bs that's been posted here thus far.
David when are you going to post an update acknowledging that you weren't first?
http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=568075&mc=168&forum_id=2
KFC matched. A free bucket of greasy chicken.
Wow -- I'd hate to work at Cravath, S&C, Davis Polk -- what cheapskates!!
Now 25 year old kids with no knowledge of jack can send faxes for a year and make almost $200K.
finally, there is no justice in the world!!!
Schulte did NOT match.
Schulte did NOT match.
Schulte did NOT match.
Schulte did NOT match.
Schulte did NOT match.
David when are you going to post an update acknowledging that you weren't first?
http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=568075&mc=168&forum_id=2
David! You have to pull these comments. Your site is officially useless for this salary stuff unless you start screening and verifying! Who are you, malicious a**holes with false matching rumors!?
so did BMW.
David,
When will the little weasels who complain that you weren't the first to publish this realize that you don't care!!
When will they learn to think like businessmen instead of lawyers and take heed that so long as the WSJ and NYT pump your site, you make out, truth be damned!!
What morons!!
David,
When will the little weasels who complain that you weren't the first to publish this realize that you don't care!!
When will they learn to think like businessmen instead of lawyers and take heed that so long as the WSJ and NYT pump your site, you make out, truth be damned!!
What morons!!
so did BMW.
nobody matched yet
Who cares when they match? It's only a matter of time now. Question is, how do you all plan to spend your ill-gotten gains?
Besides the pimp suit and cane, it's time to pay off some loans and purchase beachfront property with the excess. Who's with me?
KGB matched. +100 Rem of ingestible ionizing radiation.
The unsubstantiated statement on xoxohth.com can hardly be said to have been "first." I don't know about you guys, but I like to see the proof in pudding (i.e., a memo of some sort) before deciding who was first to break the news. David did just that. Therefore, he was first, in my opinion.
I'm really really skeptical that firms will match, or that all firms will match. I think following on the heels of the recent increase, firms won't feel as compelled, and let's face it, firms like Simpson, Sullivan etc. HAVE to match because they're lives are crap and they're losing associates by the droves. This is not actually the case in all Big Law, so maybe they will use that to justify not raising salaries?
Someone please convince me that I'm wrong, I would love to see that extra dough, but billing only 2400 I don't think I will!
David,
When will the little weasel who complaining about the xoxohth.com links learn to post only once!
When will he learn to think like a normal internet user instead of an autistic retard and take heed that so long as you press the "Post" button once on your site, the post will appear, lag be damned!!
What moron!!
Schulte matched
6:24pm is correct.
Treating xoxohth as a "source" is like citing something scribbled on the wall of a bathroom stall. Last time I checked, the Bluebook didn't have a rule for that. See Bathroom Stall #4, Men's Room, New Jersey Turnpike, Exit 13A.
6:24pm is correct.
Cletus Miller has matched.
For God's sake, if he didn't get his information from xoxo he doesn't have to credit them, and since he posted a memo that wasn't posted there until later, he clearly didn't. In other words, calm the fuck down, bizarre xoxo lemmings.
David,
When will the little weasel who complaining about the xoxohth.com links learn to post only once!
When will he learn to think like a normal internet user instead of an autistic retard and take heed that so long as you press the "Post" button once on your site, the post will appear, lag be damned!!
What moron!!
when will Posted by: woot | January 22, 2007 06:27 PM
learn basic grammar?
David,
When will the little weasel who complaining about the xoxohth.com links learn to post only once!
When will he learn to think like a normal internet user instead of an autistic retard and take heed that so long as you press the "Post" button once on your site, the post will appear, lag be damned!!
What moron!!
when will Posted by: woot | January 22, 2007 06:27 PM
learn basic grammar?
David,
When will the little weasel who complaining about the xoxohth.com links learn to post only once!
When will he learn to think like a normal internet user instead of an autistic retard and take heed that so long as you press the "Post" button once on your site, the post will appear, lag be damned!!
What moron!!
Is Woot really Aaron B. Charney?
Is Woot really Aaron B. Charney?
Is Woot really Aaron B. Charney?
Would you argue, then, that working "only" 2400 hours is worth taking a $20K pay cut (what are the average billables at STB)? My headhunter tells me that STB is hiring.
woot: xoxohth-regulars are not welcomed here. This site is for grown folks.
Is Woot really Aaron B. Charney?
Woot!
6:34 is right. I am a friend of Dave Lat and know for a fact that he no longer reads xoxohth. He once described it to me as "a cesspool of idiocy and prejudice."
(He does read Infirmation, though, and he regularly cites to Greedy NY, LA, etc.)
Shanetta Cutlar has matched.
xoxohth lets you edit prior posts, no?
Also, the xoxo thread says 4:33, this one says 4:36. I won't believe xoxo was first until I see proof that xoxo's time stamps are unassailable.
Otherwise I'll assume it's just like Bashman's 10:00 am on-the-dot posts giving the details of Supreme Court decisions, where the post first appears on the site at 10:30 or so.
And, to speak your xoxohth language, Lat's more prestigious than all of you put together. YLS + O'Scann + WLRK = bow down because you got pwn3d
...or I'll assume that the 3-minute time differential isn't significant. I.e. if you and I compare what time our watches say at any given instant, a 3-minute variation wouldn't be surprising.
Woot!
the MSM is just going to cite to whatever website they're using to get the info, if at all. and NYT isn't going to use xoxohth as a source.
Besides, the Journal law blog has already cited here.
FWIW, XO's timestamps cannot be altered. It looks like Lat waited until he'd received multiple verifications before posting it, while XO jumped the gun and posted first without waiting for verification. So XO was first, Lat waited until it was verified and posted very quickly thereafter.
Lat had the memo up before xoxohth, which is what counts in my book. And "in any event" is right - New York Times is not going to cite to fucking xoxohth.The Wall Street Journal certainly didn't: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/01/22/simpson-thacher-raises-the-bar/
I just matched.
7:01, your link shows the wsj crediting lat.
read a little more carefully, "wsj did"
"try again," you must be talking about the comment you most likely wrote on the blog entry, is that right?
lol fags
when other blogs tried to take credit for leaking the usnews rankings first, xoxo just sent out corrections and practically every blog corrected themselves. the same thing will happen in this case.
btw, xoxohth.com has already been cited in a national newspaper far more prestigious than that liberal sulzberger rag--USA TODAY
I am actually a friend of david lat and I know for a fact that friend of david lat is actually david. He calls this blog "a miracle of divine proportions" and "the single most important development in the legal field since the invention of the written word"
woot: i always find it shocking that intelligent law students/lawyers could be mindless "conservative" sheep...
Fried Weener has not matched yet. Give them a few days.
XOXOHTH folk:
We have revised this post to state that ATL posted the memo first. This we believe to be indisputably true. Thank you.
Cleary matched.
My daddy matched.
What I don't understand is why anyone who is actually close enough the market that Lat' is reporting on would pen 20 annoying posts about xoxoxoththth in the first place. There are all kinds of inane and awesomely immature things law students do, and we should be proud of this, but seriously, who are these XOXOHTH people?
we're rich, beeyatch!
As someone who has hired BigLaw only when absolutely necessary, this development means that junior associates at such firms will get even less meaningful work. Most clients actually read their bills and object to spending $300+/hour for someone who doesn't know the first thing about structuring a deal or trying a case. I have spent many hours reading bills -- including expenses -- and insisting on being charged fairly. I didn't start out doing that, but when the six-figure monthly litigation bills started rolling in, you can be damn sure it was worth my time to figure out where the padding was. Until law firms figure this out, we'll just fo where the billing rates are more reasonable and actually reflect valuable legal services.
Almost a year ago, Sullivan & Cromwell raised starting salaries by $20K from $125K to $145K. Yesterday, Simpson announced a further $15K increase in starting salaries to $160K. Why have salaries gone up by nearly 30% in a year? To staunch the flow of midlevels to the investment banks, hedge funds, PE shops, in-house counsel and myriad other jobs that promise either higher pay, a better quality of life, or in rare cases, both.
I do not intend to sound ungrateful for the increase in salary, I am just another associate at a big New York firm with over $100K in law school debts to repay who knows how much any extra money helps that cause. But is there a price point where more associates will stop grumbling about poor working environments and stay at these firms for the long-haul?
Obviously a $20K increase was not enough to slow the attrition rate. Now firms are hoping that another $15K might get people to stick around? What about asking the tougher questions such as why turnover is so high in New York law firms? Or why associates secretly, or not so secretly, begin planning their own exit strategies from day one on the job? Or what senior associates and partners could do to keep their juniors from jumping ship? Perhaps better management techniques should be taught to those at the top, such as learning how to manage upward (i.e. the clients' expectations) rather than caving in to every whim of the client and promising unreasonable deliverables. Since the big law firms seem to do everything else in tandem , maybe they should strike a gentlemen's agreement to push back on clients' unreasonable demands. Such a move could eliminate the fear that if a partner at Firm X says no to a client on a Friday afternoon to drafting an entire Merger Agreement by Monday morning, the client will just go to Firm Y to get it done. In the process, a small legion of junior associates will be more grateful for actually having their weekend to themselves for a change and more willing to sacrifice when absolutely necessary.
Whatever the solution is, while a boost in salary is nice for everyone, it fails to address the underlying problems as to why third- and fourth-year associates flee New York firms in droves, creating the apparent shortage today. Maybe New York firms should finally begin critically assessing their management structures and treatment of their subordinates.
Almost a year ago, Sullivan & Cromwell raised starting salaries by $20K from $125K to $145K. Yesterday, Simpson announced a further $15K increase in starting salaries to $160K. Why have salaries gone up by nearly 30% in a year? To staunch the flow of midlevels to the investment banks, hedge funds, PE shops, in-house counsel and myriad other jobs that promise either higher pay, a better quality of life, or in rare cases, both.
I do not intend to sound ungrateful for the increase in salary, I am just another associate at a big New York firm with over $100K in law school debts to repay who knows how much any extra money helps that cause. But is there a price point where more associates will stop grumbling about poor working environments and stay at these firms for the long-haul?
Obviously a $20K increase was not enough to slow the attrition rate. Now firms are hoping that another $15K might get people to stick around? What about asking the tougher questions such as why turnover is so high in New York law firms? Or why associates secretly, or not so secretly, begin planning their own exit strategies from day one on the job? Or what senior associates and partners could do to keep their juniors from jumping ship? Perhaps better management techniques should be taught to those at the top, such as learning how to manage upward (i.e. the clients' expectations) rather than caving in to every whim of the client and promising unreasonable deliverables. Since the big law firms seem to do everything else in tandem , maybe they should strike a gentlemen's agreement to push back on clients' unreasonable demands. Such a move could eliminate the fear that if a partner at Firm X says no to a client on a Friday afternoon to drafting an entire Merger Agreement by Monday morning, the client will just go to Firm Y to get it done. In the process, a small legion of junior associates will be more grateful for actually having their weekend to themselves for a change and more willing to sacrifice when absolutely necessary.
Whatever the solution may be and while a boost in salary is nice for everyone, it fails to address the underlying problems as to why third- and fourth-year associates flee New York firms in droves, creating the apparent shortage today. Maybe New York firms should finally begin critically assessing their management structures and treatment of their subordinates.
Kaye Scholer still hasn't given out bonuses from 2006.
Still nothing from DPW, S&C, and Cravath? what cheapies?
As a Head Hunter in NYC - I am happy about my raise as well.
Any indications about other cities following suit?
As much as you fools think this is a "good" thing or music to associate's ears, you do realize it just means you will be that much more miserable for a few extra bucks. At least in my book, the marginal cost of misery for every hour billed over 2400 is not worth the pittance increase. Of course, hours wouldn't need to increase if partners took a slight nip in their profits, but I think a 2-mile sheet of ice will pave hell before that happens.
OnHandandKnees - do you honestly think that firms will now say "You owe me 100 hours over your previous year for this increase." The fact of the matter is, they are going to work you as hard as they can regardless of what they pay you. thus, it should be viewed as "music to our ears", because the job will not change, only how we are paid to do it.
so with all this talk, what seems lost is that summers are going to be paid almost $3100/wk by BigLaw. I know this is a common refrain for at least 20 years (just check Westlaw/Lexis for NYT/WSJ articles on the topic), but are we worth it? I mean, as someone who was a 1L summer and now will be a 2L summer, I definitely like the pay scale but getting paid $1,000/hr/per week definitely ain't reality (well, without joining a hedge fund)!
Fish & Richardson matched in all offices:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1170077834022
Breakign news for K&L Gates first years - rumors of salary increase to 145k!
Pyramid schemes and public disclosure of every employee’s salary creates an environment is not capitalism and not American. The big law environment creates incentive to to be lazy workers and to waste client money by billing for ATL time, Facebook time, Gchat time, Scrabbulous time.
It's time to make pyramid scheme based partnerships illegal, or at least taxable at the proper corporate rate.
In a utopian society, there would be no lawyers.