Add RSS RSS

Skaddenfreude: Cahill Matches

Cahill Gordon & Reindel has raised base salaries for its associates. The memo — posted on Infirmation, verified to us by one source at the firm, and emailed to us by another — appears after the jump.

CAHILL GORDON & REINDEL

We are pleased to announce that we have increased associate base salaries effective as of January 1, 2007 as follows:

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

Classes senior to 1999, Senior Attorneys and Counsel will be addressed on an individual basis.

These increases will be reflected in your February 15, 2007 paycheck.
Thank you again for your hard work and dedication to the firm.

Executive Committee

Cahill Memo (Matches STB)
[Infirmation / Greedy NY]

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by Anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:45 PM

Hey David, in honor of your UTR roots, how about expanding the firm salary discussion to clerkship bonuses? Any word on increases?

avatar
2 Posted by ML | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:48 PM

Email just went out at Morgan Lewis saying firm will raise salaries in most US Markets, but did not say how much. Will be sending out announcement soon for all non-NYC offices.

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:50 PM

whoop-dee-frickin-doo

avatar
4 Posted by cog in the machine | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:52 PM

Here is a list of some notable v100 firms that have not yet matched the salary bump in NYC:

Latham
Kirkland
Williams & Connolly
Gibson Dunn
Arnold & Porter
Jones Day
Ropes & Gray
Wilson Sonsini
Winston & Strawn
Orrick
Baker Botts
Freshfields
Baker & McKenzie
Linklaters
Pillsbury Winthrop
McDermott
DLA Piper
Fulbright
Dechert
Vinson & Elkins
Alston & Bird
Heller Ehrman
Bingham McCutchen
Bryan Cave
Hughes Hubbard
McGuireWoods
Squire Sanders
Thelen Reid
Mintz Levin
Kelley Drye

I'm sure I've missed some, but this is a start.

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:53 PM

whoop-dee-frickin-doo

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:57 PM

Cog: add Holland and Knight

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:00 PM

My count is that 48 firms have matched to 160K in NY (not including Wachtell). Does anyone have an electronic list? Thanks.

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:00 PM

second the request for info on clerkship bonuses

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:02 PM

3:52 --Add Reed Smith

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:03 PM

Does anyone know the payscale at Morgan Lewis in NY prior to the recent raise? Thanks!

avatar
11 Posted by student | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:05 PM

how much does a typical clerkship pay? NY? DC?

avatar
12 Posted by anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:06 PM

no one cares about clerkships.

avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:08 PM

Don't know the full payscale at MLB in NY prior to raise, but it was $145 starting.

avatar
14 Posted by Wildcat | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:10 PM

Umm, yeah, Anonymous 3:45 -- federal judicial clerks got a 1.7% COLA which bumped me up $900. For the year, not the paycheck. Sweet! And as a bonus, I don't have to work this weekend.

avatar
15 Posted by Anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:16 PM

Is the Wachtell news verified?

avatar
16 Posted by someone who cares | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:18 PM

People do care about clerkship bonuses.

avatar
17 Posted by Anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:18 PM

Is the Wachtell news verified?

avatar
18 Posted by Anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:19 PM

Cog - add Chadbourne - still no word.

avatar
19 Posted by Anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:21 PM

Is the Wachtell news verified?

avatar
20 Posted by an on an on | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:22 PM

Cog - add K&L Gates

avatar
21 Posted by Anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:22 PM

4:06: great call, no one cares about clerkships

avatar
22 Posted by weighing in | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:24 PM

i don't care about clerkships.

avatar
23 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:28 PM

Cog - add Crowell & Moring.

avatar
24 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:28 PM

what firms have a hold-back?

avatar
25 Posted by seriously now | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:28 PM

shouldn't you be gushing about judges on a plane?

no one cares about clerkships. plus, your bonus is going to be taxed like you worked at biglaw the whole time anyway

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:28 PM

Add Cooley

avatar
27 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:29 PM

4:24 - Clerkships don't care about you.

avatar
28 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:30 PM

what firms have a hold-back?

avatar
29 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:31 PM

what firms have a hold-back?

avatar
30 Posted by Anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:31 PM

4:22:

I assume that you mean: "People too dense to get clerkships don't care about clerkships."

avatar
31 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:31 PM

Cog - add Crowell & Moring.

avatar
32 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:35 PM

can someone explain to me why people go work at Steptoe? it has a generally good reputation yet i don't understand how that can be when you get $0 for meeting the 1950 min. billables and then if you hit 2100 you get about $10K when other firms pay $30+ bonus. Also, I hear they have a $20K hold-back and the clerkship bonus is generally only $10K. I don't understand why people would go there and be so undercompensated. Can someone who works there or knows something I don't explain to me???

avatar
33 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:36 PM

Please post if anyone has news on the SF/SV market (besides MoFo and Dewey).

avatar
34 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:36 PM

can someone explain to me why people go work at Steptoe? it has a generally good reputation yet i don't understand how that can be when you get $0 for meeting the 1950 min. billables and then if you hit 2100 you get about $10K when other firms pay $30+ bonus. Also, I hear they have a $20K hold-back and the clerkship bonus is generally only $10K. I don't understand why people would go there and be so undercompensated. Can someone who works there or knows something I don't explain to me???

avatar
35 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:37 PM

can someone explain to me why people go work at Steptoe? it has a generally good reputation yet i don't understand how that can be when you get $0 for meeting the 1950 min. billables and then if you hit 2100 you get about $10K when other firms pay $30+ bonus. Also, I hear they have a $20K hold-back and the clerkship bonus is generally only $10K. I don't understand why people would go there and be so undercompensated. Can someone who works there or knows something I don't explain to me???

avatar
36 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:37 PM

clerkships are for losers

avatar
37 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:37 PM

Please post if anyone has news on the SF/SV market (besides MoFo and Dewey).

avatar
38 Posted by anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:40 PM

There are a lot of firms who pay the market base rate but are really cheap when it comes to bonuses. That way, in vault reports, etc. they can claim to pay market but actually with bonus they pay much less than market.

avatar
39 Posted by Anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:44 PM

Add Katten Muchin to list of yet-to-match firms

avatar
40 Posted by anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:50 PM

Cauque Balls & Licktenstein matched your moms.

avatar
41 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:57 PM

Has MoFo SF raised?

avatar
42 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:58 PM

what about katten muchin?

avatar
43 Posted by Yo Mama | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:01 PM

MyButt & YourFace LLP just matched!

avatar
44 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:02 PM

Look for McDermott to match shortly after Feb. 14, when its Management Committee meets.

avatar
45 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:08 PM

5:01 - you must work for a shitty little firm like Venable and are not getting a raise and are mad as hell about it, hence the "jokes."

avatar
46 Posted by Anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:11 PM

Hughes Hubbard just matched, although instead of giving total salary numbers they listed the increases for each year.

avatar
47 Posted by Yo Mama | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:16 PM

Venable just matched!

avatar
48 Posted by meow | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:20 PM

clerkships are a waste of time. I worked for a judge! I'm an overachiever!

avatar
49 Posted by dikembe | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:21 PM

Latham is announcing tomorrow.

avatar
50 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:26 PM

How do you know that Latham is announcing tomorrow?

avatar
51 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:27 PM

add to that:

I'm prestigious! I'm elite! I'm Spielvogel!

avatar
52 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:30 PM

just got fired for reading too many posts. office services just came down and i'm now writing from my personal blackberry. :( everyone, go home or get back to work!

avatar
53 Posted by Another anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:31 PM

Seriously, Meow & Anonymous 5:27, your animosity towards clerks smacks of jealousy and ignorance. Grow up.

Lat, the new people posting on this site suck (undoubtedly drawn here by the salary news) and its rapidly becoming a waste of time to read their comments.

avatar
54 Posted by anona | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:34 PM

Way to go McDermott! Leading the charge from the rear as usual... frigging cheapskates. You'll probably get a bill from Chicago for the paper the memo is printed on.

avatar
55 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:38 PM

WilmerHale raises confirmed:

http://www.wilmerhale.com/careers/careers/summer/compensation/

avatar
56 Posted by anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:41 PM

There are some reports that Wachtell has went to 200K for first years? Is this legit? Also, I'm extremely delighted to see that gsbarristers is still down... I can picture Spielvogel sitting in his office right now, with its many leatherbound books and furniture of rich mahogony, wearing his tux (bowtie untied) and crying like a little baby

avatar
57 Posted by anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:47 PM

As we speak Spielvogel is meeting with the other eminent heads of the International Association of Networks in their secret Long Island Command Center to figure out a way to get more bandwidth.

avatar
58 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:48 PM

Wow, Wilmer bumps the DC/NY split to 20K in the 4th year. Thats gotta hurt for DC associates.

avatar
59 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:06 PM

"Wow, Wilmer bumps the DC/NY split to 20K in the 4th year. Thats gotta hurt for DC associates."

More than you know. Trying to figure out which firms to send my resume to as we speak.

avatar
60 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:06 PM

ps - I'm still junior enough to move.

avatar
61 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:08 PM

6:06 -- God Bless you. Send them a message and look out for yourself. I am tied into a firm that still hasn't decided but rational actors like yourself will set the market straight.

avatar
62 Posted by Mikey | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:08 PM

Add Curtis Mallet

avatar
63 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:09 PM

6:06 -- God Bless you. Send them a message and look out for yourself. I am tied into a firm that still hasn't decided but rational actors like yourself will set the market straight.

avatar
64 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:11 PM

Add Curtis Mallet

avatar
65 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:12 PM

6:08 - Add Curtis Mallet to what? The list of non-matchers in NY?

avatar
66 Posted by anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:15 PM

Looking at the list of firms who haven't matched, I don't know how some (or any) of them can afford not to match in NYC. It's not as if 1 or 2 firms went way over the top. This will clearly open up a talent gap for the firms that aren't matching.

avatar
67 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:40 PM

Re: Steptoe, aren't you allowed to bring your dog to work? That's gotta count for something.

avatar
68 Posted by Anonymous | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:57 PM

Reed Smith better match in NYC if they want to be considered in the same ballpark as the other big players

avatar
69 Posted by Clerky McDork | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 7:03 PM

I'm jealous about not clerking. I wanted to get paid crap and help write opinions! I wish I could put it on my resume! Oh well! Too bad I'm not an overachiever!

avatar
70 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 7:07 PM

Reed Smith is a very very solid firm in many markets, but NYC may not yet be one of them. Ask me again in 2 years as they are a firm on the rise. The office in NYC is small, which they are growing by recruiting laterals, not by hiring lots of first years - so doubt they are too worried about your threat. Its not like a Fordham or St. John's grad, no matter how good, is going to lateral over to Cravath tomorrow.

All that said, I imagine they match, but it may not be until later this year.

avatar
71 Posted by anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 7:09 PM

the way i see it... you wanna play with the big boys you gotta pay like the big boys

avatar
72 Posted by Anony | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:18 PM

You are probably right that Reed Smith won't lose its associates to the elite firms. Pittsburgh is tough though.

avatar
73 Posted by futurelawclerk | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:20 PM

LAW CLERKS DESERVE RAISE TOO! Here’s a thought: when I started law school - starting salary in NY was 125K. Now the starting salary is 160K and it’s a change that reflects the market value of recent graduates. However, the bonus given to people who clerk has remained at 15K for several years. Every year law firms raise their salaries only increases the amount of money students give up in order to clerk. Immediate financial concerns of law clerks whose families are not among the financial elite are realities which firms should take seriously. Clerks bring a valuable set of skills to law firms - one that should be reflected in the bonus firms offer clerks to make up for the 75% pay cut they take to clerk. The amount that clerks give up for the experience is at least 110K. True that clerks benefit from the prestige of clerkships on their resumes, but most have just as many loans to pay and I refuse to believe the value of an associate has appreciated but the value of a law clerk has not. If law firms want to attract clerks, it’s about time that they raise the clerkship bonus to reflect the change in market.

avatar
74 Posted by futurelawclerk | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:25 PM

For those interested - federal district court clerkships are around 47K. For state supreme court clerkships, it's a little more at 50K. The clerkship bonus for firms is 15K. With the increase in salary should come an increase in clerkship bonus so that the deficit between what law school graduates would make to work at a firm at least remains consistent.

avatar
75 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:25 PM

hey futurelawclerk, you posted that verbatim on another blog previously. get out of here, punk.

avatar
76 Posted by anon | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:28 PM

Re: Clerks

Raise bonuses or what? You're going to clerk forever and not go to private practice? You did your clerkship so that you could get that job. And if you had it before and decided to take a year off, well that was your decision, and they shouldn't pay you for deciding to defer your giant salary. Sorry. But form experience, most clerks don't know anymore about working in a law firm than a first year.

avatar
77 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:31 PM

Bravo, Anon 8:28! My sentiments exactly.

avatar
78 Posted by futurelawclerk | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:31 PM

For those interested - federal district court clerkships are around 47K. For state supreme court clerkships, it's a little more at 50K. The clerkship bonus for firms is 15K. With the increase in salary should come an increase in clerkship bonus. Getting a larger clerkship bonus can help a student start paying back what they would have been able to during the first year of work at a firm. Firms should also reflect the fact they value the skill set clerks can bring just as the value for associates just out of law school.

avatar
79 Posted by anon 8:28 | Permalink Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:38 PM

Anonymous 8:31: thank you.

Law clerks: ZING!!!

Post Your Comment