probably not.

I think the troll L2L actually has a point. These 13 firms are spurning recruitment and retention by their slow response to the market changes. Law students are keenly aware of these changes, and will question the long term viability of these firms. Top students who have choices to go elsewhere will go elsewhere, opening up opportunities for T2 and even T3 students.

Dust off that resume L2L, come recruitment time, coordinators at the 13 firms listed above probably will love to secure a top 25% from a T2 school.

I doubt it.

I think 9:49 is right to a degree. The firms might not be needy enough to hire L2L, but they might want to look at his fellow T2 classmates.

When did Baker Botts leave the list? I don't ever recall seeing anything on that.

Baker Botts should NOT be off the list- they did not raise the majority of their offices.

Baker Botts matched (in New York, which seems to be the focus of the list):

http://www.abovethelaw.com/2007/02/skaddenfreude_baker_botts_mung.php

This is a list about NYC raises. If your firm moves in NYC, they should move in home offices and other markets too. If not, you've got a problem.

Lat,
Multiple requests for Amlaw 100 list. Please provide to the masses.

The two Richmond firms are dragging their feet. You'd think they'd move, given the movement in Atlanta and Charlotte. I bet their NY associates are not pleased.

It's not completely fair for Hunton to be on this list as their fiscal year ends April 1 and any raises are always announced in the summer.

The two big dogs in Richmond, Hunton and McGuire, are way behind the ball given that Troutman moved weeks ago to $125k, then again last week to $130k.

I think both will match eventually, because they do not want to see Richmond become a 3-firm town. My guess is that they are delaying in an effort to make the raises effective 4/1, their new fiscal year, rather than retroactive to 1/1.

Their delay to save about $3k per lawyer will not go unnoticed.

Troutman Richmond moved to $130? Hunton and McGuire will have to follow.

What happened to Dickstein? Is the lifestyle worth the pay deficit?

Hey Lat,

Do us a favor and return to the List of Shame those firms with small NY offices, please. There may not be many affected associates in NY, but those of us at other offices could sure use the help! Thanks.

Does anyone have the Steptoe memo?

What about another list of shame where you actually use the AmLaw 100 instead of making parenthetical reference to where your Vault 100 listers fall on AmLaw?

It should come as no surprise that at least 9 of the 13 firms on your list of shame are in the bottom half of the AmLaw 100 when comparing revenue per lawyer. Baker & McKenzie is second to last with $454K. Seyfarth has no excuse with RPL of $866K.

9:49 - I hope the recruiting committee for every firm on the list of shame reads your post, especially those who claim to want to be "selective" in their recruiting efforts. Kudos.

9:49 - I hope the recruiting committee for every firm on the list of shame reads your post, especially those who claim to want to be "selective" in their recruiting efforts. Kudos.

9:49 - I hope the recruiting committee for every firm on the list of shame reads your post, especially those who claim to want to be "selective" in their recruiting efforts. Kudos.

Hey Lat, Can you start a thread about bonus size? While salaries are pretty transparent bonus information is as vague as ever

Just Sayin'
But doesn't Baker & McKenzie have such a low RPL because of the location of their offices. I have to imagine the RPL is brought down by the fact that they attorneys in 3rd world countries that cannot be making the same amount as their NY lawyers, thus brining down the RPL on whole.

To me this is still no excuse to not match in NY and other major US cities.

Sorry for the newbie question but why are there such drastic differences between the AmLaw and vault rankings? Does it have to do with who has NY offices (assuming that Vault is only concerned with prestige and from what I gather, NY office = mucho prestige)?

Thanks!

McGuireWoods and Hunton don't raise salaries until April. It is their policy. There is no reason for them to break from it. Everyonce else raise after the beginning of their fiscal year, MW and Hunton haven't turned their years over yet. And I wouldn't worry, they will at least match, I would think.

Yeesh - For those who want to know about Baker and Mckenzie DC - I got the inside scoop:

They increased salaries to the 145 starting (retroactive to January 1), but are holding associates back from the annual July promotion. Now associates need to wait until January 2008 for their next promotion (in other words - 18 months from their last promotion in July 2006).

1:28 -- thats just cheap.

We need a new list of shame which includes firms that 1) did not match in all markets they are in, 2) did not apply the increase to all associates, or 3) did not match up the chain for senior associates.

Here's a start the list. Please copy and add/adjust as needed:

Baker & McKenzie [FN 1]
Greenberg [FN 1]
DLA Piper [FN 1]
Fulbright & Jaworski [FN 2]
Vinson & Elkins [FN 2]
Hunton & Williams [FN 2]
Nixon Peabody [FN 2]
Bryan Cave [FN 2]
Reed Smith [FN 2]
Dorsey & Whitney [FN 2]
McGuireWoods [FN 2]
Baker & Hostetler [FN 2]
Thelen Reid [FN 3]
Mintz Levin [FN 2]
Dickstein Shapiro [FN 2]
Seyfarth Shaw [FN 2]
Baker Botts [FN 4]

FN 1: Did not apply the raise to all associates or held associates back from raises.

FN 2: Has not matched for first years.

FN 3: Has not matched market for senior associates.

FN 4: Has not matched in all markets.

We also need some transparency for bonuses. We can start on a list for that when we get some data.

Hunton & Williams has just raised to $145K in all offices except New York and to $160K in New York.

BS on the H&W news

bored 1L
Vault rankings are their self-proclaimed prestige rankings which takes into account profits per partner I believe. ?? AmLaw is based on law firm size and gross income. The most striking difference is Baker & McKenzie which is 3 in AmLaw because they have almost 4,000 attorneys and a gross income of something near 1.5 billion per year. But they are known for having a low PPP. Probably because they have a ton of offices all over the world, including borderline 3rd world countries like Mexico.

Lat: You should reconsider your decision to drop Boies Schiller & Flexner and put them back on the list of shame. BSF USED to pay above market base salaries but has decided to forego that policy. Currently, the base salary for 1st to 4th years is at market rate. For those past their 4th year, however, the base salary is significantly below market, for some classes, I hear, it as much as $25K below market.

H&W did raise to $145K in all offices and $160K in NY. I'm pretty sure the 1st years in DC and LA are *delighted* to be making the same as a 1st year in Norfolk and Raleigh.

A hunton memo, or it's a lie.

1:57 - it's true. Lat: check your e-mail. Confirmation of the H&W raise should be waiting.

Per 2:14's post. If you have info, please update this list.

We need a new list of shame which includes firms that 1) did not match in all markets they are in, 2) did not apply the increase to all associates, or 3) did not match up the chain for senior associates.

Here's a start the list. Please copy and add/adjust as needed:

Baker & McKenzie [FN 1]
Greenberg [FN 1]
DLA Piper [FN 1]
Fulbright & Jaworski [FN 2]
Vinson & Elkins [FN 2]
Hunton & Williams [FN 2]
Nixon Peabody [FN 2]
Bryan Cave [FN 2]
Reed Smith [FN 2]
Dorsey & Whitney [FN 2]
McGuireWoods [FN 2]
Baker & Hostetler [FN 2]
Thelen Reid [FN 3]
Mintz Levin [FN 2]
Dickstein Shapiro [FN 2]
Seyfarth Shaw [FN 2]
Baker Botts [FN 4]
Boies Schiller & Flexner [FN 3]

FN 1: Did not apply the raise to all associates or held associates back from raises.

FN 2: Has not matched for first years.

FN 3: Has not matched market for senior associates.

FN 4: Has not matched in all markets.

2:34 - Hunton is off the list. Trust.

Take Hunton off that list and annoint them King of the Southeast! They crushed the market in Richmond, Atlanta, Charlotte, Raleigh (?), Norfolk!

This bodes well for all of those markets.

2:13-- AmLaw rankings are based purely on gross revenue:

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1145964629375
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1145803851920

Vault rankings are based purely on an associate ranking where associates are asked to rank the "prestige" of firms:

http://www.vault.com/nr/lawrankings.jsp?law2007=1&ch_id=242
http://www.vault.com/nr/lawrankings.jsp?law2007=2&ch_id=242&top100=1

The Vault results therefore tend to skew toward NYC- and LA-based firms, particularly those that have a lot of "institutional" clients (i.e., investment banks and big private equity funds), which seem to be considered more "prestigious" (whatever that means). DC-based firms also seem to get big boosts in the Vault rankings for some unknown reason. Meanwhile, many firms that are large, excellent firms but don't tend to do this so-called "prestige" work get pushed down the list.

You might want to hold off on the Hunton cheers until we get a memo and can see how bad the compression will be. My guess is $5k raises each year, which is not worthy of "King of the SE."

From the Hunton memo (for Richmond, ATL, Dallas, Raleigh, Knoxville, and Norfolk)

2007 - 145K
2006 - 145K
2005 - 150K
2004 - 155K
2003 - 160K
2002 - 170K
2001 - 180K
2000 - 190K
1999 - 200K

no Charlotte?

Can anyone with a subscription to the Legal Times post this article?

Keeping Score

Monday, February 19, 2007

A chart showing how firms on Legal Times' D.C. 20 have embraced the latest associate salary raise.

Can anyone with a subscription to the Legal Times post this article?

Keeping Score

Monday, February 19, 2007

A chart showing how firms on Legal Times' D.C. 20 have embraced the latest associate salary raise.

From the Hunton memo (for DC, McLean, Charlotte, LA, and Miami)

2007 - 145K
2006 - 145K
2005 - 155K
2004 - 170K
2003 - 190K
2002 - 210K
2001 - 225K
2000 - 240K
1999 - 255K

Wow. That's good money in Charlotte and Miami.

Can't wait to see the Legal Times article.

That's market for financial services in charlotte

not sure if KDW should be off the list of shame just yet. Raises are still 10k below market.

If you have info, please update this list.

We need a new list of shame which includes firms that 1) did not match in all markets they are in, 2) did not apply the increase to all associates, or 3) did not match up the chain for senior associates.

Here's a start the list. Please copy and add/adjust as needed:

Baker & McKenzie [FN 1]
Greenberg [FN 1]
DLA Piper [FN 1]
Fulbright & Jaworski [FN 2]
Vinson & Elkins [FN 2]
Hunton & Williams [FN 2]
Nixon Peabody [FN 2]
Bryan Cave [FN 2]
Reed Smith [FN 2]
Dorsey & Whitney [FN 2]
McGuireWoods [FN 2]
Baker & Hostetler [FN 2]
Thelen Reid [FN 3]
Mintz Levin [FN 2]
Dickstein Shapiro [FN 2]
Seyfarth Shaw [FN 2]
Baker Botts [FN 4]
Boies Schiller & Flexner [FN 3]
Kelley Drye & Warren [FN 3]

FN 1: Did not apply the raise to all associates or held associates back from raises.

FN 2: Has not matched for first years.

FN 3: Has not matched market for senior associates.

FN 4: Has not matched in all markets.

4:27 - Hunton should come off the list. They just beat the market earlier this week in Atlanta, Miami and Charlotte moving to 145 for 1Ls. Met the market in NY.

12:25: That's right. See Hunton memo here:

http://www.abovethelaw.com/2007/02/skaddenfreude_heres_the_hunton_1.php

FYI, Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw has not raised in Houston, but they have in NY, Chicago, etc. Word is that they will bump in TX if BIGTEX firms bump.

And yet BigTex remains eerily silent... Happy to be a third tier market, I assume.

I have heard some rumors that Vinson & Elkins matched in NY and DC, but explicitly will not match in Texas. Any confirmation? Heard this announcement came via voice mail.

Aren't these "shame" posts missing the point? Who cares what firm matched what salary hike - isn't the whole thing a big joke? The more firms raise salaries the more they feel they can put the squeeze to their associate attorneys and the whole thing is just a big cycle of bad karma. If firms want associates to act like investment bankers and get the big bucks, associates can't complain that they are being worked too hard. Personally, while I'm not sneezing at good pay, I want a more balanced life and that isn't going to come to me if I make another $20,000 and never see friends or my kids. What happened to law as a sane profession? If we want to have lives as attorneys, I don't see how the annual competition to pay the most does anything but make our lives worse. It's a vicious cycle and seems to be getting worse and worse with the 24/7 mentality of cell phones and blackberries. (and I'm not a partner, I'm a senior associate making slightly reduced pay for slightly reduced hours, and seeing the profesion get nastier and nastier as lawyers make more money, work longer hours and complain more and more, so everyone seems to lose, other than lawyers who jump off the track - and we're supposed to be so grateful for our special deals, instead of just the sane ones)