almost first

Not quite first, but good enough

Wachtell was robbed!

Not quite first, but good enough

I like turtles.

Latham and Patterson Belknap also did very well in the A-List rankings:

http://abovethelaw.com/2008/07/a-list_rankings_open_thread.php

They sound like great places to work.

Does anyone know if any firms are actually breaking with the lock-step system, and quietly advancing people on the salary scale? Or do they view it as more in their interests to hold tight on salary even if they bleed mid levels?

Cadwalader would have been in the top ten, but AMLaw couldn't find a large enough sample.

Well, my OCI preference list just got updated!

My amlaw 50-100 firm does not pay lockstep salaries.

11 - everyone knows there's the T14, and then there's TTT. By saying 50-100 you sound like a bitter Seton Hall student.

12: What are you talking about? Get a clue.

12, huh? I have seen people refer to their firms as top 200, top 100, top 20, etc. on this board. I guess I could have said top 100 but why bother, my firm isn't in the top 50. I went to a T14 school btw.

i think i got a callback at nutter in lawschool but didn't get the job. i went to another biglaw firm (conspicuously absent from this list) got laid off and now practice from the back of a convenience store in east boston

enough with the TTT T14 elitism for christ's sake.

I don't work for CWT but I have to say, I can't blame them for firing the 90 people that participated and ranked them last in the survey. You have to get rid of those types of cancer so the malcontents don't salt the fields so to speak.

Well done Chris White, kudos to you.

someone posting list in comments....???

Interesting that mid-levels are viewed (at least by AM and, apparently, Lat) as financial "sweet spots" for BigLaw. That does not appear to be the case at my firm, where the mid-level population has been pretty much eviscerated over the past year or so. I expect I'll be next...

this is complete bs. the way the survey works at the firms that do well is, firm admin keeps pestering associates to submit responses and those who do are mostly cheerleaders. it's like a "get out the vote" drive (wink - and vote for us) except the nay side is not campaigning.

What is the standard billing rate for mid-level associates at these firms?
I'd imagine that being the "sweet spot" has a lot to do with the firm having raised their billing rate substantially but not the pay rate.

what's up w/ dechert?

I'm with 19. My previous biglaw firm has very few midlevels in the 3-5 year range. Or maybe it felt that way because they were leaving all the time.

Day Pitney clearly got a heavy response from the Hartford folks (legacy Day Berry & Howard) and virtually no response from the New Jersey group (legacy Pitney Hardin). Very touchy feely in CT. NJ-well, not so much.

20: Ex-Latham guy here (that participated in this survey). I never got any pestering e-mails.

13: this is 12, and I am hilarious. See, I intentionally confused law school rankings with law firm rankings. In doing so, I demonstrated my own wittiness and mocked the rampant elitism on ATL.

20 - I disagree that only the cheerleaders participate. You also get the malcontents. The apathetic are the ones who don't take the survey.

Dropping lockstep is just an excuse to pay everyone less and hide everyone's compensation from their peers. If you add up the sum of all "merit" based bonuses and salary increases I guarantee it will be less than the sum of the lockstep increases and bonuses tied to hours targets.

Partners don't need to be told: "with a locked-in pay structure, [associates] can become a real financial burden during a slowdown." What this article is actually saying is, you can pay less under a merit system because you can build in "economic market conditions." F--- American Lawyer magazine and its pro-management bias.

22, what is up with Dechert? Where is that firm in the rankings?

28/2:02, if you're a good lawyer and receive high merit-based bonuses, you don't care what all the other underachievers get and whether that sum bonus total is higher or lower than lockstep. And if the firm is underpaying you for what you deserve, you can easily go to another firm.

If you're getting less money based on merit than on lockstep, then perhaps the market is trying to tell you what your labor is actually worth. Only the below average performers argue for lockstep and flattening everyone's incentives.

It's like the ones in school who complain about the grading curve the most. Guess whether these geniuses are below or above the median.

I used to work at one in the top 5 on that list. We never got any pestering emails, either.

My current firm has very few 4th-6th years because when I came out of law school ('02), it was very much like it is now - economic slowdown because of tech bust and 9/11. Many in my class were given delayed start dates or had their offers revoked. 3L's certainly could not get offers at new firms. The class behind me had a much more difficult time finding SA and 1st year jobs. And that continued for a while. Therefore, there were simply a lot fewer associates in the 4-6 year pipeline, and many of those that were around with experience have been lured away to a better lifestyle or a higher paying gig. They were throwing money around a couple of years ago and many people took it.

Why is MoFo so swell on the national survey but horrible in SF?

i used to work at a firm that came in last in its geographic area on this ranking last year. that place did, in fact, suck.

why is dechert ranked so low?

The problem with moving away from lockstep in a large firm is that the firm quickly turns into a shark tank. Also, the only objective way to differentiatie between associates in a large firm to go by hours, which could easily lead to fraud. How can anyone judge the quality of an associate as compared to their peers unless you work with everybody, which is impossible in a large firm. Some partners/clients are incredibly demanding while other are less so. How can a firm honestly handicap those differences in terms of real dollars to associates when looking at reviews? Also, I think lockstep compensation is the single biggest reason for the high level of collegiality at my firm so I'd hate to see it go.

32 - if you don't know...

The people who liked it and made MoFo the firm it was (and still pretends to be) have all left since the firm decided to stop being the MoFo of old in an attempt to jack up PPP. Now it's a bunch of pissed off associates working for a bunch of pissed of partners. MoFo-SF's corporate group is downright scary.

36--that i get, but how is it so much higher ranked in other geographic areas?

can someone with access tell me how jenner & block ranked?

Dewey and LeBoeuf will do much better next year. They will soon be a V5 firm. Go Steve Davis!

34
If you do a search on this site you'll find several negative stories about Dechert. There are some very good associates that work there, but the people who run things do not care about associates. Not caring about associates is just fine. Saying time and again that you care when you don't is dishonest and precisely what Dechert's management does. They were quick to lay people off in real estate when the economy weakened and the midlevels started feeling it first. These real estate associates billed a lot and made the firm a lot of money, and the firm showed its appreciation by giving them the ax, not by transfering them into other groups. A lot of firms stick associates into narrow practice areas and when things inevitably slow down in that area firms like Dechert are very quick to get rid of them. With the economy so weak and business falling off the firm has been getting more cut throat- getting rid of partners with practices that couldn't extract ridiculous rates. One partner had been with the firm almost 30 years and had good business. Strangely that partner's clients would have been unhappy with a 30% increase in rates. Winokur and son- - I mean Dechert are going to do whatever it takes to preserve PPP and maintain its PPP ranking in AmLaw. Nothing wrong with that, but the firms very poor midlevel survey rankings (it's been bad for a few years) reflect how poor a job Dechert does with it's associates. The firm is banking on the fact that people feel lucky just to have a job in this economy, especially a 6 figure job.

No surprise that Jones Day DC got 2nd to last in the DC rankings---SECOND TO LAST!!!

Jones Day does not pay lockstep, and Jones Day DC does not pay bonuses. The result has been---unambiguously---across the board lower salaries. The reward to Jones Day DC's partners has been: (1) more money in their pockets, and (2) SECOND TO LAST PLACE IN THE AMLAW MIDLEVELS SURVEY.

Let this be a warning to you assoicates at Howrey and other firms moving away from lockstep. Overall salaries go down, and hours go up because people are constantly leaving, laterals are hard to hire because who wants to join this kind of situation, and the people who haven't left yet have to pick up the slack in the interim.

And, of course, for anyone thinking about joining Jones Day DC: Do so at your own peril.

Dipietro is an idiot. Lockstep pay makes sense because most associates really are fungible and since most associates only work for a few specific partners it is impossible to really rank them. How do you compare a 4th year assoiate that works mainly for 2 M&A partners to a 4th year associate who works primarily for 1 or 2 ERISA or litigation partners? The only objective measure is billable hours, and that is largely dependent on firm, group, and partner performance. And firm performance is already built in with the variable year-end bonus.

Can someone post the lockstep salary article in the comments? Thx.

Guess who came in last place?

http://abovethelaw.com/2008/08/cadwalader_is_a_lost_cause.php

Just fyi, the last link (data by city) didn't make me log in like the others wanted to do.

How did Crane, Poole & Schmidt do?

Why is everyone so unhappy at Sidley?

On these boards they can never seem to stop talking about how wonderful and happy they are...

47/4:42 - Sidley-LA in particular is notorious. There are others who can give more details than I am, but I was told to stay far, far away when I was looking to lateral (mid-level corporate).

37/2:44 - It's the mothership. Crackdowns are going to be felt more severely there. Also, there are a few particularly difficult people in the corporate department there (I know from interviewing and from being across the table from associates who looked like they wanted to die). Someone is free to defend them, but my sense is that the department has really been gutted over the past couple of years, and they're having a tough time hiring.

finishing up my summer at Sidley NY and im pretty shocked to read that- i've met associates who are happier than others, but everyone seems relatively happy with the place (this varies of course by practice group)

i can tell you all that the exit/lateral options from sidley are plentiful (at least from NY, Chi and DC offices) and i really dont know of many leaving for other firms....

40--Dechert laid off 13 associates and although that sucks, at least they disclosed those numbers. That is far better than all of these firms who have quietly let go much more. I am guessing that you were one of those unfortunate 13, sorry and good luck in your search.

It's been a while since I took any statistics classes, but I have trouble taking seriously "surveys" that rank firms based on so few responses. A lot of the "City Rankings" have as few as 6 responses. That means you would move the average almost 0.2 based on ONE associate changing his or her response by ONE point. A couple of people having a good or bad day could explain some of the rankings (not to mention the question of self-selection when response rates are so low).

At the very least, the charts should include some information on the distribution of responses (is a "3" average from six 3s, or three 1s and three 5s?)

Re: lockstep vs. merit and comment #30/2:19

I graduated summa and am one of the top performers in my associate class. The reason I prefer lockstep over my big merit bonus is that as a human being, I actually care about other people besides myself, and as a lawyer, I value being able to work together in relationships of trust with my peers.

Solidarity!

Re: Communism/52

Solidarity with who? The associates that will quit after two, maybe three years? Or the partners that enjoy boinking you in your financial ass, while you tweeter about solidarity?

But congrats on graduating summa and being underpaid.

I run a two lawyer firm. I'm the owner and I hired a cheap associate from a TTT who finished toward the bottom of the class. I pay him $30K per year with a $3K (10%) bonus at the holidays.

(The paralegal gets $40K year + profit sharing / health care / SEP) I outsourced my answering service to the Phillipines.

The associate is highly unsatisfied with his job, or so I'm told, because he reports to the paralegal. I don't let him near clients or courthouses, that's the rule.

47/48, numerous Sidley people have expressed to me how much they like it. There are quite a few highly regarded firms that have very low "mid-level associate survey" ranks. If there's any reason why Sidley mid-levels would be inspired to give it low marks on any survey, it would be the bonuses (which are obviously far lower than its "peer" firm in Chi). Otherwise, I'd say they're a relativley content lot (I'm a junior at one of the firms to which most people assign a rank of #3-5 in Chi). I don't know anything about LA (thank heavens).

Regional rankings are interesting. I was plotting Cads decline in all the cities and of course it came last in Charlotte, but look at Katten's score. The blew up the curve so badly that they are only office in the city above the average.

Some people very happy, or does their HR people do a good job of bribing/filling in their answers?

47/48/55:

Just look at the breakdown by city for Sidley and you can see Sidley LA is 3.72 (19/26), Sidley SF is 3.906 (17/39), Sidley DC is 3.908 (23/59), Sidley Chi is 3.884 (12/26) and Sidley NY is a shocking 3.322 (76/81). So it seems Sidley NY is bringing down the average, for some reason.

Ex Gibson associate here. We received significant pressure to complete surveys for AMLAW, Vault, etc. usually with a comment or hint that anything under a 4 out of 5 (or 8 out of 10) in any category was a failing grade. I know that pressure is brought to bear on summer associates to give the program very high marks. Granted, GDC has an incredible summer program and its high marks are deserved, by the associates survey results are not an accurate indication of firm QOL.

Ex Gibson associate here. We received significant pressure to complete surveys for AMLAW, Vault, etc. usually with a comment or hint that anything under a 4 out of 5 (or 8 out of 10) in any category was a failing grade. I know that pressure is brought to bear on summer associates to give the program very high marks. Granted, GDC has an incredible summer program and its high marks are deserved, but the associates survey results are not an accurate indication of firm QOL.

K&L Gates--generally crappy around the country, but #1 in Harrisburg!!!!1!111oneone!1

Orrick got robbed, yo.

There's talk at Wilmer of moving away from lockstep, but who knows if they'll actually do it.

Where is McGuireWoods? This is the second year in a row that the 900-atty firm hasn't posted mid-level results? Can the firm somehow nix the publication of its results? I can't believe that 10 associates didn't respond.

Ouch. My firm is in the bottom third.

I'm in favor of lockstep pay and base bonuses.

Superior performance (or origination) should get some bonus money but generally the comp for being a stud is getting selected for partner in a few years, and getting given better work today.

Firms shouldn't even keep associates who aren't worth the base salary.

Plus, who thinks firms would actually lower the sh*tbags' billing rates and tell clients who the good and bad 4th years are? They won't.

Any "performance pay" scheme is going to do nothing but reduce associate comp. It won't help clients and it won't help the superstars (because they already get paid).

lockstep is a good deal for the average and below average

Lockstep pay rate is a good deal for all, however, bonuses should not be lockstep and should be based on performance..anything less than that creates a hide the ball culture in which partners get rich(er)

Fair enough, 67.

-65

How did Cahill do?

It is definitely not only the cheerleaders or those who have drank the Kool-Aid who participate. I slam my firm every year. I agree that it's the people in the middle who don't participate. It's not billable and it's about the firm, why bother doing it unless you have an ulterior motive?

I was one of 6 respondents one year for a firm that finished near the bottom of Chicago's rankings. Each of the respondents went into CYA mode and reported that they had given the firm glowing reviews in the confidential survey.

Firm leadership was alarmed and did some analysis on the survey answers. They then gave a briefing to a group of associates. In response to the question "where do you see yourself in 5 years?" they reported that 0 out of 6 answered that they saw themselves still at the firm.

So much for confidentiality.

Replying to post 71 -- that is why (to address an earlier comment), responses to the survey are not summarized in a more granular fashion (e.g., the number of respondents who responded in a particular way to a given question). It's already bad enough with the small sample size found in many firms (especially regional offices), as 71's example shows.

Hah, just do a google search for 'fungible billing unit' and you'll see right on top all you need to know about midlevel associate job (dis)satisfaction.

this survey is crap