First?

Arnold & PorTTTer

#2 = Macaca

First to say that reading comprehension of A&P tipster bites the big weenie. god help the client when s/he tries to decipher something more complicated than a firm memo.

replevin

First to say I'm glad to be going to a firm that already announced salary bumps as usual (GDC).

My sheep has cherry flavored chap stick.

Arnold and Porter is making it clear that they are not doing well. I am sure glad that I do not work there.

"The amounts paid will be in keeping with the levels paid in 2007. "

Does this mean full 2007 bonuses for non-NYC associates? What did A&P pay in 2007?

Good. Very good to see firms recognizing that they can't just blithely pay obscene money to undeserving children any more.

I know someone who chose Arnold Porter in DC over Ropes & Gray in Boston ... I'll bet that person wishes that they made the other decision.

Wonder when the layoffs will happend at A&P?

12 = lying racist

I know someone who chose Arnold Porter in DC over Ropes & Gray in Boston ... I'll bet that person wishes that they made the other decision.

Wonder when the layoffs will happen at A&P?

9, it may not be well known but fyi, many firms, companies, people, the damn pidgeons in nyc are not doing well.

I know someone who chose Arnold Porter in DC over Ropes & Gray in Boston ... I'll bet that person wishes that they made the other decision.

Wonder when the layoffs will happen at A&P?

7 - how were bonuses at Gibson?

9, it may not be well known but fyi, many firms, companies, people, the damn pigeons in nyc are not doing well.

"Of course, under the threat of layoffs firms can pretty much do whatever they want. Frankly, they no longer have to give a damn."

Nailed it. The tables have turned. Firms don't give a fuck about "being competitive" or "associate moral." If they freeze salaries and extinguish bonuses, what are you doing to do, leave? Good luck with that. Someone posted earlier that almost 2,000 associates have been laid off so far in 2008 and that's just what has been reported publicly; thus, the number is surely far higher.

Will these firms take a hit in recruiting when the market rebounds? Sure. But hell, that likely won't be until 2010 (if we're lucky).

The boom times are over, baby. Party's over.

12/14 - My guess is that this decision was based more on city than firm.

#2=me

Karma, baby, karma.

I know someone who chose Arnold Porter in DC over Ropes & Gray in Boston ... I'll bet that person wishes that they made the other decision.

Wonder when the layoffs will happen at A&P?

Fuck this shit - I'm moving to India.

Does anyone know anyone who chose A&P in DC over R&G in Boston? Inquiring minds want to know.

Interesting that Sidley and A&P haven't just come out and frozen salaries with Latham and Orrick's cover. Seems like firms still have some major reservations about it and are waiting for more cover to develop after the new year.

Did someone choose A&P in DC over Ropes in Boston?

Does anyone know anyone who chose A&P in DC over R&G in Boston? Inquiring minds want to know.

Does anyone know anyone who chose A&P in DC over R&G in Boston? Inquiring minds want to know.

I know someone who chose Arnold Porter in DC over Ropes & Gray in Boston ... I'll bet that person wishes that they made the other decision.

Wonder when the layoffs will happen at A&P?

***HEY EDITORS***

To prevent the management types and partners that lurk on these boards from thinking 'freeze' is the new market, how about a list or some coverage of all those firms that have decided to step things up as usual. I fear the selective reading that will be done here.

***LISTEN UP PARTNERS*** ONLY A FEW FIRMS ARE FREEZING, AND IF YOU DO IT FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN TO KEEP THE FIRM FROM IMMINENT DEMISE, YOU SUCK AND YOUR ASSOCIATES WILL LEAVE YOU HIGH AND DRY WHEN THE MARKET TURNS, IF NOT BEFORE THEN.

Who wants to play "Tackle the Greased Up Deaf Guy?"

ATL,

Stop publishing when every firm announces a hiring freeze. It is only encouraging them. There once was a time where shame could be heeped upon these firms, but you are only assisting the cartel known as V20 - PPP.

32,

The operative word is "when the market turns."

It may be a long while before you get a chance to say farewell to the Scrooge-like partners. Be prepared to be Bob Cratchit for a very long winter.

33,

If you're not careful, the greased up deaf guy just might tackle YOU and with all that grease make short work of the brown rosebud of yours.

I agree with 31 -- how about giving firms that did increase salaries some coverage?

HEY ATL,

PLEASE DO AN IN DEPTH ARTICLE ON DEFAULTING ON STUDENT LOANS.

TYIA

33 - nice Family Guy reference -- please don't cover Mystal in grease though.

A sage comment on the previous post bears repeating:
--
to those questioning the wisdom of sharing the Sidley memo: it is almost always better for a person with less power (e.g., associate) to have more information about the market in general. first, as others have noted, the partners likely have means of discovering this information. second, without this information, the partners at any particular firm could attempt to do something even worse - in good times, this means forcing a firm to give market raises/bonuses (or to try to exceed), but in bad times, this could be attempts to give no bonus/salary reductions.
--

It is generally good for associates to have this information in the open. If we are as fungible as partners consider us, then by god we'll go to the highest bidder.

Time for somebody make a chart w/ those that have frozen and those that have not.

NAILING A SHEEP

WHAT 38 SAID
WHAT 38 SAID
WHAT 38 SAID
WHAT 38 SAID
WHAT 38 SAID
WHAT 38 SAID

- not 38

How about a post on firms like GDC and other V25 firms that have managed to avoid this whole mess (at least to this point) - including any possible conjecture as to why they've been able to do so. That way, your law student audience will have better info on the firms still doing fairly well for making recruiting decisions now, and more importantly, why there are doing that well (for making recruiting decisions in the future). Your associate audience will definitely view the positive post as an open invite to trash the firms Elie (probably incorrectly) identified as the firms that are still doing well - thus generating responses from associates a the good firms. This means increased hits, increased ad revenue for ATL, and the possibility of the airing of previously unknown dirty laundry about the top biglaw shops still in good shape (which, I believe, is one of the fundamental purposes of this website). And finally, for the partner audience, such a post may give them an idea or two that could help out their own firms, and thus indirectly help out audiences 1 and 2 as well. Of course said partners will have to pass on that info to a partner on the management committee - because people important enough to be making these decisions definitely don't visit this site. Especially after Elie ruined it.

Wait - never mind - I'd rather read recaps of the top 5 mediocre stories you've already posted.

Fire Elie

Yep, 40 hit it.

More information on ATL is better for associates. Partners can call consultants (who do little more than play telephone) to get "market", or actually speak to each other. We have no such network, just ATL. No firm is going to freeze because of ATL, and no managing partner is going to learn about a freeze through ATL that he won't also learn of through his own channels.

Yes, ATL, please do what 31 suggested. It would be useful to know who has announced they are NOT freezing, who has announced freezes, who has not announced, and who punted to next year.

looking at that top 20 list, it looks like everyone has announced except for Shearman. They're usually late, but never this late. I predict frozen salaries as partners there choke while turning over market bonuses.

Leave MYSTAL ALONE! He has powdered sugar in his eyes and can't see what he is doing.

Frozen and under-market bonuses at Shearman.

Is it gay to hang out in the men's bathroom for a time far longer than needed to finish what I went in there to do?

sending these memos out while most people are on vacation is pathetic, cowardly, and a sure sign that firms are being run by morons.

Hey, I shopped at A&P once.

Guys in my high school chose Arnold Porter in DC over Ropes & Gray in Boston all the time... I'll bet those people thought it was no big deal.

Wonder when the layoffs will happen at A&P?

Thank you all for praising my earlier post about the benefits of sharing information on sites like these. (My fragile ego loves being propped up.) The original Greedy Associate sites (on which I was a partipicant) showed this.

Eagle (f/k/a Eagle Scout)

Shearman already announced.

I think this is right...

FROZEN V20

Latham
Sidley
Arnold & Porter

GOOD V20

Wachtell
Cravath
Sullcrom
Skadden
Davis Polk
Simpson
Cleary
Weil
Kirkland
Debevoise
Paul Weiss
GIbson

UNKNOWN V20

Covington
Williams & Connelly
WilmerHale
White & Case
Shearman

Thanks 55. Very useful. But isn't Sidley still undecided?

"[W]e are still in the process of evaluating associate salary levels for 2009. We expect to make a decision on this issue sometime during the first quarter of next year. "

Geez, have any of you been watching the news? Seems to me we're in a pretty tough economy, period. Salaries going up require rates going up. The firms that have announced pay freezes seem like they're pretty healthy, actually, but are making sure they run their businesses prudently. You cannot take back a salary increase very easily. I give the firm credit for taking the time to think it through.

lol, at least they're being honest that raises and bonuses will be determined by "market data" and rather than by how well the firm performs financially.

56-

Frozen means "not unfrozen" here.

57 - are you a lurking partner, stupid, or a law student? We're not talking about across the board salary increases, we're talking about people advancing to the next salary level that is commensurate with their class year. You can bet dollars to donuts the firms are going to bill their associates out at the next class year's billing rate, they just aren't going to pay them accordingly.

Cripes. The things we have to explain around here.

60, since you seem to think salaries are linked to billing rates, then if the firm concedes a discount on the associate's billing rate, or writes off the associate's time so his average billing rate is lower, or a client refuses to pay a bill, then the associate's salary should be cut in the same proportion?
Ok dude.

57: I give the firm credit for taking the time to think it through.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't break into the medical director's office in the psych unit and start using his computer. I would ask you one question -- since the market began falling apart at LEAST 3 months ago when LEH filed for bankruptcy, how have the firms not have had the time already to think about the decision?

61 - are you 57? 57 said "Salaries going up require rates going up." I was simply pointing out that 57 was completely missing the point about salaries "going up" and then noting that firms who freeze will be billing more per hour of a given associate's work than was billed last year, while paying the associate the same salary. I'm not saying that salaries are linked to billing rates, just pointing out that a firm that freezes is only freezing on one side of the equation...to the firm's benefit, and to the associates' detriment.

I love limiting the list to V20, especially when ther are nonV20 frims that did not freeze salaries. Law students are so fn dumb.

I love limiting the list to V20, especially when there are nonV20 firms that did not freeze salaries. Law students are so fn dumb.

shhh, 65, don't tip off the sheeple. Dumb people deserve to go to L&W ("frats are so fun!") and S&S (fool/fire me once...).

61 = FAIL

57 - you're a friggin tool.

So long as firms insist on paying us like commodities with this idiotic lockstep system, then they should pony the fuck up when the time comes to move us up that step. Its that simple. Otherwise, throw the system out, pay high billers and strong producers what their worth, show others the door, and face up to running the place like any other business. If collusion and lockstep are what they prefer, then the bumps are owed. I know, I know, 'at will' and all that jazz, fine. Doesn't mean we have to like it. This is bullshit.

And typos like "they're" vs "their" are entirely acceptable when you're on a rant, so zip it. ZIP IT.

- 68

68/69 - Amen brutha!

Very simple equation: an associate should take home a third of the revenues she generates, the partnership should pocket another third, and the rest should go to pay bills (overhead, employment taxes, etc.). Surplus should be shared (but not necessarily evenly - partners should pocket more), shortfalls should be shared (but not necessarily evenly - partners should shoulder more). An associate billing at $300 per hour for 2000 hours theoretically generates $600,000K (assuming full payment), should be paid roughly a third of that, and often is; salaries are set under 1/3 of expected revenue and bonuses are adjusted to reflect fortune. There are many, many ways that the current lockstep system screws this up but it is still a useful rule of thumb for identifying when you're getting screwed.

If your billing rate goes up Jan 1, and your salary stays the same, you would seem to be getting screwed. Your revenues will be increasing but your piece of that has shrunk. If the firm has not been able to collect on your work from last year, it makes sense to see a smaller bonus to reflect that year's shortfall but further pain ought to be borne by partnerships.

If 2008 PPP is not through the floor (as compared to 2007) at a firm that has frozen salaries, that firm is underpaying its associates.

Any word on what Atlanta firms (Alston, Kilpatrick, Paul Hastings, Sutherland, Troutman) are likely to do? I don't think any have announced bonus or raise info.

(Yes, I know they're all TTT, blah, blah, blah)

"they're" vs. "their" is all well and good, but "its" vs. "it's" shows a serious character flaw.

And 57 - as far as not taking back a salary increase very easily, the same is true for making a decision to freeze. If you're counting on seeing any love after firms re-visit the issue in Q1 or whenever, you're nuts. For all but a few firms that have the brains to know a good PR move when they see it, once this bump period passes, its gone. Next raise, 2010.

Sheppard Mullin just announced a pay freeze.

71 - You're forgetting that the money you'll be getting in the 1st quarter of 2009 is money that's already in the coffers... and the money you'll be getting in 2nd quarter 2009 will be money that came in 1st quarter, etc. If a firm was able to collect 90% of its billables this year, but anticipates only being able to collect 50% next year, don't you think it prudent for them to hold off on giving everybody raises -- even if PPP are up at the end of 2008?

It doesn't matter if you're billing $300 an hour or $3000 an hour if the firm can't collect on it, and, trust me, a lot of firms are anticipating a lot of problems collecting next year. "Old legal bills" come pretty far down the list in a bankruptcy filing.

71 - even if your billing rate goes up, the revenue you generate might not increase if you bill fewer hours.
- Einstein

76- remember, though, that for many of us billing rates increased in October.

76, I think it is more likely that hours will fall and collections will actually increase for work in Q1 2009, as compared to Q4 2008, as clients cut back on legal services to more closely match what they can afford. Reasonable to disagree.

77, the answer is to fire the low billers. Or keep them around but remind them that they owe you the next time they're busy and you're slow.

79 -
Which is the worse PR move (from partners' perspective)- layoffs or salary freeze?
- 77

I guess we're going to find out, aren't we?

79

64/65-

Please add to the list if you know about non-V20 firms re: salary freezes.

So with the firms that are freezing salaries, what happens in 2010? Do people just jump two pay grades? Or is the firm treating this as the equivalent of losing a year of experience (which would be uber-shitty)?

73 = ass hat. Even kidding, don't screw with someone on a rant like that. Likely to get smacked.

"The amounts paid will be in keeping with the levels paid in 2007. "

Does this mean full 2007 bonuses for non-NYC associates? What did A&P pay in 2007?

Can we also get a list of firms that just haven't said what they're doing about salaries? I know it's fairly common for firms to get their [poo] together in late January and pay a retroactive lump back to Jan 1, but it seems a little disconcerting that firms who have historically announced salary levels in early December are all silent smiles this year.

83 - They won't have any associates in 2010, so that won't be a problem.

86:
There's over 50,000 law firms in New York alone; we can't possibly get a list of every one of them to know what they're doing with salary.

86:
There's over 50,000 law firms in New York alone; we can't possibly get a list of every one of them to know what they're doing with salary.

Any word on Ropes and Gray salaries? Are they frozen? What has the past practice been?

Feel free to use ATL to supplement your Craigslist postings. E.g,. Recently made redundant at Biglaw. I have a Couch and Loveseat set for sale. They are both with oversized pillows. They are in very good condition and are only mildly used. I have pictures but can't seem to get them to upload. They are too heavy to take back to Covington, so I just want someone to take them who can use them. I am asking $200 for the both or we will work out a price if you want one or the other. Please email for pictures! Midtown.

Repeat after me, 88/89: There ARE over 50,000 law firms in New York alone. There ARE over 50,000 law firms in New York alone.

I know subject-verb agreement is a tricky one; rest easy for now and study harder next year.

Mike Shanahan now feels your pain. Denver to 190K!

this is good news! for associaTTTes!

92 - I think "there is" is equally acceptable. "There are" would be appropriate if you're talking about the specific number of firms -- you'd have to say "There are approximately X" if you're shooting for a number. But as a general statement of scarcity or abundance, "there is" should work with this object if you consider "50,000 firms" to be a representational indefinite noun phrase rather than a quantitative estimate. "There are a lot." "There is an abundance." Etc.

92//95 - "There's" has become an acceptable 'contraction' of "There are" in colloquial and spoken english. When was the last time you saw someone write or say "There're"?

Deal with it.

I hope more firms do the right thing, the prudent thing, the RESPECTABLE thing and freeze all associate salaries. Partners need to be paid for the entrepreneurial risk they are taking with even employing anyone during this time of UNPRECEDENTED UNCERTAINTY AND TROUBLES!!!

95, FAIL.

- not 92

96 - The proper contraction of "there are" is actually "tharrrrr'r." You have to squint your right eye and hook your left ear with a thumb if you want to say it properly.

will i get disbarred if i default on my home loan? i got no money .....

thanks for any thoughts, kind souls

Right on 97! The waitress at Chili's provides more value than a first through fourth year Biglaw associate. At least I can get a refreshing glass of iced tea from said waitress.

Advice for Biglaw associates--personally deliver a platter of Southwestern eggrolls to your partner at about 11:45 a.m. tomorrow. I'll have the dude from the mailroom deliver my diet Coke.

--Biglaw Partner

I think it's cute that we're all just realizing the age-old economic hierarchy between employee and employer even exists in BIGLAW. Wake up schwenks.

I want a time machine to 1998.

Echo 72. Complete silence from Atlanta firms.

Why does Atlanta need law firms? I suppose somebody has to do slip and falls and divorces, but other than that, what is there in Georgia? There can't honestly be any corporate or serious litigation work, can there?

and silence from ATL regarding those Atlanta firms.
- 104

105:
Coca-Cola, Home Depot, Delta, UPS, ING, CNN, Georgia Pacific.
- 104

107--all companies that are represented by Dallas or Kansas City law firms...

Elie:

Can you get information on Palestinian firms?

Gaza 2L

--Rafah to 25 Dinar!

107 - Yeah, fine, but wouldn't all their transactional work be done in NY or Charlotte, and all their litigation in NY? I mean, you can have a couple guys in-house at the corporate headquarters to oversee your outside counsel in NY; you don't need whole firms to basically just be local counsel.

Why is this such a surprise? Once Hogan announced that it would delay its salary decision until some point in January, it was just a matter of time before A&P and the other DC shops followed suit. Once one of Hogan, A&P or WilmerHale make a final salary decision for 2009, the other two will quickly follow without regards to what any other v50 firms are doing.

ATL's coverage created hiring freezes. Awesome. This is the exact opposite of what the Greedy Associate's board accomplished.

Of course there is less demand for legal services in Atlanta compared to other big cities, but there is a proportional supply of such services. Compare the number of V100 firms based in NY against the number of such firms based in Atlanta. 105 (seemingly jokingly) asked for sources of legal work in the Atlanta market, so I gave it to him.

But, at least two people (72 and me) are interested in salary / bonus info on the Atlanta firms. We're not asking for an in depth analysis of the Atlanta legal market, just a mention of any recent news, if it's available.

Has anyone noticed that the economy is in terrible, terrible shape? Good people are getting laid off all over the country. Given the circumstances, a salary freeze seems justified. We make enough money people.

the freezes are ok with most associates worth their salt. All firms should do this and do it now. Salaries need to be frozen for years to let depressed PPP get back to where it should be.

105 is a complete asshat. Atlanta has very good transactional and litigation work. Trust me- I've been in 3 places- SF, NY and ATL - and I did more big dollar, complex work in Atlanta than I did in the other 2 cities (mind you, SF was a midsize firm but in NY I worked at a V5). I worked on 2 billion dollar deals just this year-- yes - even in this crappy economy.

I echo the others sentiments about Atlanta-- I don't think they're going to freeze, though. Most firms outside of maybe Kilstock and MMM are doing fairly well right now and collections the past few months have been strong.

Anybody notice that none of the AmLaw 100 Los Angeles headquartered firms have laid of associates? Is that right?

116, i'll believe your anecdote over the substantial evidence to the contrary.

118- Believe what you want. I'm a junior partner at an Atlanta shop and there's been zero talk around here about a pay freeze. Plenty of talk about unproductive, over the hill partners taking home huge paychecks doing very little to earn same, but nothing about docking the associates for their hard work - especially if they've hit their hours or come relatively close this year.

But go on frothing at the mouth believing what's spewed on this blog... just because some NY firms have had to freeze doesn't mean the fiscally conservative, more regional firms have to follow suit. We're the future of Biglaw, whether you like it or not.

Now go back to doing your doc review at 10:30pm in your shared office...

116/119, atlanta firms have a de facto pay freeze because you only make like $5k a more a year on the current scale with the crazy salary compression. tell me why a senior is worth paying so much in NYC and so little in ATL?

120- 119 here. You're right-- look, I'm not far removed from the associate ranks and I was subject to the same heavy handed compression that you speak of. I don't necessarily agree with it (e.g., where a 7th year associate is making only 30k more or so than a 1st year - before factoring any bonus (if any should exist)), but guess what-- its that fiscal conservatism that is going to save Atlanta firms. I make less than a 7th year does at a V5 after figuring in their bonus (at least at historical levels) and what I have to come out of pocket for (unsubsidized benefits, etc.), but its exactly that greed and fiscal excess in NY that is causing the troubles you see on ATL daily. Meanwhile, Atlanta firms are chugging right along and doing quite well (even picking up some of that old NY work because our rates are lower (in some instances much lower) and we do the SAME quality work that they had previously received from NY firms where a 4th year was billing at the same rate as some of our junior partners.

121 is right - the hillbillies do the SAME quality work as you fancy Harvard law grads! yeehaw....squeal like a pig boy!

111 is literally the only person here who apparently has a clue how the DC firms operate. And, to add to 111's point, A&P likes to be a market leader when it comes to women with day care, part-time etc. But when it comes to $$$ they have always been happy to just wait as long as possible and then copy what their peers in DC do. That's been true of every raise I can recall over the past decade.

121, i agree it makes no sense to me why atlanta firms are sorta second tier when so many big companies are HQed there (i mean second tier in terms of not paying NYC market salary like the other 7 or so top marketsand having lower PPPs generally).

But it's true that K&S has almost NYC level PPP's and do lots of international work, have big DC offices, etc.

What is a better practice area for ATL: M&A, fund work, or cap markets?

Isn't Georgia the state that elected a draft dodging piece of shit coward over a horribly maimed Viet Nam vet? Or is that some other backward shithole of the nation?

Who are these partner apologists telling us we make "enough" money? Don't the partners make "enough" too? They've already docked bonuses to account for smaller profits and now they're coming after base pay too? What's this illusion they've created that clients are overpaying due to our so-called "greed," rather than their 7-figure profits? I call BS. These firms are just taking cover behind Latham's terrible financial situation to squeeze another ounce of profit out of us. Well I for one will lose any motivation to do more than the minimum if my firm freezes pay, since that's what the partners would be doing for us...the absolute minimum. Firms beware, associates in high demand areas are going to bolt for better comp if base pay gets attacked. Come on, partners move for a 30% bump all the time. That's pretty much what an associate is getting now by moving from Latham to Skadden.

This is just a simple reaction to the irrational market adjustment that took place during 2007. I-banks, hedge funds and private equity houses were offering better packages than big law was offering to its corp associates. To be competitive with the market that was stealing its talent, big law jacked salaries and bonuses by substantial percentages. The competitive market that was stealing its talent is now gone. No more external competition; the market has changed. Big law can set its own market salaries without outside influence.
Pretty basic econcomics. If I'm an owner of a business, and my take home is going down 20%, should my employees' take home go up 15%. Not in any rational world.

127 your logic is flawed. so if PPP stays the same yr to yr then a 2nd yr associate shouldn't get his step increase when he turns into a 3d yr associate?

No, 127, as the owner of the business, you take on the risk that you might not do as well from one year to the next. If your business is a good one, you'll make up for down years with profitable ones. Your employees don't enjoy as much of the upside, so they sure as hell shouldn't have to bear as much of the downside.

We are in literally the second Great Depression with no end in sight, soup lines, etc etc. Pay freezes are only the beginning of the sorrows my friend.

If only we had voted for Saruh Palin....

129 - You've obviously never owned a business, or owned one that went out of business. Pull your head out of Facebook and your Econ 101 class.

Slashing comp across the board only makes everyone less motivated. If I wanted bigger profits I'd cut to the bone, then pay the survivors well to motivate them to generate more profit. Otherwise it's just communism and everybody does worse.

132 - it'd be funny if you got "slashed"

132 - then you'd bitch about the partners firing everybody and making anyone who is left bill 2,800 hours.

111 and 123 are absolutely right, except that A&P probably would follow what Wilmer and Covington decide to do, maybe not Hogan.

Alternative to the pay freeze: Keep the published scale, but individually and confidentially make the decision on whether the associate advances a class year. People who met hours (say 1900 and up) get moved up, people who had some work (say 1400 and up) get frozen, and people who were way slow (less than 1400) get docked a class year (just for next year, until their hours get back up). Nobody gets upset because people without hours are happy to just have a job, and may be motivated to move to another firm thereby alleviating your firm's glut of slow associates without layoffs. You get just as much immediate savings as a pay freeze, but do it in a targeted, fair manner.

136 - Possibly good in theory but impossible in practice. Besides, setting an hours threshold to determine who gets a raise is just as arbitrary as deciding to freeze all salaries.

Fire everybody and pay me double to bill 4000 hours a year!

137 - your definition of arbitrary is interesting. people who worked a lot get a raise and people who worked 4 hours a day get a pay cut. how is that arbitrary?

anybody that knows Shearman's bonus announcement?

137 - it's not "arbitrary" in the narrow sense that pay would not be random, but would be tied to an observable variable. But it IS "arbitrary" in the sense that pay would not be tied to a variable that necessarily correlates to the associate's long-term value to the firm -- which is the only sane underpinning for non-lockstep pay. Fluctuations in an associate's hours can be driven by many factors unrelated to an associate's "value" -- eg, the particular practice area may go through cycles -- and in many cases fluctuations and value are inversely correlated. Just because it takes Mary 3 times as long as Rita to write a memo doesn't mean 1 Mary is worth 3 Ritas, if you get my drift.

Why do firms, even those that do not have lockstep partner compensation, have lockstep associate comp? One reason only: ease of administration. Merit-based pay is nice in theory but all but impossible in practice. In practice, associates who work for the more powerful partners or in the busier practice groups would get more pay, adding another layer of stress and discontent to an already dysfunctional environment, and requiring countless hours of on-billable management time to implement. And all for what? So you can be more "fair" to someone who is probably going o leave you at the first uptick in the S&P500? Sorry.

Salary freezes, bonus cuts, etc.: What you are seeing is simply the invisible hand of the market. This worked in your favor over the last decade when you were in scarce supply and high demand, and it is working to your detriment now that the supply and demand curves have shifted. Of course knowing this won't make you any happier (just like knowing this didn't make you less happy to get a big salary or bonus bump in the days of yore), but all of the ranting about those mean, nasty greedy partners is getting very old.

Eat at home more often. Go skiing in Vermont instead of Vail. Lease a 3-series instead of a 5-series. Don't buy that new handbag. Don't always pick up the tab. But if you are fortunate enough to have a job, then please stop with the whining.

I hate you people... I hate you all. To bloody hell with the lot of you.

Covington increases salaries on the yearly anniversary of each associate's start date, not on January 1. Those increases occurred as usual this fall. Bonus decisions are typically made in late March.

Latham Ass. here laughing at you.

Latham, the very well managed firm that it is, has set the tone.

Freeze salaries and survive.

Put the "needs" of your associates (who have nowhere to go) ahead of your rainmakers and risk the overall health of the firm.

Choose wisely managing partners. The rainmakers are watching closely.

123:

"And, to add to 111's point, A&P likes to be a market leader when it comes to women with day care, part-time etc."

Um... last I checked, just about half of all parents are men. But, do please go on about how day care is just for women.

125, tool that you are, I suspect you weren't complaining when another maimed veteran was defeated by a draft dodger in the 1996 Presidential Election (as he deserved to be). Yet when that same thing happens in Georgia you use it to make a vulgar generalization about the people there.

You're pathetic.

To be fair, the people of Georgia didn't vote for the draft dodger in 1996. They voted for him in 1992.

Shearman announced half-Skadden bonuses in mid-December.

Has Shearman announced whether it will freeze salaries (in addition to the half-Skadden bonuses)?

A&P has taken away 5 PTO days from staff, salary increases are undecided.