NY to 125!

uh oh. this could be worse in the long run than the smaller bonuses we've been worrying about.

I used to work at MWE and they ARE cheap, whatever their situation may be right now economically.

mysTTTal...you had me until "it's"

what a festering TTT in decline

I was just down at McDermott Will & Emery Human Resources and I'm like CAROLLLLL, CAROLLLLL, I've got to talk to you about Pepe Silvia, and you know what I find....there is no Carol in HR! This whole law firm is a goddamn ghost town!"

skadden already raised everyone per usual scale in the individual bonus memos that went out this week

Elie is searching for a man with a very big bonus.

Okay-ATL officially needs to stop reporting this kind of stuff (or at least stop making headlines out of it). You are giving the green light to other firms to join the race to the bottom (see Cravath bonus announcement). The last thing we all need is a salary freeze.

Jesus people. Its not 2003-2007. S&C isn't going to 190k.

First you cry about layoffs, then bonuses, then layoffs, then pay freezes. The money just isn't there right now and "half-skadden" bonuses and even a pay freeze >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mass layoffs and rescinding offers.

That said, a pay freeze could be the writing on the wall for the latter.

I'm going to guess that MWE works like several other Chicago firms, who do bonuses and raises in March or late February because both bonuses and raises are based in whole (bonuses) or in part (raises) on your billed hours the previous yea). Does MWE do retroactivity of the raise back to the first of the year? This seems to be the norm among those firms, to give you a "catch up" check along with your regular paycheck and bonus check all in March or late February.

how come we don't call Mystal "Elie-phant"? Too obvious?

how come we don't call Mystal "Elie-phant"? Too obvious? Too lame?

You realize that these layoffs are a direct consequence of associate raises? 160,000 for an idiot, lazy first year associate? Don't make me want to vomit. If you little, lazy whiners simply accepted your already inflated 120,000 salaries then we wouldn't have to layoff anyone. But NO - you guys just HAD to make more. Well, fine - you got your raises, but you lost your job security. You've made your bed, now sleep in it.

- BIGLAW partner

MWE blew its budget on cell phone chargers for everyone who dropped by the hospitality suite at EIW.

12 - When I was there they moved you up to the next lock step level on Jan 1 just like most places.

MWE come from the land of the ice and snow
From the midnight sun where they're so cheap they blow.

15 - Are you saying associates have to pay the troll toll to get in that partner's soul (hole)?

the mail never stops, 7. the mail never stops.

Where's Count Latoola

15 - Good comment. Kids, you reap what you sow.

-- Biglaw partner #2

Agree with #12. That sentence looks like exactly what my (Chicago) firm does already. Although it would be nice to get the pay raise immediately in January, as long as they finally give it to me in March (retroactive to January), I feel like there's not much there to complain about. I doubt they'll freeze salaries, although they may be more strict about who qualifies for an increase!

Isn't the saying, "You've made your bed, now LIE in it?" I guess BIGLAW partner is over-compensated considering his intelligence.

15- You're right that 1st yrs are overpaid. But certainly not at the "expense" of partners.

15 Funny how I always though it was partner's cash out that made layoffs necessary. Thank's for your enlightment.

4. is right, MWE is cheap, they seem to be doing okay, but not great, but they and Katten are the cheapest with regards to associates.

15 - if you are indeed a partner....

You cant possibly argue that "idiot lazy little 1st years" made you do ANYTHING. Seriously, you guys don't give away money just to be nice, you did it to keep up with the Jonses (or Skaddens or whatever) and that was your business decision.

There MAY be some conection between the raises and layoffs, though I am not confident that firms would keep idle people on staff at 120K either.

15 - Exactly, you are 100% correct, it is completely the associates' fault. The fact that firms are trying to maintain unrealistic PPPs and levels of revenue has nothing to do with firms being unable to avoid layoffs.

I've worked at two AmLaw 100 firms and thought it was fairly common for raises (retroactive to January) to be announced in Feb or March. Is the thought that MWE would not make the raises retroactive to Jan?

15: You realize that these layoffs are a direct consequence of BigLaw partners insisting that they bring home more than $2 million a year (i.e., topping the $2M ppp number)? $2 million for a greedy, fat Biglaw partner that can't make rain?! Don't make me want to vomit. If you fat, greedy bastards simply accepted your already inflated $1.5 million salaries, then you wouldnt have to lay off anyone. But NO -- you guys just HAD to make a few extra hundred grand per year. Well, fine -- you got your $2 million, but now your firm's reputation is going to suffer, you will bleed associates when the economy turns up, and current associates won't perform their best. You've made your bed, now sleep in it.

-- BIGLAW associate

22- associates didn't increase starting salaries, partners did. So associates are now reaping the short-sightedness of partners who implemented massive pay increases one year and layoffs the next. Unless you're saying that partners are too dumb to run law firms and simply do what associates want them to do (or what they're buddies are doing at the competitive firms).

15, that is bs. Even first year biglaw associates who are only billing 2000 hours are making 700-800k for the partners. 160k out of that plus benefits is fair. It's the need for partners to unrealistically increase their PPP every single year that is the problem.

15 - Get off fucking blawgs and go bring in some business. YOU are the lazy idiot playing on the internet, getting all hot and bothered cause "back in the day before I became a miserable old man I never made as much money as these kids whaaaa whaaaa whaaaa". Sad old hypocrite. I'm sure you would have turned down the money when you were an associate, too, huh?

15 = Dreier

The raises vs. layoffs question is an anteresting one.

Would lower salaries REALLY increase job security? I agree that 1st years can't possibly do 160K of work per year.

OR should associates make as much $$ as they can, while they can because firms will likely lay them off in some future downturn? Do any Big firms give a crap about any associates other than, perhaps, a small % of favorite stars?

There's no news here. As has been pointed out in this thread, MWE is transitioning this year from a fiscal year to a calendar year. This is just part of the transition process. Move on, people. Complain about something worth complaining about.

@15

NOW I get it. The only reason associates are getting laid off is because of the raise to 160,000, which of course was motivated only by greedy associates. The layoffs have nothing to do with the worst economy since the Great Depression, and we're all sure that no firm would be laying people off at 120,000.

Alternatively, in order to keep your PPP high you had to change the partnership structure so there were fewer people taking a draw of firm profits. In addition to de-equitizing your fellow partners, you made partnership less of a possibility for otherwise meritorious associates. The associates then realized that the "good things come to those who wait" advice didn't work in big law firms, because most of the people qualified to make partner won't make it. When associates realized that a future partnership opportunity had a VERY low present value because of a VERY high discount rate they began demanding more payment up front - i.e., bigger starting salaries.

Are law firms stuck paying those salaries to lazy people that have no chance of making partner? Sure, but those salaries are also demanded by people who might be qualified to make partner, but realize you're going to fuck them over in eight years. Many would be happy to take 25% less up front in exchange for a realistic chance of becoming a partner. That's not the structure you have chosen, so now we all get the consequences - you're more likely to get de-equitized, and we're more likely to get laid off.

Cheers!

36, really? Explain that one to me.

"I agree that 1st years can't possibly do 160K of work per year."

Um, do you realize how stupid that statement is in light of billing rates and hours billed per year?

I don't see the big deal. Nobody at my firm expects raises other than the typical increase resulting from an associate moving from a 3rd to 4th year, etc.

My firm, which is not having financial problams, has already announced that there will not be rate increases for clients, or new salary increases for attorneys. No big deal--I am just happy to have a job right now.

@10: Are you a Russian? Don't try to limit the free dissemination of information. Communist ...

McDermottt Will and Emery

15--I don't necessarily disagree that BigLaw associates are making bucket loads more money than some (many? most?) other professions, but that's not "reap what you sow." We law students, first years, junior associates, etc. did not create this system. You partners created it when you YOU voted to raise salaries hoping to attract "the best and the brightest."
I don't recall ever seeing any union of first year associates march to the collective entity that is BigLaw and demand higher first year salaries or face a collective walk-out...so don't start blaming us when your pyramid scheme starts to collapse.
YOU didn't want to teach associates how to be great lawyers, build a practice, etc. YOU wanted to hire law school slaves to pour over millions of documents for thousands of hours per year. To convince us that we wanted to spend the first 6 years of our career in an obscure conference room reading 12-year old emails, YOU threw tons of money at us.

MWE associate here. In the past, raises started on January 1. Things are a little different this year because of the change in the billing year, but knowing this firm, there is no way in hell they will make any pay raise retroactive. There was definitely some howling yesterday when that memo went out because everyone knows the firm just shorted everyone a few thousand dollars. Cheapskates.

18--finally, a funny comment. Thank you. LedZep rules!

As for the rest, "big law partner" does not mean (and never has meant) "good businessman". A rising tide hid deficiencies for years, deficiencies that today's economy is spotlighting. To focus on associates v. partners is asinine. Markets require two to tango--a buyer (partnership) and a seller (associate). I've been in both roles. Some of each group underperform and nonetheless are carried in the rising tide. That's over -- now some good people (and skilled lawyers) in each category are or soon will be looking for jobs. Getting bitch-slapped by the invisible hand is no fun, but to argue that either associates or partners had the power to create our current situation is not simply to mis-diagnose, but to mis-deify.

Stay tuned folks. By April 1, 2009 more than 40% of the AmLaw 200 firms will decide to not jump associates to the next class level. This will be explained to be a result of the decisions to not increase hourly rates during 2009. It is as simple as that.

16: right on brotha

39, 40 - I didn't say that 1st years can't be BILLED OUT for enough $$ to cover their salaries.

But in terms of value added, I think that 1st years are probably overpaid, and senior associates badly underpaid (I am a 3rd year).

In a Big firm, the presumed awesomeness of the parters or the firm or the whole or whatever allows the partners to leverage their own reputations, operations etc to bill freshly-minted, know-nothing 1st years for far more $$ than their labor is probably worth.

Perhaps recruiting pressures require the high initial salaries for 1st years as "bait" to get them in the door.

luv, 36

Really, bonuses should go to ZERO before there is a ONE DOLLAR decrease in PPP. (Hint: They call them PARTNERships because the whole point is to make money for the PARTNERS.) For associate comp, the rule of thumb is essentially what the old captain said about the correct amount of rations for his crew: you want to keep the sailors surly but not mutinous.

Magic Cirle Jerk here-
We get our bonuses and raises in May.... thanks UK weirdness

hahahahaha. To think I almost took a job at this FTT. This shit firm doesn't deserve the honor of being called a ttt.

u have all been bossed

Former MWE associate here. McDermott has some nice people, but is generally a horrible place to work. So cheap.

18 -- Nailed it Led Zep style.

@51: How's the legal market in the UK? Have you been hit as hard as New York or is the UK able to weather the storm a bit better?

Thanks.

12/23 - I work in the Chicago office of a national firm, and that's how our compensation works as well.

38- titcr. you summed it up more eloquently than I did.

15, 22 & any other partner out there: you got greedy, created this leverage structure, had to bribe assocs to maintain it, now you're laying them off. I wonder what you'll say (and what your clients will think) when the craptastic work roles in from the hordes of toiletiers you have to hire to replace us.

41 - You're missing the entire point of the thread. Seniority raises (i.e., 3rd year salary to 4th year salary) are exactly the ones we are discussing.

I told you it was coming. Bend over and take it b!tches!

Echo 49.

160k for a first year is a recruiting tool--nothing more. See 44's pyramid complaint.

I know ATL will hate this (and as a 2L I'd never say it if I thought it would actually happen), but firms that aren't in the V20 (to pick an arbitrary number) shouldn't be paying the same rates and/or attracting the same students as the V20s.

Pay the first years lower starting salaries (like 100-120k), recruit from local 2nd tier schools and the bottom half of the top tier schools, and offer better long-term guarantees regarding salary increases, partnership, etc....then TRAIN THEM TO BE BETTER LAWYERS.

Students who just want to get in and out of BigLaw in a few years while making a quick buck will go to the Cravaths and Skaddens, they'll work 3000 hours a year on doc review and due diligence without ever having used their brains, and then they'll go on to do whatever they want with their lives.

Students who want to be good lawyers, and are willing to put an investment into themselves, with (probably) better job security,etc. will go to the -V20s of the world and probably end up happier people.

The respective firms, on the other hand, can focus on the business models that work best given their overhead costs and general headcount.

Hey Numbskulls,

It is called deflation - look it up and how it worked during the Great Depression (not saying we going into one but deleveraging is occurring which means lower salaries). Feel luck you have a job during the GD, owners would come in and say to employees that you need to take a 50% paycut to keep your job.

don't be surprised if some stories like that come out soon (maybe not 50% but paycuts).

15 & 22. Without commenting on the veracity of your statements (which may very well have merit), kindly note that your decisions to identify yourselves as "BIGLAW" partners, leaves most everyone viewing this post (and your comments) with the distinct impression that you both are colossal douchebags. Its a shame you both will die without every having had a threesome - that you didn't have to pay for.

I don't suppose MW&E has told its clients that it won't increase the billing rates of those same associates until March/April, have they?

I don't suppose MW&E has told its clients that it won't increase the billing rates of those same associates until March/April, have they?

61: You're not a lawyer are you? I can at least speak as a corporate attorney and say that I do a hell of a lot more than due diligence. In fact, it's only made up a very small percentage of my billable hours. Litigation, however, I know nothing about.

And 62, to support your point: http://www.cnbc.com/id/28143828

There are plenty of firms that do that, 61. Law students just have to get passed the 'wanting everyone to know who the firm is that i pore over documents for' thing.

That and the name cache does improve your lateral opportunities, sadly. Ironic, since you usually get more skills from non biglaw operations.

61=exactly right and most firms are realizing it now, which is too late

66--as I said, I'm still a 2L.

I don't doubt that you do a whole lot more than just due diligence. And I'm also likely wrong that first year associates don't actually need to use their brains much at all. But every time a senior associate and/or partner complains about "lazy whiny stupid useless" first year associates--it begs the question...why not hire trained monkeys for a whole lot less money if that's all they are good for?

If law firms actually were going to invest in training and mentoring associates, and wanted them to make partner, then sure pay first years less and midlevels and seniors more. But since law firms just want highly educated document review/discovery management drones for a couple years before they boot them, it makes sense to pay them well upfront to get them to do the work.

61 - you're an idiot. Wait till you start working before you make ill informed comments. Go back to corporations or evidence or whatever stupid class you're in at the local tier 2 school.

67-- it's true, the name does often help a lot. Which is why the non-V20 firms should probably structure their lateral hires vs. in-house promotions in such a way that incentivizes lawyers who want to make partner one day to choose the proper firm as early as possible.

70 - Agreed.

-3rd year discovery management drone.

69: I didn't actually read the middle part of your original statement, so apologies for not seeing you were still in law school. But yeah, most of the stuff first years do can be done by paralegals, but, if you didn't train them to do it, then they wouldn't understand the entire deal structure and therefore couldn't do more of the heavy lifting after first year. Though sometimes as a first you you will get to do some pretty cool stuff (especially if the senior associates are busy, which, unfortunately, they aren't right now).

If business picks up, will they pay special bonuses to make us whole for the pay cut? And if it doesn't, will they guarantee our jobs at the lower salary? If the answer is yes to both questions, I don't mind.

The joke is on anyone who believes that 15 is actually a BigLaw partner.

The joke is on anyone who believes that 15 is actually a BigLaw partner.

75 - all you'll receive is words about how they've learned from the recession and have emerged stronger than ever, which you should interpret to mean they'll replicate the exact same behaviors which required them to conduct layoffs in the first place. You'll get huge bonuses and statements about the huge uptick in business, but when it slows down again there absolutely will be no guarantee that you won't be shown the door.

Even if they make it retroactive in March, they get some benefit because they are getting a very large chunk of free financing from their associates.

What is wrong with paying for a threesome?

42-no, I'm not a commie. I'm a capitalist who wants as much money as possible. When ATL shamed other firms into giving special bonuses, I liked disseminating the info. Now, however, I see no benefit for ATL's readers by Elie coming up with fearmongering theories of salary freezes based on a sentence buried in the third paragraph of a bonus memo.

On the Internet, we can all be BigLaw partners.

I actually am a BigLaw partner, but I'm sure that I'm the exception.

My firm (V100) has also instituted a pay freeze. They will announce and make effective salary increases three months later than usual this year. Of course, they keep sending out memos here and there that cut our benefits, so we are all just waiting for the next email to hit our inbox and push back the salary increases another six months. Not surprisingly, no word yet on whether our billable rate will also remain frozen....

As usual, my timing is perfect.
... starts looking at spring OCIP to back up summer job offer

T10 2L

15 & 22 aren't really partners. They are 2Ls who didn't get Big Law offers.

@80: nothing
@42: I was just f*ing with you. Lets see if Cox can ban negative statements like he did short selling.

16 speaks the truth.
Did anyone see if those things actually work?

Former MWE lawyer here:

I think everyone at MWE will agree that the firm is remarkably cheap - they will seize upon any opportunity that gives them a reason or rationale to pay associates less.

However, the delayed increase in base pay shouldn't really be an issue - they are changing the date of their fiscal year-end and like a lot of firms (including the one I work at now) pay increases happen in March, retroactive to January 1.

MWE won't step out and announce a pay freeze in March unless someone they consider comparable to them does it first, e.g., a Mayer Brown, Hogan Hartson, Morgan Lewis, etc. - in which case the probability is 100% that MWE will do it too.

61, 69,

The issue is that first years don't really know how to do anything when they first get out of law school. If you give a first year something to do, they inevitably mess it up and have to be walked through the process. It's not becasue they're stupid, they're just inexperienced. Think back to the first thing you ever wrote for a legal writing class and how it was savaged by the professor. That's the quality of work that first years generally do. They naturally get better, but it takes time. Junior associates do a lot of doc review and due diligence because (a) someone has to do it, and (b) although every bit as boring as you might imagine, it's not as mindless as you think - you have to be actively issue spotting and you can't miss stuff. I'll also reiterate that juniors do more than just review documents.

The other thing to keep in mind is that big firms are able to charge big firm rates because they usually work on complicated matters that involve a lot of money. A junior associate at a small firm can probably handle a residential real estate closing, the brief for a slip and fall or handle all the paper work for setting up a new corporation. In contrast it usually takes several years before an associate at a big firmcan handle a heavily negotiated merger agreement or a deposition in a securities class action. That said, I wouldn't say that the the small firm lawyer is getting the training to become a better lawyer.

@Elie Mys-Information: get some facts.

@37, 45 and 88: thank you.

After the way biglaw screwed us with bonuses (most of us book more hours than the associates at half the pay and 1/10 the bonus), I wouldn't be surprised if they charge us to use the elevator next...

-biglaw staff atty.

Why does everyone always say that associates only do doc review? I've been a biglaw associate for 3 years, and have maybe done about 10 days total of document review during that time. Ditto for my fellow associates. Are there really firms that stick associates on long doc review projects year after year? Isn't that why there are contract/staff attorneys?

@92: I think they say it because they're not attorneys.

Want to make a ton of $ in a non-legal career path? Organize a union for BigLaw associates and declare yourself president for life. Surely there's legal talent on this blog which could pull it off. And some talent that could finance the undertaking. Just ask Abygail.

Want to make a ton of $ in a non-legal career path? Organize a union for BigLaw associates and declare yourself president for life. Surely there's legal talent on this blog which could pull it off. And some talent that could finance the undertaking. Just ask Abygail.

92,

DIfferent practice groups vary a lot. I know for a fact that all M&A work involves due diligence, and even associates at Wachtell get stuck doing it. I'm not a litigator, but I'm pretty sure antitrust and products liability work can involve massive amounts of doc review. Securities litigation probably does too. Staff attorneys do some, but I don't think they do all of it.

91 have you been using the elevator again?!?! Shame on you.

- Biglaw Partner

92, it depends on the firm. At the V10 firm I worked at, associates mainly did document review, with some discovery management duties as well. I didn't know a single midlevel associate that had taken a deposition, written a brief themselves as opposed to a section, appeared in court, etc. At the V100 firm I now work at, associates don't review documents, but rather write briefs, take depositions, make arguments in court, meet with experts, etc. Trade-off is we don't have what people on this board would consider "prestige."

15 - I doubt you are a partner and if you were you would realize that PPP has increased dramatically despite the raise to $160K, and further, that billing rates were increased to cover the expense. At $125K+bonus there would still be little reason to keep paying a bunch of people to sit around and do nothing.

61 - Given the hours and stress expected large firms need to pay enough to justify choosing large firm practice over the alternatives. You are suggesting that firms should pay mediocre salaries (despite high law school tuition amounts) so that new lawyers can bill outrageous hours at high rates in the hope that they will be one of the lucky few that will eventually become midlevels. Its unlikely that this would be effective from a recruiting perspective - too many top students will find other paths.

Finally, its market economics. Lets not pretend that "greedy first year associates" somehow "forced" partners to do anything. Everyone in this business is greedy, including (and especially?) partners. If you deny it then consider that partners who are already rich and don't have massive debt (and likely have millions in cash and assets) could live on $500K for the year and generally avoid layoffs. If associates are getting paid $160K then there's a reason for it, or at least there was at the time of the pay raise. I wouldn't be surprised if there was wage deflation at this point as market conditions have changed.

MWE has always instituted a hiring freeze in Q4, so that's nothing new. And they are one of the cheapest law firms known to man.

People who know me have heard this story, but whatever.

MWE screwed me with ZERO bonus even during better times. Had about 1970 client billables + 90hrs of "business development" work for partners that was the but-for cause of my not making 2000.

I could have forgiven them for a half bonus, but zero is just beyond cheap.

so much depends
upon

employment at
will

william careless williams

64 - hell no. they already increased assoc. billing rates back in october.

I have no opinion on this post.

Ed Stimes

101 -- My prior firm screwed me with below-market bonuses even after I billed 2500 one year, and 2300 the next, with my billing rates being the same as many lockstep firms. The justification was that a significant part of it was business development work, but this work was described as being high-priority to the firm, and involved many of the firm's most senior partners. And of course I was not told it would not count towards a bonus. Meanwhile, associates doing doc review and billing fewer hours got bigger bonuses. (This, and various other reasons, is why it's my prior firm.) Lesson learned: either go to a lockstep firm, or a firm with a clear bonus policy, or don't plan on getting a bonus.

so much depends
upon a red wheelbarrow
glazed with rain
beside the white chickens

Ah the days of being a college english major-- back to the grind now.

There are two separate threads of discussion here which could stand to be decoupled. The first involves the profession as a whole and is driven by the fact that current economic realities dictate, for most firms, even fairly healthy ones, some adjustments to the status quo. The second involves MWE specifically. From this thread and others on this board it really seems as if MWE as an institution is fostering a level of resentment and animosity which separates it from the pack. My question for those in the know is whether my perception about attitudes in and around the firm is correct and, if so, what are the implications as it takes steps like this one in an effort to adjust to current conditions. Thoughtful comments on this point would be greatly appreciated.

Lets no decouple this from the other story on ATL re MWE.
Look, dozens of people leave each MWE office each year. They have no work. They don't pay. They lay people off without telling them first. They don't promote women or minorities. And apparently, they get sanctioned.

What more do you need?

McDermoTTT

Partners raised the salaries, not the associates.

Why is this okay? There are tons of decent law firms out there that charge MWE rates. But nobody can ever say ONE good thing about MWE. Was there a great M&A deal? A terrific IPO? A wonderful litigation victory? A quality IP matter?

I guess they do have those new Heller offices...

Why is it that this firm implements an annual associate rate increase for clients in October but implements annual associate class year wage increases in March? Are clients aware that for nearly half the year they are being charged (to use an example) second year associate rates for attorneys that the firm itself is treating and paying as first year associates? Obviously, this is financially advantageous for the firm, but is it putting the client first? As a client I would be dismayed if I knew that a firm had no compunction charging me second year rates for attorneys that the firm itself is treating and paying as first year attorneys. Is this practice typical across law firms or is this unique to MWE?

Former MWE associate here:

I've been in biglaw for more than seven years; my law school colleagues have been in all the same biglaw firms that the kiddos love to talk about here.

From my law school class (T10), after five years about 1 in 20 were in the firm they started with at graduation, 10 in 20 left biglaw practice, 3 in 20 left law practice all together (english teacher, boat builder, politician).

MWE isn't any different than the others really, probably errs on the side of cheap, but all told it's just another biglaw firm. Honestly, I earned decent bonuses billing around 2000 client-billable hours each year (kiddos, never forget: your compensation is proportional to your EARNINGS). I think life at MWE beat the shit out of billing 2400 hours for ten or twenty grand more at the other Biglaw firms (here's a tip, do the math and caclulate your true hourly WAGE some time).

Students: pick the people you like best at any biglaw firm and get started there - if you can get an offer next fall. Keep your head down and work for at least two years before you make any judgments. Realize you will in all likelihood not stay at your firm, and probably not stay in Biglaw.

Nervous T10 1L I hate to pile on, but: YOU WILL NOT GET A BIGLAW JOB THIS SUMMER. I suggest you consider sweet-talking the law professor that gives you the best grade this fall and help him/her write something this summer. In this climate for God's sake focus on grades and stop wasting time looking for a job.

Keep on billing!

Anyone heard what King & Spalding is doing for bonuses this year? Anyone? Anyone?

Anyone heard what King & Spalding is doing for bonuses this year? Anyone? Anyone?

I don't read posts until the Count comments.

McDermoTTT

McDermoTTT

McDermoTTT

HA HA!

#15 is dead on.

Partner #3.

105 - The kicker was they they were sending me hours accounting statements every month that included those hours in the "billable" tally. There was no reason not to take them at their word.

Then at the end of the year they subtracted those 90 out because there were only 1970 CLIENT billable. If that is the policy fine, but don't send people statements all year making them think the firm actually values the business development time when it apparently does not.

119 - you're an idiot. The policy is plainly spelled out: bus dev and pro bono hours count, BUT ONLY IF you otherwise have 2000 client billable. It's true that you got screwed if the bus dev prevented you from getting to 2000, but don't pretend you didn't know the rules.

119 - you're an idiot, but not for the reason that 120 says.

Don't feel bad, though, cause 120 is an idiot for the same reason.

You both work at McDermottt

In the past, McDermott has adjusted compensation retroactively. So I think they might do that here. I would not expect any special bonuses. The firm is not a market leader in any way. They only do what they have to and they clearly do not need to pay more when no one else is.

As people go through end of year reviews, some ppl are being told that they are not getting any class adjustment or bonus.