So much for choosing firms based on Vault "prestige."

the normalcy continues

Terrorists win when salaries freeze. Thanks Obama. This wouldn't happen under Dubya.

"Me chinese, me play joke, me put pee pee in your coke"

- Eliza Gray

Any word on possible layoffs at Cahill?

Something smells fishy, and it's not me.

5: What does that even mean?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/11/george-the-giant-lobster_n_156921.html

So much for choosing firms based on Vault "prestige."

5: What does that even mean?

they've already paid out some bonuses, but other people are still waiting? isn't it strange to stagger pay out dates like that?

More firms should do this. It's a sound alternative to layoffs, and a salary "freeze" is a reasonable (and economically justified) counter to the large salary spikes we saw in the past two years.

Also, we are in a period of moderate deflation (instead of relatively high inflation), so a $10-15k pay bump isn't necessary to maintain the same standard of living as in years past.

Normalcy = Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge. Coolidge, at least, said the oath correctly the first AND second time. Obama = unconstitutional president.

#12: I think NY paid bonuses already, following NY market; other MB offices typically do bonuses later.

2/10, you mean to tell me that a poll of random junior associates' opinions on law firms may not provide the best correlation with the economic well-being of those law firms?
You have just shattered my worldview.

14=idiot.

-a Republican

When MB and other firms freeze an associate's salary at 2008 levels, do they also continue to charge clients the 2008 rates for that associate, or are they raising the rates to a 2009 figure to reflect the value that an additional year of experience purported adds?

Dang it! I just RIPPED another NASTY PUSSY FART!!

17 = ostrich with head in sand, too drunk from "hope" kool-aid to know any better.

13 - MB also had layoffs.
18 - rates went up at MB.

The initial post a few weeks ago WAS wrong, they usually don't start the raises until sometime in February or March, and give you a "catch-up" check to make it retroactive to the first of the year. Bonuses for non-NY offices come at that same pay period.

From what I've heard, PPP for MB will be down some though revenue was actually up slightly (ignoring JSM's revenue). And clients all over are demanding rate freezes, so I wouldn't be surprised to learn that MB has frozen rates for some/many of the attorneys. Either that, or they'll "raise the rates" but end up discounting on the bills, effictively yielding the same result.

13: Except when you've already done mass layoffs.

20 = Bitter d-bag

Sorry if I missed it--was there a post about MB having "mass layoffs" (see 23)?

HOOOOOOOOOOOOORAY BEER!

13 -- like every economist and mgmt guru agrees that layoffs, not salary freezes, are the way to go. the latter destroys morale, lowers productivity, and causes free riding by slouches.

i know this is the obama era and all where we're all supposed to "sacrifice" for one another, but if that's the case, then why not just lay off the worst employees, give the others their salary increases, and then we can all chip and give those who got laid off some of our money. that's more efficient than just having people sit around all day doing nothing while destroying morale.

Does anyone else hate the fact that they laugh almost every time they read one of 19's posts?

24 = there's no emotion in Article II, douche.

There is no emoticon for what I am feeling right now.

13, you are an f'ing moron. 6 months from now we are going to be seeing inflation akin to what we saw in the early 80's.

Children: Would you rather have pay freezes or unemployment benefits? This economy is simply correcting itself from the past few years of glutney from the big no experienced paychecks handed out. It is those laid off who are paying the highest price for those corrections..

28, no, I'm not 12 y/o.

27-- please provide a cite for the proposition that "every economist and mgmt guru agrees that layoffs, not salary freezes, are the way to go." I read most of the Cooley thread and spoke last night to my friend in Cooley's Seattle office (a layoff "survivor"), and their morale is not good. I doubt the remaining CWT associates are feeling great about things.

I'm a low level associate and know nothing about running a firm, but I do think a short-term salary freeze is wise in this climate, and better for morale than layoffs.

This will forever be a Mayer Brown Eye on what has to date been an untarnished veneer.

BITCH SPREAD THAT MAYER BROWN EYE SO YOU CAN LET THOSE JUICY INSIDES THAW OUT!!

34 - you have to find a cite that salary freezes are the way to go -- there are a zillion cites saying that layoffs are better.

i know cooley's morale is bad. it'd be worse if there were salary cuts.

salary cuts are too complicated -- are they gonna restore the cuts later, will they make up for the lost pay, will incoming associates get paid < 160k, etc? what a mess! just layoff the slackers -- if your firm is like most, there are PLENTY of slackers. it's not hard.

7- Who is that? Does she do porn?

Elie locked me out.

I just come here to look at Trophy Wife.

31, again, please provide citation. Home prices, rent, grocery prices, energy prices, and gas have all fallen significantly in the past six months. Even if you're right, and inflation spikes six months from now, then that would seem like a reasonable time to revisit salary freezes. For now, they're justified.

And adding "f'ing moron" to your one-line argument (if "argument" means "unsupported conclusion") doesn't make it more persuasive, you d-bag tool (see?!).

BITCH SPREAD THAT MAYER BROWN EYE SO YOU CAN LET THOSE JUICY INSIDES THAW OUT!!

37 - In every other industry, people get paid what they're worth, and not a certain set amount based on the number of years they've been working for the company. You do well? You get a raise! You do poorly? You don't! New hires get paid whatever they'll take; there's no rule that somebody with less experience but more skill has to make less than somebody with more experience but less skill; and, yeah, sometimes people can go three or four years without a pay raise if the market and conditions dictate that.

It's not that complicated. Everybody else other than lawyers get this.

40- who doesn't!

Balama Rama Ding ding is half black, half catfish, all lover. Aint my wife B-U-T- FULL!!!

37, there's no need for 13 to provide a cite for his opinion. You brought in "every economist" and now say "zillions" support your proposition (but still have not cited any), so you bear that burden.

That said, I don't really disagree with you to the extent you say "let's fire the slackers." I just worry about how we determine who they are. I'm a first year associate and work is very hard to come by. My guess is that (a) less work is coming in; and (b) the work that IS coming in is not being delegated the way it used to be in busier times. For this reason, if you look at my billable hours, it's easy to call me a slacker, but I'm trying pretty hard to find work and taking everything I can get. So a salary freeze looks fine to me (as compared to layoffs), but I'm no doubt biased.

Trophy Wife = CWT NY 05 female associate

Now, Sidley will no doubt officially freeze. I think in Elie-speak, Sidley will switch from a slurpee freeze to a full freeze, or something.

I.Heart.Trophy.Wife

It's a pretty moot argument. Most firms doing salary freezes are also doing significant layoffs, whether they are out in the open or "stealth." If stealth layoffs are happening at your firm, you know about it, and you know at least one very talented lawyer who got axed. I'd say bad morale is pretty evenly distributed right now to all but very few biglaw firms, and that salary freezes are designed to avoid the need for further layoffs.

Elie, can you update and post the freeze list??

It's a pretty moot argument. Most firms doing salary freezes are also doing significant layoffs, whether they are out in the open or "stealth." If stealth layoffs are happening at your firm, you know about it, and you know at least one very talented lawyer who got axed. I'd say bad morale is pretty evenly distributed right now to all but very few biglaw firms, and that salary freezes are designed to avoid the need for further layoffs.

Any word about the early "performance" reviews at Milbank. Is there a salary freeze there?

13, 27, dont worry, they did layoffs too.

I don't really think 33 attorneys out of 1,800+ counts as "massive" layoffs. I'm sure it struck the unlucky associates affected as fairly monumental, but MB doesn't even compare to firms like Cooley on the bloodbath scale.

Paul Roth is my hero!

Can anyone recommend a good legal blog other than ATL? One with salary info and other good stuff. This thing is down the tubes.

there is a lot more to this story. check with your MB partner friends - budgetary assumptions for 2009 call for a very ery substantial reduction in PPP

Freshfields (the firm, not the grocery store) is also staggering bonuses, if anyone cares.

I had hoped that the first Sidley-inspired actions taken by Obama to catch on nationally would relate to seduction of colleagues, not freezing of pay.

yes can someone please post an updated freeze list? the ones on the community board are stale.

BITCH SPREAD THAT MAYER BROWN EYE SO YOU CAN LET THOSE JUICY INSIDES THAW OUT!!

Has any freeze firm indicated what incoming first years will be paid? Still $160? Seems kind of insulting to the second years.

stopped clocks are right twice a day

55: And those that were cut from performance (i.e., stealth) layoffs?

63: paying the first years same as the second year associates is no more insulting to second years than paying fifth years the same as sixth years is insulting to sixth year associates. Actually, its probably less insulting, given that no second year really has any valuable experience beyond a first year, whereas a tough fifth or six year (e.g. working a trial) can inpart a great deal of experience and value.

I think we have heard enough from disgruntled associates at various firms calling bullshit on (conspicuously high numbers of) "performance related" layoffs to rest easy. MB couldn't keep that kind of thing under wraps for long.

5.5.

I think we have heard enough from disgruntled associates at various firms calling bullshit on (conspicuously high numbers of) "performance related" layoffs to rest easy. MB couldn't keep that kind of thing under wraps for long.

5.5.

Hang on just one second. This has the effect of more...or less...lobster?

Hang on just one second. This has the effect of more...or less...lobster?

66, in any given pay cycle at a pay freeze firm, fifth year individuals are not paid the same as sixth year individuals, while first years are paid the same as second years. Learn to count, bro.

38--I don't. I started clubbing with associates before the MoFo bump at the beginning of '07. One of them made partner in Jan. of '07, showed me what he got bumped to and told me I only need to look good for him (and, of course, in public). It really was a match made in heaven.

63/71: You're missing the point -- first/second years are essentially identical in terms of their ability to do legal work -- not much difference between the two, whereas the quality of more senior associates is much more variable (i.e. the difference in capabilities between a fifth year and a sixth year can be vast depending on the type of work the associate was exposed to in thier fifth/sixth year.) Some fifth/sixth years have substantial experience, and thus freezing their salaries is more of an "insult" (your word) than freezing first or second years salaries. First and second years have no grounds to complain that thier "experience" is being unfairly discounted by a salary freeze, because they just don't have any to speak of.

58: wrong. I did check with a partner friend and he says MB is predicting a big increase in PPP in 2009 because of cost savings and other moves. Believe me I don't really mind being frozen at 220K for a year in light of this economy.

73 - Wrong. A first year doesn't know how to do everything, and has to be shown. A second year -- at least by the end of their second year -- should be able to run an entire case / deal by themselves. If I have an associate working for me who can't take a case from pleadings to discovery to motion practice to trial to appeal by the end of their second year, I'll fire them.

#75, how are things at your insurance defense firm? Has your industry been hit by the economy? Inquiring minds want to know.

to 73/75: I think this has to do with what type of work you do. I agree with 73 but do transactional work. It may well be different in litigation.

and 58/74: I think you might be talking past each other. the PPP numbers for 2008 are certainly down (and will be announced sometime soon); but I agree most are optimistic about 2009.

74, what class year gets paid 220 at MB? Seems off market.

Well, this wasn't wholly unexpected. Cost cutting measures are certainly the prudent thing to do in this economy. It's unfortunate though that MB is following the herd's freeze, however, instead of coming up with a solution that affects associates in proportionate and meaningful ways. This pay freeze (like most that we've seen) punishes certain classes (particularly third/fourth years) much more than others and has already affected morale in those classes in disproportionate ways. This is an unfortunate result as those classes are ones where MB has always struggled in retention, associate reviews (see AmLaw), and lateral recruiting.

78 - no idea, but 220 is not on the normal salary progression at MB (at least in the major markets)

76 = Fail. Anybody representing a company in litigation gets handed big matters and small matters. If a company I'm representing in a multi-billion dollar litigation throws me a seperate complaint filed against them for $200K, I don't want to have to stick a team of people on it and waste the client's money. I'd like to be able to hand it to a third year and say "handle this" and not have to think of it again.

Maybe it doesn't work that way in corporate.

Does trophy wife tape it back, or just tuck it?

Can we have a list of all the firms that have frozen salaries or have committed to not freezing?

75: "Slip and Fall" lawyer or small-stakes divorce hack. No real lawyer would even consider the possibility of a 2nd-year "running" a case. Running for coffee, on the other hand, is perfectly acceptable.

84 - I allow young associates to run to court when a deadline is short. They're a lot faster than the grown-ups.

75 - I'm really glad that I'm not one of your clients. You are THIS CLOSE to a major malpractice suit, or just really full of shit. Take your pick.

84/85 - Sorry; you're wrong. By the end of their second year, an associate should be able do everything needed to do in running a case -- with partner supervision, of course. I'm not going to let them write an appellate brief and send it out the door without reading it and revising it first. I'm not going to let them take depositions unsupervised unless it's something mundane and inconsequential. But I think the widespread practice of using 2nd-3rd year associates for tasks that can EASILY be done by paralegals is just a form of billing fraud.

More firms will freeze and many more will be conducting deep cuts on associate levels soon. Wish it were otherwise, but the well managed firms are going to freeze salaries and cut 30% of associates in order to survive this great depression.

posted in another thread, but this one seems more appropriate. F&R just sent out an internal email announcing a planned salary freeze for 2009.

One time I bought a tricycle and rode it down Bloomsbury road while blissfully puffing on a giant didactically conceived weed contraption.

Fa-DING-gle.

31 - "Glutney" -- is that like chutney?

The hardest thing that a second-year would have to deal with in a case would be the logisitics and organization. He should certainly know the law by this point, he damn well better know procedure and the issues of a case, and he's not writing things himself either. Who in big firms writes something by themselves?

There are people who you could give six years to and they won't learn how to organize litigation. These are people who should be canned.

MB didn't need to do this, especially since it laid off anyone who dind't have work. Remaining associates are busy.

Also, everyone should be aware that associates have to pay the full amount of disability insurance, which is about $2000 after-tax dollars per year (so, in excess of $3000 before-tax dollars). My friends at other firms have indicated that their firms pick up the full cost of disability insurance. I also believe that associates' share of health insurance is not in line with the market. Bottom line -- comp at MB is now well below pretty much all competitors.

Do you think the firms that announced early they would increase salaries as usual will make it up some other way, such as pay cuts bringing them back to freeze levels or smaller bonuses at the end of 2009? This is the first time in years that firms aren't on equal footing with each other.

94 -- No. Nearly all firms can afford to raise, so the ones that did won't need to undo the raise through smaller bonuses or something else. I think the better question is how long it takes for the freezing firms to realize their mistake and undo the freeze. Freezing might seem like a good short-term move, but it will hurt recruiting and retention -- firms may not be concerned about these things now, but at my firm, there is still a lot of work to do and there have been associate departures, so new people will eventually need to be hired.

Agree with 79. This freeze is disproportionate and is already hitting midlevel morale the hardest (which is traditionally MB's biggest weakness). Just look at the numbers:

-Rising second years were denied about a 6% increase
-Rising third years were denied about an 8.8% increase
-Rising fourth years were denied a 13.5% increase
-Rising fifth years were denied 9.5% increase
-Rising sixth years were denied a 6% increase.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Surely some of the top legal minds can figure out ways to save money in a way that doesn't piss off their most scarce resource? Partners, please explain this to us.

Midlevel morale may be low, but MB Chicago has huge 05 and 04 classes. Midlevels are hardly a scarce resource. Maybe a little attrition is what they have in mind?

97, not sure what practice group you are in, but that is certainly not the case in my group, where midlevel and senior associates have always been in short supply. There are barely any 05 and 04 left and they are all very good associates that would be hard to replace.

Bring on the lay offs. I've always made hours. I'm over budget this year. I've got more work than I know what to do with. Cut the dead wood. Bye bye corporate and real estate associates.