What is Going On With Orrick’s Bonuses?
Let’s pretend for a moment that yesterday didn’t happen and associates were A) employed, and B) expected to be compensated.
Everybody with me? Okay.
You might remember that Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe announced its 2008 bonus structure way back in March of 2008. Once the market collapsed, people started wondering if Orrick would keep its word. But at the end of October, Orrick stated that they would keep bonuses at Skadden levels:
Today, Orrick assured us that the firm would not look to change their bonus plan. A firm spokesperson put the issue succinctly:“We are committed to using the previously announced bonus schedule.”
But something happened on the way to actually making good on that promise. Details after the jump — and an update from the firm.
Last week, we received word that Orrick delayed actually paying out bonuses, without a stated reason. A tipster reported:
I wanted to let you know some of the things that have been happening [at Orrick] recently, culminating in an email today informing us that the firm “expects” to pay our bonuses “during the week of February 23, 2009.” This is a postponing of bonuses - Orrick always pays in February (which is too late in most people’s view) but it is usually in the 2nd week of February. We had previously been told that the bonus would be paid on February 13, 2009. Why the delay?
At the time, I didn’t think much of the delay. But associates felt otherwise:
Why is Orrick not paying out bonuses? … Combine this with the pay-freeze, our changing (read: downgrading) salary structure (still an unknown quantity) which will take effect in June this year, and stealth lay-offs continuing throughout the Firm - Associates are very very worried. Oh, and add to that that one of the firm’s biggest clients, Wyeth, was recently taken over by Pfizer, leading many associates to feel that if the firm loses Wyeth it will be on very shaky ground. The atmosphere at the firm is tense, worried … and after today’s email, angry. At the very least the firm should have explained the delay in paying bonuses.
Yesterday, individual bonus news started leaking out. And few people were happy with the results:
Orrick just sent associates individual memos regarding their bonuses. Although Orrick promised they weren’t changing their bonus policy - and they haven’t in theory - the practice in 2009 is clearly different. Many associates were dismayed to find their bonuses were half of what they were expecting. But dismay turned to shock when associates realized not all associates were treated the same way.
As we understand it, some associates did receive a Skadden level bonus. But other associates received only a Half-Skadden payout … and nobody knows exactly why. According to one tipster:
Orrick’s system is hours based. In order to get market, you have to meet 2100 hours. You can get slightly less than market if you meet 2000. However, all bonuses are discretionary, and depend on whether you are in good standing at the firm. In past years, it was almost unheard of not to get market if you met your hours. This year, it seems they are applying a different standard: one that hasn’t been explained. Some people have gotten full market, whereas others have gotten half of what they were expecting.
We’ve talked with people who made their hours, and claimed to have positive performance reviews, who nonetheless received a Half-Skadden bonus.
What gives?
Given the fact that Orrick already laid off attorneys, and froze salaries, I imagine that many associates would have accepted bonuses at Cravath levels.
If the firm was just upfront about the decision.
But paying people half of what they expected, for no stated reason, is not going to go over well.
Shouldn’t the firm tell associates exactly what it is doing with associate pay?
Update (5:10): We just talked with an Orrick spokesperson who was able to share this information with ATL:
Orrick honored the bonus scheduled that was announced in the first quarter of 2008 exactly as it was announced.The one caveat was if you received an unsatisfactory performance review you may have gotten a partial bonus or no bonus at all. Orrick has always done this.
If you made your hours and had good performance reviews, you received the full bonus.
Earlier: Associate Bonus Watch: Orrick Stands Behind Bonus Structure
Nationwide Layoff Watch: Orrick Lays Off Attorneys
Nationwide Pay Freeze Watch: Orrick follows Latham
(96) 
Comments
SECOND!
All this talk of frozen salaries, falling bonuses, and layoffs makes me laugh. As a doctor, I make more money, have more job security, and actually make a contribution to society. And to top it off, I have respect. Why be a lawyer? Go to medical school if it's not too late!
Meow
This Elie guy asks, "What gives?"
And I say, "The ship be sinking..."
That what gives, mo'fucka
It was funny when there were one or two good comment characters.
Now its just unfunny and annoying.
I am offended by the words unfunny and annoying. They are not professional. Please moderate.
Professional Attorney in Texas
I am an Orrick associate and received my full bonus. Haven't heard of people in my office who didn't receive what they should have based on our structure.
Evan here, writing from Miami, packing up for another Asia trip this weekend.
could the differences in bonuses be office dependent? different markets?
Can we all just STFU and be thankful we have jobs? Just for a few days. Then we can all get back to bitching that our bonuses are only the size of one average American salary, rather than two, and express our anger that firms betrayed our trust by not raising salaries to 190k.
"O" in Orrick is actually a '0'.
Let's pretend these idiotic bonus posts had any meaning at all in light of all the shit that's going down. What's going on with Orrick's bonuses? Who gives a fuck.
Let's pretend these idiotic bonus posts had any meaning at all in light of all the shit that's going down. What's going on with Orrick's bonuses? Who gives a fuck.
Let's pretend these idiotic bonus posts had any meaning at all in light of all the shit that's going down. What's going on with Orrick's bonuses? Who gives a fuck.
Let's pretend these idiotic bonus posts had any meaning at all in light of all the shit that's going down. What's going on with Orrick's bonuses? Who gives a fuck.
State bars need to start holding partners accountable for misleading statements.
Now that I have been laid off, I am giving serious thought to the family business: dentistry. Fuck it, I will go Grenada (or its dental school counterpart) and go to work for Dad (who pulled in a million three last year).
5,
Why so serious?
Another Orrick associate here. I am receiving the appropriate amount under the published policy for hitting 2000 hours. I haven't heard anything to the contrary about anyone else.
17: dental school is a good choice. So is medical school. Chase your dreams.
What if - and believe me this is a hypothetical - but what if you were offered some kind of a stock option equity sharing program. Would that do anything for you?
Interesting.
Well done, Elie.
I don't want to nitpick, but why break your last six sentences into separate paragraphs?
It seems a litle distracting.
But maybe it's just me.
when did orrick become relevant? this firm is a total joke.
Know why Orrick changed it's name? So you couldn't say SuTTTclife
Don't know what to say. I am an Orrick associate and received a full bonus as did every colleague that I have talked to regarding his or her bonus. If it is true that some associates received a half-bonus, I don't believe it was widespread.
How about the Skadden stealth lay-offs?
Even if there were only a few layoffs, I'm sure ATL can still report them and pretend like they are crazy in order to create more hysteria and "shock" the "legal community" (legal community= law students and first/second year associates who have the time to read this garbage)
ATL is a joke!
I'm #7 and have talked to others in the firm and all I've spoken to have received full bonus. Elie, I think this is irresponsible "reporting" -- your "tipsters" are probably disgruntled associates who received poor performance reviews.
GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT! THIS IS GARBAGE! AND THE EDITOR THAT LET IT IN IS GARBAGE TOO!
26 - your reading it
do you fall into those categories?
21- Best post I have ever seen. Priceless.
Another Orrick associate here, and I received the exact bonus I was supposed to based on my hours, as did everyone else I know. If you have complaining tipsters, it's probably because they (like the purpose who made this post) don't understand Orrick's bonus system. Orrick doesn't do "market bonuses." It's all hours based. If you're a first year, you get nothing at 1950 hours, 25k at 2000 hours, plus another 10k if you hit 2100, and then you get a prorated amount for every hour after 2100. Second years get 30k at 2000 hours plus another 10k at 2100, plus a prorated amount for every additional hour.
A lot of us were indeed expecting to get screwed and not get paid the full amount based on our hours (the delay was definitely shady and unexplained), but we all chatted after we got our memos yesterday and everyone I talked to was pleasantly surprised to receive the full amount.
Note also that Orrick counts all pro bono toward the billable number. I know some people who only "billed" 1900, but did another 200 in pro bono and ended up getting a 40k bonus. Not bad.
Of course, when our new compensation system shows up in June we'll all have more things to complain about.
Orrick only paid me a Half-Lobster bonus. Not full.
As an associate at Orrick who received a Skadden bonus and intends to donate all of it to John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, all I can say is...
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS FOR JOHN MCCAIN!
#21 -- well played. Very funny indeed.
did GLASSCOCK get his bonus???
Unreal. How out of touch is this discussion?
How does any of this relate to SkaddenLA?
So you think people aren't putting off dental work just like everything else in this economy, 17? If you lost your job and insurance, you're going to take a handful of Tylenol and think of England, not pay some tooth-pimp $1k you don't have for yet another worthless x-ray. And that goes for you and your Botox too, Dr. Gupta.
I think people are not understanding the point here. I am an associate at Orrick and have heard of plenty who haven't received full bonuses AND received no explanation. If the ONLY problem were bonuses, then yes, we could STFU. It's not the only problem. We have stealth lay offs (completely unethical ones). The firm is getting rid of people who have families and is keeping a summer associate class that's unprecedented in size for the firm. First and second years are twiddling their thumbs without any work to do and are told there is absolutely no work. Meanwhile, the one or two first and second years who are considered "favorites" have had multiple assignments dumped on them. Someone within the firm described it as a "sinking ship" and I agree. So, the bonus problem is just one more layer added to the bullshit that we've been dealing with for months.
Orrick associate here. The story is absolutely true.
Orrick associate here. The story is absolutely true.
what does any of this have to do with ongoing layoffs at Cahill?
Boo friggin hoo. Be happy you still have your bloody jobs, you spoiled kids. Oh, and 12-15: Learn how to use your damned mouse. One click is all you need. Moron.
Orrick likes to give totally unexpected and unsupported negative performance reviews in December. That way, even associates who worked hard all year and met the hours requirement receive no bonus because they are "not in good standing." Thanks, assholes!
44,
"Unsupported" negative performance reviews is too nice a word to use in describing what they've done. They've told outright lies in performance reviews. Example: "Partner X says your memo was poorly written." Turns out, you've never done a f*ckin memo for Partner X. I completely agree with 39. This is the most unethical place I've ever worked for.
Confirming #44's comment. I received my full bonus, however, I know several associates who worked their butts off this year, made their hours and were given unjustifiably poor reviews in December and will not be receiving their bonuses. That is just wrong!
To all the bitter poors who complain that we're "whining." No one in the post or comments is complaining about a low bonus. We're just spreading information. It's called news. It's possible to care about what firms are doing and still be thankful that we have jobs.
#39, what does the fact that people have a family have to do with whether or not they are laid off?
Orrick is a sleaze factory.
25: When I was in BIGLAW, I found that most people lied about their bonus because they were too embarrassed to admit they didn't get one. Ditto performance reviews.
To make matters worse, Orrick partners drafted many reviews this year in early October but did not deliver them until December. Unsuspecting associates continued to work hard and bill hours through October, November, and December, unaware that it was impossible for them to earn a bonus.
Does anyone have any info on Jones Day? Just curious. Haven't heard a thing.
34 is full of it. The summer class at Orrick is not bigger this year. Orrick SF has 15 2Ls coming compared with 28 last year.
i question your sources.
i got my full bonus, as did every other associate i've talked to. it was pretty clear... at 2000, you get 25K. things seem pretty good here.
sinking ship? angry associates? i guess not at my office.
i question your sources.
i got my full bonus, as did every other associate i've talked to. it was pretty clear... at 2000 hours, you get 25K.
sinking ship? angry associates? secrecy? i guess just not at my office.
53 - The only reason why the SF office's summer class is smaller this year is because many students declined Orrick's offer. They were all aware that the associates were being hosed and did not like it.
Right, 56, that makes total sense. I'm sure Orrick's summer class is smaller because it couldn't find law students willing to work there. Stupid.
57 - Its actually true idiot. I work in the SF office. We had to bring on several 1Ls because we didn't fill our class like we thought we would.
57 - Its actually true. I work in the SF office. We had to bring on several 1Ls because we didn't fill our class like we thought we would.
I've heard from exempt, non-attorney Orrick staff that their annual bonuses are normally paid the second week of February, but this year's bonus decision has been put off until April. That's the decision on whether or not there will be bonuses at all. Of course, that's just rumor, since there's been no official announcement.
21
HA that is great
rest of post
seriously- Orrick is a law firm? I thought they were the company that made the vacuum cleaners they sold on tv.
#3 - grandma? ?????
35, former Thelen and current Orrick partner The Glass Cock here, advising you that I am a partner and partners don't get bonuses. However, I have been trying to contact my loyal associates who followed me here from Thelen to find out how they were treated and have yet to hear back from any of them. I bet they didn't get any credit for their Thelen hours and further bet that they weren't prorated for the time here. That's a rather cold glassy cock in the dupa for such hard working young men and women.
If true, this strategy is called pissing associates off on purpose in the hope they will leave voluntarily so you won't have to fire them and pay severance. Given that annual attrition has to come one way or another, I don't know why so many associates don't seem to understand that firms simply cannot afford to have everyone be happy. It's not personal; it's just that the biglaw recipe calls for a cup of misery. So, if you feel like you are being treated badly and unfairly on purpose, it's probably because you are, but not because you deserve it.
wow, 61, no one here has ever heard that joke before. how clever of you.
Jones Day associate here. Every indication we've been given is that JD will not have layoffs and is stable. While there have been busier periods, there does seem to be plenty of work going around right now.
In light of the terrifying economy, we're all praying the sense of stability lasts.
58/59 - you're purely speculating, and wrongly. i've talked to the recruiters. they didn't bring 1L's on b/c they needed to.
you think that orrick actually has a hard time recruiting in this economy? please.
Orrick senior associate here. $75,000 bonus, which is about what I predicted given my hours (about 2200). Haven't spoken to anyone getting half their expected bonus, but I will believe the posters above. Let me just say: if you get a bonus by billing 1500 client hours and 500 pro bono, you really shouldn't complain if the firm reduces it somewhat. 800 people lost their jobs yesterday, you losers.
I'm at Orrick, and I would be interested to hear which practice groups shafted their associates on bonuses. I suspect that these decisions were closely tied to the economics of those particular groups, rather than to the firm as a whole. Groups that laid people off in November are probably the same ones that gave associates negative reviews and cut their bonuses. Groups doing well probably paid out full bonuses (mine did).
68 -- Another Orrick senior associate here. Couldn't have said it better myself. I see too many people that fit that description around the office.
Thanks 66. Got some friends in the Orange County Ofc. from my time spent out there. Haven't been able to reach them so I was worried given yesterday's events.
68-70 have it right and your tipster is wrong. He or she is also not terribly bright b/c there is some identifying info in the comment that traces back to a particular office and a particular group.
Seriously? Someone is complaining because his above-market bonus is being paid two weeks late? Is he concerned that the delay will prevent him from accepting the dozens of lateral offers on the table? No wonder he didn't get the full bonus.....
"If the firm was just upfront about the decision. "
1) This is not a sentence.
2) "If" goes with "were," not "was."
Where exactly were you educated?
74 - "If" is used with the subjunctive in formal writing; it is acceptable to use the indicative in informal writing -- this is a blog after all.
74 - "If" is used with the subjunctive in formal writing; it is acceptable to use the indicative in informal writing -- this is a blog after all.
74 - "If" is used with the subjunctive in formal writing; it is acceptable to use the indicative in informal writing -- this is a blog after all.
74 - "If" is used with the subjunctive in formal writing; it is acceptable to use the indicative in informal writing -- this is a blog after all.
74 - "If" is used with the subjunctive in formal writing; it is acceptable to use the indicative in informal writing -- this is a blog after all.
74 - "If" is used with the subjunctive in formal writing; it is acceptable to use the indicative in informal writing -- this is a blog after all.
75-80: We got it the firsTTT time.
What 44 said is true.
44 and 45 are correct. I know several good associates in NY and DC project finance have been stealth fired and/or screwed out of their bonuses by unsupported, out-of-the-blue negative performance reviews, usually delivered in late November. You'd expect this kind of behavior from most law firms. From Orrick it seems sleazier because the firm holds itself out as some sort of paragon of "core values." This is total marketing B.S. Don't believe it for a second.
Orrick likes to give totally unexpected and unsupported negative performance reviews in December. That way, even associates who worked hard all year and met the hours requirement receive no bonus because they are "not in good standing." Thanks, assholes!
Orrick's summer class is smaller because they couldn't afford to give out full offers last summer, which got them bad word of mouth. They also consciously gave out less offers for the summer so they wouldn't have to do the same thing twice. I was in last year's summer class, and I talked every single person from my school out of accepting there. It was horrible. All of their kool-aid drinking bullshit is insufferable. The people are assholes and the firm is dishonest with its associates. I'm going to a V10 first instead which, shockingly, had much nicer people who were willing to give me any/all of the work I wanted and spend a lot of time going over it with me before, after, and during the projects.
I used to work at Orrick SF. By and large, the partners aren't assholes, with the unfortunate exception of one or two management-types who are universally hated by the associates. The culture is better than at most firms, and by and large, the firm is very ethical, transparent, and reasonable. They do pad the reviews of even the best associates with some , but hey -- they're a lawfirm, so they need to cover their butts against all of us litigious associates in case they need to lay us off (one of those asshole management types is an employment partner).
84/85 = bitter orrick rejects/rivals
couldn't afford to give out offers? or more likely that they just didn't want you?
lemme show you my O face
you people make absolutely no sense. yeah, i'm sure denying a few associates their 25k is the firm's tactic for saving money. sheesh.
don't you think the more likely story is that one or two associates who didn't do well and got bad reviews ended up not getting their bonuses, got pissed, then started complaining to people and who then emailed their theories to random blogs? and of course they would claim they were doing just fine work. sure they were.
85 here; I never said I was rejected, I just said I hated it. But they did fire some of my friends, and they did refuse several summer offers. In a very fucked up way.
85: Is the measure of a good firm one that extends offers to all its summer associates whether they deserve them or not? From the way you brag about badmouthing your firm it sounds like you didn't deserve an offer at all. Might it be that Orrick or other firms are consciously trying to have smaller summer classes because of the economy, and so they can make more summers full-time offers in a down market? I feel sorry for the firm that ended up with you.
This place sounds terrible.
I just created an "Orrick Apologists Unite" group on Facebook. Please join and post pictures.
Orrick is a really hard place to get a job. You don't just survive there and suck. So, 89, I think the more likely story is that the partners unjustifiably dinged the associates. If you haven't lived in a cave, you'd realize that is a pretty common practice.
91, I don't understand commenters obsessed with cutting down other commenters.
91 is clearly a partner. Pathetic.