"The partners take very seriously the fact that you have reposed your career with us."

Reposed?? I realize that it's not an incorrect word choice, but it's a terribly pretentious word choice.

Aaaack...who am I kidding, I'm just jealous. Why, oh why, can't everyone announce already.

Can someone (Lat ;) as a service to the readership post an updated list of the firms that have not matched (say of the top 100 firms by revenue or number of lawyers, who cares). The last attempt during the morning thread was not even close to being accurate.

Any chance this demand will trickle down into employment for tier 2 grads?

Survey: Increased Demand for Lawyers at Firms, In-House

By Thomas Adcock

New York Law Journal

February 9, 2007

http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?hubtype=BackPage&id=1170928967158
Of all attorneys looking to make career moves this year, those in the catbird seat - the ones with multiple offers who can practically name their price - have five-plus years of experience in corporate transactional law or corporate litigation, according to a new report.

And for first-year associates at large Manhattan firms, starting salaries could rise to $190,000 by December, the report predicts.

The forecasts come in the "2007 Salary Guide" from Robert Half Legal, a Menlo Park, Calif.-based recruiter that sees a particularly rosy year for attorneys, paralegals and support staff.

Charles Volkert, executive director of Robert Half, said the demand for lawyers at firms and corporate legal departments would increase this year due to corporate governance requirements, new business initiatives and rising caseloads.

He added that lawyers with backgrounds in compliance and regulatory issues, litigation, intellectual property and real estate are also "particularly well positioned to take advantage of the current job market."

Maura Mann, manager of training and development at Robert Half Legal, predicted the significant rise in first-year pay.

"We anticipate that even beyond the [recent] jump to $165,000 salaries," she said, large firms in New York and a few other cities with especially high costs of living will "continue to pull the trigger" throughout this year, which will see salaries boosted first into the $180,000 range and then to about $190,000 by December.

See charts of projected 2007 salary ranges and project attorney hiring trends.

Up to a point, a hiring partner at a major Manhattan firm confirmed that prediction.

"Maybe not by the end of this year, but the $190,000 mark is close and inevitable," said the partner, who asked not to be identified.

There are "ebbs and flows" in the industry, said Joanne S. Ollman, director of professional resources at Proskauer Rose, "but right now it doesn't seem like there are many ebbs."

Ms. Ollman, too, spoke of increased competition in lateral hiring, which would lead inevitably to increased compensation for both senior and junior associates.

"The lateral market is getting so tight," she said. "Firms would rather hire at the front end and worry about it later at the back end. I'm not sure it works, but that's the strategy."

Drawing from her experience at Proskauer - as well as similar stints at Weil, Gotshal & Manges and Cravath, Swaine & Moore - Ms. Ollman acknowledged, "We're all fighting over the same five laterals who still want to practice law after five years or so."

Other hiring trends noted in the Robert Half survey include:

• Competition for first-years has "intensified" as large and midsize firms "tap an ever-shrinking pool of candidates to bulk up their staff in response to increasing caseloads."

• In-house counsel experienced in regulatory and compliance issues continue to be in demand as a result of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, passed in response to a wave of corporate scandals.

• Paralegals with three or more years' experience also continue to be in demand at large and midsize firms, and will increasingly assume traditional first-year associate tasks such as trial preparation, research and witness interviews.

Further, according to the Robert Half survey, which questioned 300 attorneys at representative law firms and corporate legal departments:

• Fifty-five percent of firms expect to increase their number of lawyers in 2007, while 41 percent expect lawyer ranks to remain the same.

• The most growth by practice area will be in ethics and corporate governance (25 percent), litigation (23 percent) and intellectual property (19 percent).

• Increased workload is the single biggest challenge for corporate law departments, according to 34 percent of respondents, followed by compliance or regulatory issues (28 percent) and litigation costs (24 percent).

Far less than half the attorneys surveyed - 38 percent - said compensation is the biggest incentive for staying with their firms. Nearly one third of those surveyed - 29 percent - cited professional development opportunities as the most important incentive. Sixteen percent cited flexible work arrangements.

Ms. Mann expects increased interest among experienced attorneys in leaving law firms for in-house counsel positions.

"These are people five or six years out who've had the chance to practice and are thinking several years down the line about ultimate goals - whether they want to be partners," she said. "If not, it's the ideal time to move to the in-house role, which may not be as lucrative as the firms, but where you have more of a work-life balance."

Ms. Ollman said of the wave of lawyers seeking to move in-house, "We're fighting hardest against the banks. There are no more dot-coms, but the banks are certainly picking up."

To stem the tide, Ms. Mann said many large firms are implementing ever more "life development programs," which especially allow women to maintain career continuity.

"Ten years ago if a woman wanted to start her family, she had to leave or go to a smaller firm," said Ms. Mann. "And when she wanted to come back, it was a big hill to climb. Now it's not out of the realm of possibility to have it all. We see more of them tele-commuting. If they're not at work at nine on the dot, it's no longer a big deal. Firms realize they have to make accommodations."

Shut up Loyola 2L. You are such a whining bitch.

I just asked a question. Sheesh.

Lat --can you block L2L --he really is a troll and is f-ing up this blog.

I talked to someone at Jones Day Dallas last night and they are at $150K for first years.

Lat --please find out who L2L is --and post a picture! I need to see if my mental image of him is correct.

What a loser!

Why is everyone being so viscious suddenly? Don't ask me questions if you don't want a response.

Why does everyone keep oppressing all the tier 2 posters on this board? Why aren't we entitled to the same jobs and the same money that the rest of you are? I know no one here worked any harder in law school than I am, but you all got your jobs handed to you. So stop picking on me.

The 5:27 post was not me. I know how to spell vicious. My 5:31 post stands though.

The 5:31 post is more eloquent too.

Can you please all stop talking about salaries? It hurts my feelings as a tier 2 student. Because I am a tier 2 student I will never, ever work in a law firm. Why do you all treat tier 2 students like we're lower than dirt? Surely we must be at least the value of hamsters.

Chuck Norris punched me in the teeth because I am a tier 2 student. My teeth fell out and now they are fertilizer for the plants in Simpson Thatcher's offices. I asked Simpson Thatcher for my teeth back but they laughed at me and threw me in a den of lions.

L2L, I just want to speak up and tell you that the reason everyone is "picking on you" may have to do with the fact that most of us are coming to this thread to get information about salaries. I could really care less where you went to school or where you want to work. I just want to know if I get a raise and your incessant commenting is getting in my way.

"And for first-year associates at large Manhattan firms, starting salaries could rise to $190,000 by December, the report predicts."

I call BS on this but I like the sound of it.

rofl @ 5:36

Dechert is considering making an announcement that it has no plans to announce at this time, but that an announcement may be made in the future. Once it has been determined that an announcement may be forthcoming, Dechert may announce its intention to make an announcement, subsequent to which time, it may make an announcement... or not.

So do increased salaries during good times mean increased layoffs during bad times?

Laura, if you get a raise I'm sure you'll know it before anyone else here.

Don't tell L2L to shut up. He's some of the best entertainment I get holed up here in my high-paying BigLaw firm job.

Laura,
Sorry if my stories of tier 2 unemployment occupied 2 seconds of your time as you eagerly await new of your (pre-bonus) $160k salary.
And note I didn't post all the Loyola 2L posts. Most of them are from imposters.
Loyola2L

So do increased salaries during good times mean increased layoffs during bad times?

I did not write the 5:41 post. Most of these posts are NOT by imposters. Why is it that people don't believe I am who I say I am? It's probably because I go to a tier 2 school and suck so hard.

Anyone else see art in the intertwining of biglaw salary increases and Loyola 2L's stories of tier 2 unemployed misery?

Dechert is considering making an announcement that it has no plans to announce at this time, but that an announcement may be made in the future. Once it has been determined that an announcement may be forthcoming, Dechert may announce its intention to make an announcement, subsequent to which time, it may make an announcement... or not.

test

>>So do increased salaries during good times mean increased layoffs during bad times?<<

Pretty much, yep. The class of 2000 grads say hi.

>>So do increased salaries during good times mean increased layoffs during bad times?<<

Pretty much, yep. The class of 2000 grads say hi.

I like reading this website for the snark and info, and even though I generally ignore Loyola2L's comments, I am really beginning to get annoyed with the constant postings and lamentings. I know you don't censor comments, but can't you block Loyola2L until s/he agrees to stop posting the same annoying, irrelevant comments?

I don't mean to be rude about this, but reading the comments is like reading Loyola2L's personal blog.

Here here! I bet L2L is costing you clicks and money Lat!

L2L, if you are so bothered by hearing about how much money the 1st tier grads make, stop reading here and go back to studying. You may have a chance at biglaw yet if you are at the top of your 2nd tier class, but that won't happen if you continue moping around on this message board getting more and more depressed about something you don't have much control over and trying to make those of us who get paid big bucks feel guilty for it. I personally worked my @$$ off for this opportunity. If someone wants to pay me big piles of money because I did that, I'm happy to oblige.

You only want me removed because I'm from a tier 2 school! How typical, just ignore the plight of the poor, trampled-upon, cancer-ridden, malnourished, learning-disabled tier 2 student.

I bet you would all like to remain blind to our plight! People like you are responsible for Darfur. Tier 2 schools are my Darfur!!

Is there a tier 2 blog, where they talk about salary increases from $40k to $50k, where I can post?

It's known as jdjive.com

so what did K&L Gates do everywhere other than NYC?

I didn't post the comments above, especially not the offensive 6:24 comment.

I definitely didn't post the whiny 6:25 comment.

klgates dc bumped to $145 for first years as of March 1, but I don't have a memo. It was announced at an associates meeting.

I don't know if 6:19 is the real L2L, but if it is, that's the funniest thing you've said in a week and a half.

I didn't post the 6:28 comment saying I didn't post the 6:25 comment. WTF

We should rename this blog,

"abovethel2l-aw.com"

Ummmm...Will you love me? I can't believe that you all make six figures while I'm still a law student and don't have my future set yet. Please allow me to whine before I've actually suffered any set-back. The prospective harm I'm suffering far outweighs any actual harm.

I don't know who this "Loyaloa" person is, but it definitely isn't me.

I bet they're from some pathetic tier 3 school.

L@L, Darling, Dear,

Stop whining. Get good grades and transfer to a top tier school. And, if this thread disturbs you, try not to read it.

It is hard not to write mean things to you. Go network. Meet people. Show them how smart you are.

Also, IF you were in the top 5% at Loyola, you could get a job at a top firm. So quit whining and go study.

But what about the other 95%? That's my point.

Rumor at Greedy IP that Finnegan Henderson will match Fish's $160k scale.

Confirmed?

The point is, not everyone is a top tier lawyer at a top tier firm. The people who are worked hard to get there. You are working hard, too. I grant you that. But, if you were top tier material you would not be here whining, you would be working hard to get top grades, not just sitting here annoying people.

Top school grads are allowed to post here while studying, but if tier 2 grads do it something is wrong with them. No wonder we're not allowed in any influential part of the legal world.

I went to a "Tier 2" school (because it was the best school in my home town and I naively bought into the 'it doesn't matter where you go to school' line; but that's neither here nor there), graduated in the top 5%. and now work at BigLaw and got the raise. There is hope for you, Loyola2L, if you get your grades up and interview well.

Pillsbury just matched in NYC and announced 145K in California and DC.

I can confirm Pillsbury's match.

7:36, I respect where you're coming from, but still don't care. I'd rather complain. The LA market is soooo small (there are, after all, only 10 million people in LA), and there are probably only 60 or so firms in town starting their associates at six figures. I mean, given that the LA law schools graduate a total of 900 people a year, how can I POSSIBLY compete?

Loyola 2L: you are pathetic!! You are such a girlie boy! Adjust your bra straps and pull down your skirt for crying out loud. Get it together. It is you, you, you. I am certain that you talk yourself right out of a job with all your self-pity gibberish.

Loyola 2L: you are pathetic!! You are such a girlie boy! Adjust your bra straps and pull down your skirt for crying out loud. Get it together. It is you, you, you. I am certain that you talk yourself right out of a job with all your self-pity gibberish.

L2L: you can't compete because you suck! Please Lat can you block Loyola 2L, both of them, whoever they are.

"Top school grads are allowed to post here while studying, but if tier 2 grads do it something is wrong with them."

If we have already graduated, why would we be studying (unless for the bar)? And, perhaps, yes, top tier can post instead of studying while you should be hitting the books if you want to elevate yourself to the pedestal.

"No wonder we're not allowed in any influential part of the legal world."

Are you claiming that the top tier grads and biglaw are VICTIMIZING poor little 2nd tier grads? Now that's the funniest thing I've heard all day! Stop blaming others for your shortcomings!

L2L: you can't compete because you suck! Please Lat can you block Loyola 2L, both of them, whoever they are.

L2L you poor baby...you had the terrible misfortune to go to a Tier 2 school. The plight is so horrible. I'm sure the people dying in Darfur are so glad that they only have to worry about starving and dieing--they don't have to worry about the day to day life as a Tier 2 student.

As a tier 2 student, I am amazed by the fact that you could even think to compare Darfur to Tier 2 schools.

"You are such a girlie boy! Adjust your bra straps and pull down your skirt for crying out loud. "

Kind of an ironic insult for David Lat's blog.

At least you are not as much of a loser as me - T4.

8:03 - I didn't post that comment. People are posting under my moniker to make fun of my plight.

Is there any doubt now that LA firms paying $145k to first-years are below market?

WHAT DID K&L DO IN PITTSBURGH?????

And, apparently it's obvious why I'm a tier 2 student dying I think is the word I was going for up there....

L2L: The comment about adjusting bra straps has nothing to do with one's sexuality. It has everything to do with the fact that you are whining like a little girl going through puberty. Just stop it for goodness sakes.

UnivBaltimore2L,
We're in the same boat. Top 5-10% from our schools get rewarding jobs. The rest get to waste our lives.
Loyola2L

Loyola 2L: You frequently refer to your firm as "second tier" or "Tier 2"... isn't that overstating things?

I know who L2L is. He is the brother of the girl who jumped naked into the Hudson River. hahahahahah

I didn't post the 8:07 comment. Stop trying to make me look ridiculous! Tier 2 IS as bad as Darfur, at least comparatively. You all get to eat your expensive steaks and drink your expensive wine on your big firm salaries but I am loaded down with debt and will end up starving soon!

And LA is such a tiny city, I could never ever hope to find work here. Hardly anyone lives in LA. You walk around and it's like it's deserted. I don't know how people find jobs out here... where are these law firms located? I don't see any buildings, I only see tumbleweeds.

Won't anyone read my resume? I know the spelling sucks but look its the spirit of teh thing ok!!!

L2L: I go to a top 5 law school, have generally slacked off in my two years here, got mediocre grades, and still managed to land 1L and 2L summer gigs at these big firms with their big salaries. With this new pay raise, I'll probably earn more next summer than you'll be able to make in a year! Cheers.

Hope is the thing with feathers
That perches in the soul,
And sings the tune without the words,
And never stops at all,

And sweetest in the gale is heard;
And sore must be the storm
That could abash the little bird
That kept so many warm.

I 've heard it in the chillest land,
And on the strangest sea;
Yet, never, in extremity,
It asked a crumb of me.

Then I applied to biglaw from a tier 2,
and a flurry of rejection letters killed it.

Emily,

See, you understand my plight. How nice of you to use your real name on a bulletin board. Are you a partner at a biglaw firm? Can I send you my resume? If only more biglaw hiring partners had a heart like yours.

Loyola 2L

rofl @ 8:36. Do you think Loyola 2L knows which firm Emily works at? Don't tell him.

chirp chirp says the WGWAG

still at work...

I won't tell him if you won't, but I'm sure he can find her if he searches enough biglaw firm websites.

I think Congress should pass legislation to guaranty me a chance at a top law firm. I mean I wasn't smart enough to go to a top school and I didn't get top grades. On top of it I am not willing to go out and sell my non-grade, non-school related skills to an employer to justify such a good salary. Instead I will lobby Congress to protect me.

I know other people made it into BigLaw from non-Tier 1 schools but they had marketable skills (such a personality that would attract clients), so its no fair.

7:17: Yeah, someone's gotta keep state bar revenue up by taking the exam multiple times and paying exam fees. Then, when they finally pass, they perform the invaluable public service of chasing ambulances... Who else but tier 2 and below is suited for that? Certainly not me! My station in life is one of privilege because I deserve it.

L2L, don't worry... there are plenty of jobs out there for you when you give up on repeating the bar exam. Didn't your career counselor prepare you by giving you the pamphlet that all tier 2 law schools and below are required to pass out -- "Alternative Careers for Low Tier Law School Grads (Who Just Can't Make it as Real Lawyers)"

I like that corporate counsel article. I would just love to work 9 to 5 and supervise litigations and audit BIGLAW bills, calling to bitch because someone did too many Westlaw searches on some shit you could find in Moores. But I need to maintain my accustomed standard (barely BIGLAW as in no raise yet... ) of living, so I would clearly need mucho stock options. Cheers :)

Loyola... Do a mass mailing. It can't hurt. Make the letters super personal, you send out 100 letters you may catch the eye of one - that's all you need.

David Lat has assumed the moniker Loyola 2L. It's kind of like the Dread Pirate Roberts from the Rob Reiner class, The Princess Bride.

I don't care what anyone says - Loyola 2L is fantastic. You are hilarious, dude.

Let me tell you something though - I went to a tier 1 school and did pretty well - I'm at a biglaw firm, but the grass ain't always greener on the other side.

If you need somebody to lobby Congress, that's exactly what I do, bro. If you want to throw down a few hundred an hour, I'll hook you up with some legislation in the Hizzouse... literally... the Hizzouse of Representatives....

I'm grad from a tier 4 law school in the northeast this may and will be making 160k in a large nyc law firm. The quality of your school isn't all that important if YOU are quality.

ok, KL Gates made the move. Reed Smith, you are on the clock.

Are you people still here insulting me? I didn't write any of the posts above and was actually out jogging. The weather here is great as usuall of course.

First of all I know who Emily Dickinson is. She'a a 19th century poet.

Second I did a mass mailing with hundreds of resumes and didn't get an interview.

Third I definitely didn't write that legislation post.

Fourth I'm exhausted so good night.

L2L, you are at least better than me, my law school is not even accredited.

If you guys have taught me one thing it's never to expect sympathy from biglaw.

it's about time you learned that. Don't expect sympathy to get you anything. You will not get a job because you worked harder or because you are nicer or anything. The best you can hope for is that you get a job that is as good as the job you can do. And that means hard work and talent. I don't know why you are at Loyola... maybe it is because you botched the LSAT, maybe you dindt work hard in undergrad, or made bad choices, or maybe you just aren't that academically gifted. But all you have is your experience, your track record, and what you have shown you can do. You have not proven yourself, so you will not get a biglaw job. End of story.

L2L - I work for a bunch of Tier 2 & 3 grads (Loyola is on of the schoosls) and spent my 1st year at a Tier 2 school. These lower-tier grads are all biglaw partners that made it the old fashioned way - by busting thier ass and being smarter than you (Amlaw top-ten if you care). I get to make $200k as a junior associate b/c I also busted my ass. Do the same and get the same result. If you don't, that's OK - Just shut up!!!

Your Heller Ehrman information is stale: They bumped their Seattle office to $130k today. Anyone know what K&L Gates did in Seattle? They still at $115k?

List of firms who have moved to $190!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

L2L, Why don't you spend less time jogging and more time studying. All you do is have fun and whine. No wonder you're only top 25% and got shut out of biglaw.

Somone clue L2L in on biglaw hours. If he can't study hard enough to make top 10% at a tier 2 he would get eaten alive in biglaw.

L2L -- when you get up in the morning, take some time to think. Get away from this blog and think about what makes you uniquely valuable to an employer. I will tell you that almost everyone at Biglaw has something (even if it is just good grades at a good school). If its not grades at a Tier 1 school (and there are pleanty of people in Biglaw who did not have top grades from top schools) its something else. Do you have some prior work experience that is uniquely valuable, an ability to attract clients, anything? Did you sell more Amway than anyone else on your block? Figure this out and tailor your cover letter to stress this skill set to the needs of each firm you are applying to. Stop crying and start figuring out why you are worth the salary that you so despirately want.

I know many of us a Biglaw know we are worth what we are getting (especially since some of our firms have not matched). You need a real answer of why you are worth this money. You need to convey it in your cover letter and in your dealings with firms. Partners want people who add value and make their lives easier. This is the only reason why they tolerate the high salaries -- to get people who will please and retain THEIR clients and make THEIR lives easier. They do not pay these wages out of fairness or because an associate tried hard to get a Biglaw job.

You may also need to think in steps, such as 1) maximizing your grades, 2) getting the best job you can land that is going to get you experience, 3) building that experience and getting a positive reputation, then 4) lateraling into the job you really wanted. If you can sell why you are fantastic for that particular firm you can get a job with someone.

Why hasn't Ropes moved? I say it's the Boston market, a friend says it's unstable finances. Any opinions?

Information needed!
Does anyone know what the NY firms are doing with senior (i.e. 98+)associate pay. What exactly does determined on an individual basis mean?

As a side note on HA's post at 12:54 ...

I am on the recruiting team for my biglaw firm, and one of the first things we say is "that kid does/doesn't only want the money"

It's expensive to lose people, and if you're just gonna bounce around for another couple hundred bucks (even though we are at market) we dont' want the hassle. You have to make them believe that you really want the job, that you really want to work there. And that you've thought about why you want to be there as opposed to other places. I know not everyone is like this, but trust me, we all see right through you to the "give me my 160" behind your bullshit. Do you even want to be a lawyer?

anon, I totally don't just want the money. I want to biglaw because I enjoy giving up 70 hours a week of my life to shuffle papers for massive corporations. Now can I send you my resume?

McKenna Long & Aldridge, DC. Any news? Firm has been silent. Will the firm match market?

Ok, enough about Ropes having not raised. Its official. I've emailed with several associates there who have confirmed the raise to $145k in Boston, with an escalating pay scale to match NY salaries by the 6th year. I'm not sure why no one has posted the email memo, but there has been at least 5 different posts saying that it was by email last Monday. It was also confirmed on the Greedy Boston board.

Re Finnegan Henderson, the following was posted at Greedy IP by "Patently Chicken Redux" who appears to be a regular on that board, and had earlier posted a question about the FH scale. Appears not to be a joke.

"2006-160
2005-170
2004-185
2003-200
2002-215
2001-230
2000-250
1999-270

5% bonus per 100 hours over 2000 up to 2400
up to 20% merit bonus

After the first two years the base salaries are lower than Fish and Richardson. The potential merit bonus is double what it was before and may make up for the lower base salary for some."

Perkins in Seattle went to $120 (up from $110) yesterday.

I have a hard time believing top 25% at a decent school like Loyola is not good enough for some biglaw jobs ... maybe not Cravath or Skadden, but a firm like Holland & Knight for example. Maybe get a ll.m. from a better school than try ...

2:23, I agree. There are plenty of AMLAW 100 firms that would hire a Loyola student in the top 25%. Maybe Loyola 2L had a typo on his resume since it was summarily rejected by all the firms!!!

Munger matched LW scale only. Of the relatively "prestigious" lit mid-sized and boutiques in CA, Quinn and Keker are paying 160. I expect Irell to go to 160 as well.

L2L really should quit the whining. E.g., Skadden has 7 partners and 14 associates from Loyola (search by law school on their website).

agree with you 2:46. Maybe the type of personality that spends all day posting inane comments on a gossip blog is not a good fit for BigLaw...hmm...

So let me get this straight, of the 60+ firms that raised first-year salaries in NYC, only 1 (Blank Rome) didn't go to 160K. Anyone know of other below-market firms?

L2L, life is unfair. Get the fuck over it. Just because you've worked hard does not entitle you to a 6-figure salary. Either you chose a tier 2 knowing the shitty job prospects that accompanies the school, or you failed to do sufficient research on this before choosing your school. Either way, you're fucked and you're not worthy of any sympathy.

what will it take for people to get it.

darfur didn't work.

what else is left?

no, don't go there.

hey loyola - you realize that anytime a hiring partner who has read this blog in the past two weeks gets an application from someone in the top 25% at loyola they're just going to throw it away at the fear of it being yours. good job. chances are they throw it away anyway though so whatever, no harm no foul...

for what its worth, I was bottom half of my class at a school ranked in the 40s and I am an 8th year associate at an AmLaw /Vault 100 firm ...

A (5:55): i think that, unlike you, hiring partners are astute enough to realize that L2L is an internet schtick designed to get a raise out of novices.

What about the partner from S&C that told Charney to bend over. He's graduated from like a tier 6 school and succeeded (sort of) at a biglaw. Is that school even accredited?

02:23 PM - I applied to hundreds of firms. 100 in LA and 100 or so in other cities. You may have a hard time believing it but that's because no one talks about the plight of tier 2 grads.

02:46 - No. Skadden has 21 Loyola people nationwide. That's from Loyola LA, Chicago and New Orleans combined. But let's say 14 of them are from the LA Loyola. Loyola graduates 500 students a year. I'll let you do the math.

5:55 - Why would they throw it away? I'm basically groveling for a job. Why would they want to hire some whiny "I'm entitled to this job" top school grad over someone like me who appreciates being here.

6:00 - More on your story please. How did you land a good as a tier-2 (tier-2 adjacent) median student?

06:05 PM - He's my hero. Except for the harassment part. He's like story of gold at the end of the rainbow which gives us downtrodden tier 2 grads hope.

1:00, re: Ropes. you are an idiot. ropes has not raised. when a firm raises, the whole world knows about it within minutes. you think if a memo came out MONDAY we'd still be discussing it as a maybe?? dumbass.

this is 6:00. I got a ll.m. and networked by a$$ off. once you get in the door nobody cares about your grades or your school .... up for partner in 6 months.

6:00 - I'm glad all that stuff ends when you get your foot in the door. I'm thinking of an LLM, but so does every other tier 2 grads. I don't know if it works for everyone.

this is 6:00 again. i think ll.m.'s don't' "work" as well when your JD school is ranked REALLY low - not naming any names, but you know what I mean & Loyola is definitely not in that category. But in this market top 25% at Loyola should be fine. Just get a job and the best firm you can, see how it goes, and if you dont like it lateral over to BigLaw after a year ...

PS, I know the L2L thing is probably schtick, but still this stuff might be informative for any law students reading these threads.

Why do people respond to Loyola 2L? It's not him that's ruining this blog, it's all of the responses to him. Please just ignore him. Besides, my bet is that he's already working for biglaw or is at a top tier law school...he's just screwing around.

Nothing ruins a "did we get our deserved $160k yet?" blog faster than an unemployed tier 2 sharing his job hunt woes.

The real problem with associate attrition at big law firms is the whole "hiring eggheads" thing.

People nowadays who do well at top colleges and top law schools more often than not have some upper middle class money behind them.

They aren't hungry. Their parents often have money. They aren't dying to be "rich" -- or at least, aren't dying to sacrifice their lives in return for some cash.

Yes, of course there are exceptions. But many of the top students (david lat) don't really need to be catapulted into the world of the upper middle class. They already are there. So the appeal of sacrificing one's youth to firm life just isn't there.

A&P are being such cheapos. They should just put us out of our misery already so that we can begin to send out new resumes!

To further the "eggheads are often wealthy" argument -- the baby boomer generation were often the first of their families to experience middle class/upper middle class security, whathaveyou.

But their kids are used to a relatively privileged lifestyle. They were coddled intellectually as children. They scored well. Went to good schools. Went to top colleges. Didn't know what to do with their Yale or Haverford lit degree.

Ended up at law school.

Ended up top of their class in law school.

Fiound themselves at a firm. Not really sure why they are there. The money is nice, sure, but daddy might make two or three times their salary. And they have no life. And they are stressed out and unhappy. And they don't have kids to support yet, unlike their parents might have at their age.

Conclusion? Run screaming from biglaw. It's just not the same transformative experience to join BigLaw as it might have been for a poor kid from Brooklyn or Long Island 30 years ago.

Exactly, and if an unemployed tier 2 who busted his ass in law school dares talk about wanting a biglaw job he's accused of whining.

But they can whine about why their salaries haven't gone to $!60k all day.

insurance defense
32 up, 9 down

The chocolate factory (as in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) of the law profession, where desperate attorneys work for a pittance, like Oompa Loompas working for cacao beans. Except in Insurance Defense, the attorneys don't smile and sing happy songs.

I went to a ttt, and now I do insurance defense. In a sad and cruel twist of fate, I can't even afford the insurance rates of my own clients, so my teeth are rotting away, and the pinched nerve in my groin is making me incontinent.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=insurance+defense

1. toilet law
85 up, 23 down
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=toilet+law

shanty law firms where the yearly salary is less than the yearly bonus enjoyed by biglaw associates. often not offering health insurance or meaningful experience, toilet law firms have high turnover and low morale.

jdjive had a great blacklist of toilet law firms in manhattan, but the partners of some of the named toilet law firms thugged themselves out and threatened to break some kneecaps. of course, they could have opted to file a lawsuit, but since they are toilet law, anyone could have caught their bluff, because they would have lost if they tried. going tony soprano was simpler.
tags ttt

L2L, if Tier 2 is "toilet law," what is Tier Three? "Open latrine law"?

http://bigdebtsmalllaw.blogspot.com/

Big Debt, Small Law is definitely worth the read. Here, he/she talks about working at Paul Weiss as a contract attny:

"Four years of college, three years of law school, countless late-nights studying for the SAT, the LSAT, the term papers, the first-year stress, the all nighters, the hundreds of thousands of debt, the manic cramming and stress of the barzam, the months of sleepless nights waiting for results, all to grovel like a suckling yelp for a dead-end gutter job paying lower wages than an illiterate ex-con janitor cleaning the shithouse at McDonald's.

While a doc reviewer at the infamous Paul Weiss, I had an obscene amount of free time on my hands, as I had no idea what secret code-words to watch for in a "Bi-Lateral Prospectus Semi-Lateral Quadannual Sub-Agreement" or whatever souless corporate dreck these pinheads churn, and thus didn't even try. Instead, I visited the NY Public library each morning and deigned to catch up on my "great books I've never read" list. For $21 an hour, I plowed through some true classics of American literature, all on the dime of some dirtbag corporation. As we were in the infamous basement area, there was ZERO supervision, and thus everyone was free to fuck off all day and do nothing. It was a great deal for Paul Weiss, as I later learned they were charging the client TWELVE TIMES what we were being paid hourly, and of course everyone knows that Biglaw doesn't accomplish anything except deforestation and makework lobbying for more ultra-complex "laws" that they can charge $500 an hour to "navigate.""

Here, Big Debt Small Law compares being a low tier law grad with being a member of the Joad family in the Grapes of Wrath:

"Anyway, for those who haven't read The Grapes of Wrath, it is a tale of a family called the Joads. They are simple farm folks who have been "tractored out" by huge scumbag congolmerate farming corporations. Having lost their little home, they are lured by slick, glossy brochures about the endless and high-paying jobs in California picking grapes and fruit. In the brochures, men lounge about in hammocks with a cool glass bowl of grapes on their chest while a gorgeous woman farms them with a palm frond. The Joads are thus inspired to scrape together all the cash they have in the world, load up a makeshift jalopy, and head out Route 66 to the promised land.

Their voyage is fraught with much hardship, but it is nothing compared to the bitter, acid disappointment they find waiting for them in California. So many Okies have come west that wages are in a race to the bottom. One day a farmer will pay 25 cents a basket to pick grapes, then the next day 100 more people show up wanting to work for 15 cents, so he makes that the new wage. Then the next day 500 people show up and most of them will work for 5 cents a day, so the rate falls again. You get the picture.
The similarity to law school is chilling. You have the slick, glossy brochures churned out by dishonest, money-grubbing shysters like Dean Hobbes, boasting of high salaries and ample work. You have the participants sacrificing all their money (and borrowing other people's money) to "make the voyage." You have the same stressful, misery-filled journey (finals, papers, bar exam), and, most importantly, the same end result. Bitter misery and total failure, as thousands of people out-bid each other in a race to work the longest and hardest hours for the lowest salary possible in dead-end garbage jobs. The similarity is eerily chilling."

6:22: Yes they have.

L2L, how do you know you want to work in Biglaw? Maybe you'd hate it?

7:48 - There's no difference between Tiers 2, 3 and 4. 5-10% out of our schools are given a chance. The rest get to work in the toilet law firms described above.

8:42 - I just know. Like Charlie Bucket knew he wanted the golden ticket. Like Cinderella knew she wanted to attend the ball. Like Tevye knew when he sung "If I were a rich man." Like Dorothy knew she wanted to see Oz.

L2L, you should go to this "convention" of embittered young tier 2 and 3 grads in New York. March 2007. By invite only.

http://temporaryattorney.blogspot.com/

Too far away, but I'm glad they're getting organized.

Why aren't Lat and Lattman doing stories on this convention?

http://nycinsurancelaw.googlepages.com/

List of Shame UPDATE:

17. Williams & Connolly
18. Gibson Dunn
19. Arnold & Porter
25. Ropes & Gray
40. Baker Botts
42. Freshfields
43. Baker & McKenzie
45. Boies Schiller
46. Pillsbury Winthrop
50. Fulbright & Jaworski
51. Dechert
52. Munger Tolles
56. Irell & Manella
57. Cooley Godward
58. Vinson & Elkins
68. Foley & Lardner
69. Steptoe & Johnson
70. Hunton & Williams
71. Patton Boggs
72. Perkins Coie
75. Nixon Peabody
77. Bryan Cave
79. Crowell & Moring
80. Howrey
82. Reed Smith
83. Dorsey & Whitney
86. McGuireWoods
87. Squire Sanders
89. Finnegan Henderson
90. Baker & Hostetler
91. Thelen Reid
92. Mintz Levin
93. Kilpatrick Stockton
94. Fenwick & West
95. Dickstein Shapiro
96. Venable
98. Kelley Drye
99. Preston gates
100. Seyfarth Shaw

Does anyone think there will be a cutoff? Say, anyone lower that 75 won't match, or can't afford too? Who in the bottom do you all think is most likely to match. Is that question the same as the most financially strong? Are any of them "moving up"???

Baker and McKenzie raised in SF, to the Latham scale. But it's not firmwide, at least not yet.

Dorothy didn't want to see Oz, she wanted to find her way back to that farm in Kansas

Dorothy didn't want to see Oz, she wanted to find her way back to that farm in Kansas

Re: List of Shame
You can remove Pillsbury and Gibson Dunn. Both have matched market.

I thought the whole movie was about finding Oz. Wasn't that the title?

I have to imagine that Baker & McKenzie will match firmwide. They are trying to establish a presence in NY (they bought up Coudert Bros. NY office). They won't be able to compete without matching the 160 in NY.

Dorothy was looking for Oz and its Wizard because he had the power to get her home.

Although, Dorothy did have some teenage angst about wanting to leave the farm in Kansas, she did not go looking for a new locale.

McKenna Long & Aldridge matched the DC $145.

K&L's only confirmed match is NY. There are rumors about DC, but no other offices, at least not Seattle or Pittsburgh, K&L's largest offices.

Like the list of shame idea. The posted list seems a bit out of date though. Finnegan and A&P come to mind as firms on that list that have already matched.

L2L -- we shouldn't be talking to you since you refuse to listen to everyone on this list, but go through and update/correct the list of shame for us. Post the results to the site. Then direct your resumes to those firms as they should have a lot of people lateraling out over the next 6 to 8 months, creating openings for you.

11:15 -
To modify the list for those firms with NY offices with more than 10 associates:

19. Arnold & Porter
25. Ropes & Gray
40. Baker Botts
42. Freshfields
43. Baker & McKenzie
45. Boies Schiller
50. Fulbright & Jaworski
51. Dechert
57. Cooley Godward
58. Vinson & Elkins
68. Foley & Lardner
70. Hunton & Williams
75. Nixon Peabody
77. Bryan Cave
82. Reed Smith
83. Dorsey & Whitney
86. McGuireWoods
90. Baker & Hostetler
91. Thelen Reid
92. Mintz Levin
95. Dickstein Shapiro
98. Kelley Drye
100. Seyfarth Shaw

Since I have not done extensive research, some of these may have already raised. Below are the firms I removed from your list.

No NY Office:
17. W&C
52. Munger
56. Irell
72. Perkins Coie
89. Finnegan Henderson
94. Fenwick & West

Small NY Office (icing if we hear from them):
69. Steptoe (5 assocs)
71. Patton Boggs (1 assoc)
79. Crowell (5 assocs)
80. Howrey (7 assocs)
87. Squire Sanders (2 assocs)
93. Kilpatrick Stockton (2 assocs)
96. Venable (8 assocs)

Raised:
18. Gibson Dunn
46. Pillsbury Winthrop
99. Preston Gates (now K&L Gates)

And I am pretty sure Cooley has raised, so we should probably remove them.

Dave why can't you give a list of shame some kind of blessing so we knows its accurate? This would be helpful.

How about a DC list of shame?

According to this, law students pay 267 PERCENT more for their education, compared with costs in 1990.

At the same time, new associates are earning on average just 60 percent more than what they were in the private sector in 1990, a figure that does not take into account decreased earning power due to inflation.

http://www.law.com/jsp/law/careercenter/lawArticleCareerCenter.jsp?id=1138701909390

I think it's high time for some differentiation in the market on associate pay.

The 125K number was frozen since, like 1999. Suddenly, law firms are waking the fuck up and realizing that that's just not enough.

But a lot of firms aren't going to be able to pay 160 or 190 to first-year associates.

If 125k was the number in 1999 (I know it was by 2001), this means that all increases in fees and other growth have been indirectly flowing into partner's pockets. Now they can't come up with the money for 160k or 190k it means that they either did not grow their business or mismanaged overhead. I'd be concerns to be at a firm that is not strong enough to get to the 160k scale nationally (and do so without adding compression). Its a sure sign of mismanagement over the last 6 years or greediness. Raising from 125k in 2001 to 160k in 2007 is only a 4.25% average annual increase (granted it does all hit the bottom line in large blocks as salaries do not smoothly increase over time).

That being said, my firm has yet to match so I may need to dust off the resume. (And for your nay-sayers, its not about the extra money, but the lack of strength the inability to raise shows).

People. Ropes HAS raised. I have confirmed this personally.

6:22: I can tell from the insulting tone of your post that rational thought isn't your strong suit, but just because you haven't seen something with your own eyes does not mean it doesn't exist. Most attorneys have better things to do with their time than making sure ATL is kept abreast of the comings and goings of their firm.

"and do so without adding compression"

What does "compression" stand for?

Does anyone actually think salaries are going to go up again, whether to 160 in large non-NYC cities, or to 190 as predicted in the article?

2:22 - One can hope :)

I would argue that the true BigLaw have every incentive to raise first-year salaries. Competition within the partner ranks is often based on a Firm's PPP. Numerous American Lawyer articles have discussed how PPP is used to attract lateral candidates with significant books of business. Knowing that, many firms that are large in size, but not necessarily based on PPP, will have to take from the PPP to raise associate salaries (first-year on up the line). As such, those firms are at significant competitive disadvantage as they try to cherry-pick key lateral partners. Furthermore, those firms large in size and not in PPP are probably the least likely to be able to pass on pay raises in the form of higher rates because of the nature of their client bases and legal services provided. Some crappy BigLaw like a Holland & Knight (sorry to pick on them, but its the first that comes to mind as McLawFirm) doesn't real offer much in the way of unique services. A client could go to them or any one of a number of generic large-in-size, reasonable client service firms. So driving up associate pay makes perfect sense to me for the firms that want to reinforce their true prestige and to insulate their partner ranks from cherry-picking.

2:30, so why then did H&K raise?

cuz they got their panties in a bunch when everyone else did - 145 isn't the cut off from top tier to second tier biglaw firms, it's going to be 190 - 160. The starting salary was set so low at 145 that most every firm can bump up, now the elite will separate by going up from 160 and the rest will stay.

Perhaps they can pass on 160. I have no clue. I was responding more to the question of whether firms will/should move higher on up the scale and differentiate themselves. Even if H&K raised to 160 out of necessity the story is still untold as to what impact it will have on their PPP, ability to retain work at whatever rates they establish, etc. My point is that for firms that can truly raise first-year associates salaries to 160 without even considering the financial impact may reap more benefits that simply recruiting and retaining top associate talent. It can also be a competitive weapon to financially hurt those firms less able to absorb the increase costs.

It seems sensible that elite firms will plan on raising salaries again before next recruitment - and perhaps even at the end of the summers when they are trying to convince their summers to stay. 160 will likely be it for now, though.

a firm like H&K can raise starting salaries, but they give less in bonuses and dont raise as much at higher levels ...

but the thing is, they have markets where the salaries are much less. Sure they pay $160K in NYC, but they pay $110K in Orlando for example ... so the salaries are not bankrupting the firm trust me.

PPP's for that reason can be misleading, because it does not take into account the COL of where most of the partners live and work. Take McGuire Woods or Hunton Williams for example. THeir PPP's are half of a big NYC firm, but an equity partner bringing home $600K in Richmond is living large, Thomas Jefferson style in a big house on a river (but hopefully without the slaves).

Okay, again, sorry for picking on H&K in my original post. They are not the only generic large "national" firm. PPPs may be misleading because of COL adjustments. But truthfully Richmond and Orlando are not the hotbeds of lateral partner cherry-picking like NYC, DC, or LA. I think as firms with clear strengths and original roots in nontraditional BigLaw cities try to grow they are looking for key partners in major markets. The PPP overall or nationally for a firm is what matters most in these situations. It has little to do with the COL in the home city for that firm. Jones Day did not rise to prominence in DC because some partners in Cleveland have a relatively low cost of living. They did it by raising PPP and making themselves key players in big markets with the ability to attract partners with large books of business.

wouldn't the bigger national firms be able to raise salaries in NY just like the big NY-mostly firms? Would firms like Holland & Knight and Bingham McCutchen be at a big disadvantage?

3:03. right I agree, but Jones Day's PPP will never be as high as a NYC firm because of a large number of lawyers working in Cleveland. Really you need to see the revenue per lawyer BY OFFICE to really judge. I bet JD in NYC or LA brings in nearly as much per lawyer as the firms with $1.5M PPP ....

3:12, perhaps that's correct. I'm certainly not proclaiming to be the expert here -- just one associate's opinion. However, in response, I think what happens when a firm from a nontraditional BigLaw city raises in traditional BigLaw cities where it has a significant presence, it increases the pressure to raise in the nontraditional cities too. I would imagine that was a large determinant in Jone Day's decision to raise in Cleveland. Why else would they? Every other firm in that city was probably praying and hoping JD would not move the market -- and I can't imagine any other firm in that city being the first mover. While it is somewhat soft and fluffy, keeping some level of parity in salary across offices is necessary to keep morale at reasonable levels.

to me JD had no reason to raise in Cleveland, seemed to be a bad decision for their bottom line. For example, KL Gates has not raised in Pittsburgh or Seatle ...

or Reed Smith - their 2 biggest offices are in London and Pittsburgh - if they can get by w/o raising in those 2 markets then this salary wave will hurt them much less than the other big firms.

I disagree, Jones Day has significant reason to raise in Cleveland. All lawyers do not practice only in NY, DC or LA. Jones has a strong presence in Ohio and if it wants to maintain its dominance, that is, keep associates from leaving for out of state laterals, it must raise. Some of you forget, the service industry is in NY, but plenty of fortune 200 corporations, i.e. clients, are in Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio. There is legitimate reason to raise in cities like Cleveland. Jones Day was smart enough to recognize the business rational and ignored the tendency of attorneys to focus on particular cities of interest.

3:27, precisely. That's why it makes sense for the elite national law firms to use salaries as a weapon to fend off firms from nontraditional markets that are growing in size (and in some cases prominence) and keep their significance minimized. You raise your rivals costs overall by forcing them to raise salaries in lower-margin markets. It makes it more costly for these firms to do business overall.

2:00 -- Compression is the difference in salaries (or lack thereof) between classes.

Starting pay at the nation's top law firms proportionately has been at its LOWEST POINT in a decade:

http://www.law.com/jsp/llf/PubArticleLLF.jsp?id=1170842572765

What confirmation is there for Pillsbury?

Here's the only question that I have for L2L -- Did your school mislead you into thinking a summer job would be easy to get?

I assume there are statistics that show only a certain top percentage from your school get decent enough grades for offers from biglaw firms.

So, why are you whining? Is your whine basically "I didn't do my research when i went to this law school?"

So, any odds on who is first going to $175,000 for first years, and by when?

I say Skadden by April.

When I wrote the 1:37 post, the thought was that the money for the 160k (and the raised up the line) would come from decreasing the ratio of associate salary to PPP. Apparently, as the article posted by 4:26 points out, PPP has been going up faster than associate salaries. The different between 125k in 2001 and 160k in 2007 is only 4.25% annually, barely the rate of inflation. Presumably the rate increases needed to pay for the raises were pased to clients between 2001 and 2007.

I understand 2:30's point on lowering PPP and its affect on the hiring of lateral partners. But wouldn't a wise lateral partner want to go to a firm with good PPP and the best associates? I mean the partner will need the services of those associates to provide the best client service to attract and retain the clients that make the lateral partner so profitable?

To pay for this raise, each partner will take an approximate personal hit of $40,000 to $70,000 a year. “It’s horrible,” said one partner at a big firm.

http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/27377/

Well they have been enjoying that extra $40 to $70k by not increasing associate salaries at the same rate as PPP. They should just cough up the money and laugh their way to the bank for all the years they got away with making the extra 40 to 70k by not giving raises each year as billing rates creaped up.

4:49 -- Yes. And if starting salaries are used as the benchmark as to whether a firm is capable of attracting top talent then the fact that there is little to no differentation right now (or for years) means has made that lateral partners with good books of business have no reason on salary alone to believe that the associates at one firm are significantly less capable of providing the necessary level of associate client service for his or her clients.

4:43 - They don't advertise that stuff.

5:13 -- and it just flags that not paying associates higher pay in an attempt to keep PPP higher will be a failing strategy.

the article dealing with the ratio between PPP and associate salaries is misleading, because in the past 10 years there has been an explosion in the number of NON-EQUITY PARTNERS. I think if you include their incomes in the PPP the ratio between associate salaries and ALL partner incomes would be fairly constant ...

WHITE GIRLS WITH ASIAN GUYS

speaking of picking on Holland & Knight, "Six attorneys with Holland & Knight are heading to another local law firm, Arnold & Porter, to expand its government contracts group."

nail in the coffin.

how many people that work at H&K do you think read this board and immediately checkout lateral postings at other firms ... i'm putting the over under at 99% ... discuss.

ah, they are very solid in Florida ... should have stayed there and not gobbled up every crappy mid-size firm in the country ...

http://www.jdjive.com/read.php?1,318915

loyola 2l found a better audience

Hopefully he'll stay away permanently.

I'll be back.

So I take it Curtis Mallet isn't going to do anything...

$190k is "inevitable" for 1st years? Well, unnamed parter, I guess you didn't see 2008 coming your way back in '07, did ya?