Featured Job Survey: Bonus Timing and Lateral Moves
We're still gathering responses to Monday's survey, which asks you how big your bonus was (or is going to be). At last count, around 1,250 of you had responded, and you can still add your two cents (which is reportedly close to "market" at MWE) over here.
About a third of you still haven't heard whether your firm will pay bonuses, and that's clearly a source of deep frustration. But many of you have reported that the wait for your numbers is nowhere near as frustrating as the wait for the actual check. So here's an open thread for discussion of the subject.
To kick off the discussion, here's a tip we received from an associate in Washington, DC:
How about a story on mid-sized firms (who recruit from T14 schools) who intentionally wait until February-March to give bonuses? By doing so, they must know that the bulk of lateral openings will have come and gone by the time bonuses are given out -- so if an associate waits for his bonus to lateral, it's too late.
Today's featured survey, brought to you by ATL and Lateral Link, is on the same topic. It appears below.
In the spirit of delayed gratification, the next batch of results from Monday's survey will appear after you complete the survey. So far, we've revealed the bonus and salary responses from New York, Chicago, and Washington, DC. Yesterday, Los Angeles and San Francisco were neck and neck in the number of responses, while Boston made a proud showing in the comments.
Which city will we reveal next? Fill out the following survey to find out.
Comments
FYI a source of frustration at Paul Hastings is the fact that bonuses are given out around March 7.....which sucks
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 01:51 PM
bonuses at thelen were given march 15 last year!
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 02:13 PM
This chart makes no sense. How is average NYC base actually lower than Chicago.
These surveys are worthless.
The only thing that would be worthwhile is to actually compile all of the official memos (or other reliable salary/bonus info that ATL has published) that have been posted here and do a chart based on that.
But, alas, Lat is apparently too lazy.....
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 02:15 PM
There's obviously something wrong here, since the Chicago "base" for first years is NOT $162k.
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 02:19 PM
"Market" means something different at MWE. It means "how much we're willing to pay you," not "how much you can earn somewhere else."
This is like those people trying to sell their homes when they're underwater on their mortgage, and bitch that potential buyers aren't offering them "market" prices. They're a little shady on what "market" means --
WHAT SOMEONE ELSE IS WILLING TO PAY!
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 02:36 PM
2:15 - Those charts already exist, on AutoAdmit, Infirmation, etc.
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 02:38 PM
Lat, you're clearly aware of what's going on at MWE -- why not create a thread for all of us to discuss it?
. . . and to publicly excoriate the partners?
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 02:47 PM
A transcription of Harvey's damage control, with editorial comments in brackets:
This is Harvey Freishtat with a message to all of our U.S. attorneys. I want to reiterate the main point of Don Goldman's voice mail earlier today [the one Don Goldman entirely forget to mention]. Our firm is and remains committed to paying [below] market compensation to associates and income partners. If it turns out that [you continue to complain about how] we missed the market this year with respect to compensation, we'll address that issue in January by paying [an insultingly small amount of] additional compensation to [the remaining] associates and income partners. I also want to convey to our associates and income partners on behalf of our firm my appreciation for your continuing hard work and dedication this past year, both to our clients, and to our continued success as a firm. I wish you and yours and warm and wonderful holiday season and new year [but I have no intention of helping you pay for those Christmas presents. Besides, the best gifts are made from dried macaroni and construction paper, anyway. Get your kids some of that].
Posted by: MWE Ass | December 21, 2007 03:04 PM
This is hilarious. If MWE would have just paid market (or something close to it) at the beginning, this would be a non-issue. Now, they are going to have to shell out more money, and have more firmly established their reputation as being cheap. I do, however, applaud the very quick response by firm management to the outrage over the [lack of] bonuses.
Posted by: anon | December 21, 2007 03:07 PM
A quick response is not the same as an appropriate response. This is nothing more than you would get for complaining to management at Sears about how they screwed up your dryer install. "We take your concerns very seriously, and are committed to making this up to you." . . .. three weeks later, here's a coupon for buy one refrigerator, get the second one 10% off.
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 03:19 PM
and exactly how quick is it, when they promise to take up the issue in January, and probably not pay out any adjustment until February?
Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 03:21 PM
this is yet another reason why you should not accept an offer from a so-called "lifestyle" firm
Posted by: Dear Law Students | December 21, 2007 04:36 PM
Out of UCLA, I went to work for one of these mid-sized firms that waited until February (or was it March) to pay out bonuses. It was crap. I left. Joined a real firm. I'm getting my bonus at the end of this year. There's no truth to the idea that "all the good positions" are taken by March. Trust me, firms ALWAYS need associates, year round. So much anxiety around here all the time.
Posted by: Never Too Late to Lateral | December 21, 2007 07:12 PM