2006 NYC Law Firm Bonuses

<p>
[quote]
You can ask, but I'm not giving details. My firm pays market, and in this market that means first-years start at $135k.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's a little odd that you are reluctant to share. Most if not all BIGLAW firms have their salary schedules published in a book available at any law school recruiting office. I never minded telling anyone what I earned as a 5th year because they could easily look it up.</p>

<p>It's also a little odd that you claim to be a 5th-year BIGLAW associate and claim you have never ever been called in to work on a particular day or time.</p>

<p>Readers can draw their own conclusions.</p>

<p>Not meaning to intrude on a debate, but these are exactly the types of threads that contribute to my overall idea of law school. So from what I've read, for the first four years associates are basically getting used to things. What most of us picture lawyers doing (examining witness, etc.) is done by the senior associates and partners, correct?</p>

<p>"It's a little odd that you are reluctant to share."</p>

<p>I assumed that you asked my salary because you wanted to judge the competitiveness of the firm where I had the experiences that surprise you so much. I told you that by telling you what first years make. If you asked my salary for some other reason, then I have to tell you that it is none of your business, and not something I typically discuss with anonymous strangers in a public forum. If you find that odd, so be it.</p>

<p>"It's also a little odd that you claim to be a 5th-year BIGLAW associate and claim you have never ever been called in to work on a particular day or time."</p>

<p>Well, there have been many scheduled conference calls and team meetings and the like, and as I said, I started out clerking. But you were clearly not talking about conference calls when you talked about "coming in to get your work done" on the weekends. I have never had a superior try to control when or where I work on the projects that occupy the vast majority of my time. In fact, I came into the office around 4 p.m. today; I was billing from home. It's the up side of the Blackberry/cell phone/hi-speed DSL world.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Since I've been on the board under my real name, complete with many identifying details, for two years, I agree with you that my credibility is obvious. If my unwillingness to name my firm, or details about its pay structure, etc., online damages my credibility so much, again, so be it.</p>

<p>I have never claimed that biglaw is for everyone, or that it doesn't have serious down sides, or anything of the kind. But it's been a good path for me, and if that weren't the case, I would have walked out of here a long time ago. I'm a take-this-job-and-shove-it kind of a girl. I'm here because I liked it when I started, and I still do.</p>

<p>If I were to draw a comparison to a surgical resident, it sounds to me like fifth year associates have much more responsibility, work close or perhaps slightly fewer hours* on average, and have incomes several-fold higher.</p>

<p>(Residencies are officially capped at eighty hours a week. JAMA recently published a study indicating 95% noncompliance)</p>

<p>
[quote]
I assumed that you asked my salary because you wanted to judge the competitiveness of the firm where I had the experiences that surprise you so much.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm not sure that "competitiveness" is the correct word, but I do question whether your firm is a bona fide BIGLAW firm.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I told you that by telling you what first years make.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Maybe you did, and maybe you didn't. I believe that most of the BIGLAW firms in any major US city pay 5th years about the same amount. I have no problem telling people what I made as a 5th year because every other 5th year made about the same amount. So I don't see any legitimate reason for someone who claims to be a BIGLAW associate to withhold this information. Since you are holding the information back, I assume it undermines your argument in some way.</p>

<p>[Edited to delete request for real name, I found it and do concede that revealing your real name adds to your credibility]</p>

<p>
[quote]
Maybe you did, and maybe you didn't.

[/quote]
I don't understand how the first year salary might not tell you about the status of her firm, while the fifth year salary would.</p>

<p>And just to add to my previous post, I found the name of your firm, and I concede that it is a prominent firm. I still have a hard time believing that you've never been called to work on a particular day, but there it is.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I don't understand how the first year salary might not tell you about the status of her firm, while the fifth year salary would.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't understand either. But the fact that she was holding back that information seemed odd. In any event, see my previous post.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But the fact that she was holding back that information seemed odd.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I disagree. It is her discretion whether to reveal such information, and social convention does not obligate her to do it. </p>

<p>I stand by Hanna's credibility, for what it's worth.</p>

<p>
[quote]
It is her discretion whether to reveal such information, and social convention does not obligate her to do it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's true, but it doesn't change the fact that it's odd not to reveal information that can be easily looked up.</p>

<p>In any event, I did try to look it up, and I see that associate salaries at her firm are "set individually" so I see now why she wouldn't share that information. Sorry, I made a bad assumption. Mea culpa.</p>