Big Law Salary Increase

[CB2021]

1 minute ago, C_Terror said:

 

I won't comment on the 6 weeks off + 2 weeks Christmas, because that hasn't been my experience, but that salary @ 40 hours a week (maybe 50-60 hours once or twice during year and semi annual year end) is way more common than you think. 

Absolutely true, especially in the tech industry (non-tech roles) before the current situation.

I know what I have signed up for, but I don't understand why ppl get defensive when we discuss the situation. Is this what Stockholm syndrome feels like? 

[Scout]

1 minute ago, CB2021 said:

 I don't understand why ppl get defensive when we discuss the situation. Is this what Stockholm syndrome feels like? 

Literally. I feel like I'm being cross-examined for just trying to vent about my revelations.

[Rashabon]

1 minute ago, C_Terror said:

Assuming you have an 1800 billable target, that's roughly 150 a month in billables which you'd hit assuming you bill 7.5 hours a weekday (nobody's that efficient normally, but let's just assume this is it). You take a week off, that's 37.5 that you're missing now that you have to make up for some where else in the year. You take the full 4 weeks off, that's essentially a full month of billables you have to "make up" for. 

In any other industry where there isn't a "billables" system, you don't have to "Make up" the 150 billable targets elsewhere in the other 11 months (i.e. you're now compelled to take on more files and work more just to hit your 1800). If you take 2 weeks off in IB, assuming you're in between deals and don't have to work, you don't have to give those two weeks back by adding 2 weeks worth of work on top of whatever you're doing. In a sense, you're not actually getting 4 weeks off in a billable system because you're always giving it back to the firm (assuming you're hitting 100% of billables). On top of that (going off tangent), if you have a slow week, say by billing 15 hours, now you have to "make up" those 22.5 hours that you should've billed that week somewhere else. In any other industry, you get to enjoy that week, and move on without the pressure of additional hours. 

There are absolutely lots of professional non front office jobs out there paying 100-150K a year (total comp, which in most cases include a slight bonus of anywhere from 10-20%, stock matching, or defined contribution  pension) to people working 40 hours a week. It's not a fantasy at all. In a majority of corporations, normal back office FP&A finance jobs offer you that at 4 years out (aka 1st year associate because you don't go through law school). System administrators in IT across all major corporations average that. If you have relevant experience after 4-5 years (again, I choose this because this is how long law school + articling is), there are lots of jobs that open up in the 6 figure range. Caveat, this is my personal experience, and my friends in recruiting in downtown Toronto. 

I won't comment on the 6 weeks off + 2 weeks Christmas, because that hasn't been my experience, but that salary @ 40 hours a week (maybe 50-60 hours once or twice during year and semi annual year end) is way more common than you think. 

Okay but in your example you're working Monday to Friday. That's not the job, nor are most other professionals getting their full weekends off every time. As someone who has done this for many years, the groups where that target is real, it really is that easy to become that efficient. And with the increase in flexible work arrangements, if you don't have stuff to do, you can get up and do something else with your day. That's part of the trade-off. I would shoot myself in the face if I was an office drone that had to fill out time slips and sit at a desk 8 hours every day doing nothing. I sleep in half the time and start my day at 10 am and work a couple hours in the evening. That flexibility comes with tradeoffs, yes, but that's as with anything. And sure, IB doesn't "make up" those hours as you put it. But have you looked at the hours of bankers compared to Bay Street lawyers? They work more of them, they do a lot more work that goes nowhere, and their compensation is much more at risk. It was great being in IB in boom times. Not so fun when there are no deals and therefore no huge bonuses.

Target also really only matters if you are striving for bonus. Everyone prefers quality over quantity. Associates that bill a lot of hours churning out shitty work product are not valued the same as associates with lower hours and higher quality.

And sure, $100-$150K total comp. That's great, especially at 4 years out! That's fantastic for those folks. A first year associate with no skills, no knowledge and no clients is earning $150K on Bay Street factoring in bonus. By 4th year you're clearing over $200K. By 7th year you're clearing $300K. There is no comp.

 

[Scout]

8 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

I would shoot myself in the face if I was an office drone that had to fill out time slips and sit at a desk 8 hours every day doing nothing. I sleep in half the time and start my day at 10 am and work a couple hours in the evening.

 

This post shows that you are out of touch with the broader job market. People in other professions including marketing, advertising, tech, etc. do not sit at a desk for 8 hours. They work remotely and flexibly. I'm really getting the sense that you have some superiority complex about this job and I think perhaps in the year 2022 it is a bit displaced. 

Also, once again, your only rebuttal to most of the points being made is to cite to IB and ignore literally any other position that doesn't have these kind of hours. 

Edited June 28, 2022 by Scout

[Disbarred]

10 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

 

 

1800 hour target if you work 50 weeks in the year is 36 billed hours a week.

I know it will vary by group, but based on your experience, roughly how many hours total do you have to work to bill 36 hours a week?

This doesn’t seem crazy to me, if you can do that in 50-55 hours a week it seems pretty reasonable for the pay

Edited June 28, 2022 by Disbarred

[123]

26 minutes ago, C_Terror said:

System administrators in IT across all major corporations average that.

Sys admins are pretty well paid. But I assume that's because they have to be adequately compensated for the soul crushing boredom.

[C_Terror]

7 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

Okay but in your example you're working Monday to Friday. That's not the job, nor are most other professionals getting their full weekends off every time. As someone who has done this for many years, the groups where that target is real, it really is that easy to become that efficient. And with the increase in flexible work arrangements, if you don't have stuff to do, you can get up and do something else with your day. That's part of the trade-off. I would shoot myself in the face if I was an office drone that had to fill out time slips and sit at a desk 8 hours every day doing nothing. I sleep in half the time and start my day at 10 am and work a couple hours in the evening. That flexibility comes with tradeoffs, yes, but that's as with anything. And sure, IB doesn't "make up" those hours as you put it. But have you looked at the hours of bankers compared to Bay Street lawyers? They work more of them, they do a lot more work that goes nowhere, and their compensation is much more at risk. It was great being in IB in boom times. Not so fun when there are no deals and therefore no huge bonuses.

Target also really only matters if you are striving for bonus. Everyone prefers quality over quantity. Associates that bill a lot of hours churning out shitty work product are not valued the same as associates with lower hours and higher quality.

And sure, $100-$150K total comp. That's great, especially at 4 years out! That's fantastic for those folks. A first year associate with no skills, no knowledge and no clients is earning $150K on Bay Street factoring in bonus. By 4th year you're clearing over $200K. By 7th year you're clearing $300K. There is no comp.

 

M to F is for simplicity's sake. Of course that's not the job; I'm trying to average out a full 37.5 hours of billables a week to keep it simple. I don't think you've ever worked in a professional job other than law, if you think other office "drones" fill out time slips and sit at a desk 8 hours a day doing nothing. "Office drones" can go for coffee chats, go to the gym in the afternoons on a slow day, all that you think is special only to law,  but they don't have to fret about making up the lost hours for that day. Obviously, our comparison has now gone beyond big law comparables of IB and consulting to just "office drone" jobs, but those "office drone" professionals barely have to work weekends. 

If you don't have bonus, then you're looking at just the base, which is even starker in comparison because firms don't offer any other defined contribution, stock matching, options, etc. 

A first year associate has written the LSAT, gone through 3 years of law school, written the bar, and has done 10 months of articling at the firm. I wouldn't necessarily call that "no skills and no knowledge", or firms wouldn't be billing them out at significant rates. 

If we're comparing the comp to your "office drone" professional, then yes of course. Assuming you're not factoring work life balance, the ceiling is much higher once you go to more senior associate, and even then, the raises across the board over the past 5 years have narrowed that down. But the whole point of "peer comparison" is looking at peer industries like IB, PE, VC, tech, consulting etc. Then, quelle supris, there is a comp, and what I've been saying is that big law has lagged those industries in comp, and your "office drone" jobs are also starting to catch up. 

[CleanHands]

10 minutes ago, realpseudonym said:

But I assume that's because they have to be adequately compensated for the soul crushing boredom.

TBF that obviously applies at least equally to working in BigLaw.

[easttowest]

I don’t understand this confusion over making up hours. We have a target, which we can choose to hit or not. If you want to hit target and take four weeks off, bill around 165 hrs/month. If you don’t want to hit target, don’t. 

I’m currently unfortunately about 140 hours ahead of target, so I need to take some vacation. But it’s not like it’s hard to “make up” the hours. The difficulty in my experience runs the other way; I’m going to have a hard time only hitting target with four or more weeks off, which was my goal. 

[C_Terror]

11 minutes ago, easttowest said:

I don’t understand this confusion over making up hours. We have a target, which we can choose to hit or not. If you want to hit target and take four weeks off, bill around 165 hrs/month. If you don’t want to hit target, don’t. 

I’m currently unfortunately about 140 hours ahead of target, so I need to take some vacation. But it’s not like it’s hard to “make up” the hours. The difficulty in my experience runs the other way; I’m going to have a hard time only hitting target with four or more weeks off, which was my goal. 

It's not the confusion, it's just not how anybody else not in law will see vacation as.

Think of it this way; if you're offered a non law job, say base $100K a year and 20% bonus with 4 weeks vacation, you're basically working 11 months, and you won't expect to work more or less depending on how much of that 4 weeks you take, and you'll always get the 20% (assuming it's performance base). 

In a billables system with the same base and % bonus (except now your bonus and your prospect as a partner hinges upon hitting your target), you have to adjust how much more you have to work depending on whether you're taking vacation or not. So when you're taking one month off, you'll have to work more in the other 11 months vs if you only took 2 weeks, or no vacation at all. 

Sure, another way to think of it is to start off your mindset in billing 165 a month to get your 4 weeks "vacation", but I really wouldn't call it a vacation in the traditional sense. 

 

 

 

[Rashabon]

45 minutes ago, Disbarred said:

1800 hour target if you work 50 weeks in the year is 36 billed hours a week.

I know it will vary by group, but based on your experience, roughly how many hours total do you have to work to bill 36 hours a week?

This doesn’t seem crazy to me, if you can do that in 50-55 hours a week it seems pretty reasonable for the pay

It is very easy to do in 50-55 hours a week in my experience in a corporate practice as you move out of first/second year (and even then, can be relatively easy to hit depending on the deals you work on). Anybody that takes 60 hours to bill 36 is moving well past being inefficient.

49 minutes ago, Scout said:

This post shows that you are out of touch with the broader job market. People in other professions including marketing, advertising, tech, etc. do not sit at a desk for 8 hours. They work remotely and flexibly. I'm really getting the sense that you have some superiority complex about this job and I think perhaps in the year 2022 it is a bit displaced. 

Also, once again, your only rebuttal to most of the points being made is to cite to IB and ignore literally any other position that doesn't have these kind of hours. 

I think you're also exaggerating the pay for a lot of those jobs, as well as what it takes to get there. The average person working in marketing and advertising is not earning $200K a year 4 years into their job.

The only sector where there is a comp for this type of stuff in your example is perhaps tech, and you need to be doing tech work. Also that comp looks a lot worse when your options are massively underwater.

And sure, it sucks to not have the highest salary + highest bonus + a zillion weeks of vacation + whatever other unicorn stuff you want. But I don't find the complaints to be serious ones when they are decoupled from the reality of the situation. 

[easttowest]

18 minutes ago, C_Terror said:

It's not the confusion, it's just not how anybody else not in law will see vacation as.

Think of it this way; if you're offered a non law job, say base $100K a year and 20% bonus with 4 weeks vacation, you're basically working 11 months, and you won't expect to work more or less depending on how much of that 4 weeks you take, and you'll always get the 20% (assuming it's performance base). 

In a billables system with the same base and % bonus (except now your bonus and your prospect as a partner hinges upon hitting your target), you have to adjust how much more you have to work depending on whether you're taking vacation or not. So when you're taking one month off, you'll have to work more in the other 11 months vs if you only took 2 weeks, or no vacation at all. 

Sure, another way to think of it is to start off your mindset in billing 165 a month to get your 4 weeks "vacation", but I really wouldn't call it a vacation in the traditional sense. 

 

 

 

I suggest trying that mindset. I set my intapp personal goal to 1960 hrs for the year and work to that. I assume your firm probably uses intapp too. It’s way more satisfying.

[Rashabon]

4 minutes ago, easttowest said:

I suggest trying that mindset. I set my intapp personal goal to 1960 hrs for the year and work to that. I assume your firm probably uses intapp too. It’s way more satisfying.

It was gross last year watching Intapp for a big chunk of the year. The full year estimate was not fun. This year has been much nicer.

[easttowest]

I’m not going to sit here and tell you that I love my job and can’t imagine how it could be better. Oftentimes I don’t like my job and don’t know how long I’ll stick around. It would be cool if someone somewhere figured out an alternative to the billable hour, which is really at the root of many if these complaints, while also guaranteeing that we keep making as much as we do. I’m just so skeptical that is possible. 

 

 

[KOMODO]

I think so much of this really boils down to efficiency / how quickly you can bill hours. One of the things that makes evaluating big firm associates and their jobs challenging is the wild discrepancy in how easy or hard it is to turn your worked hours into billable hours. I have maintained for a while that I think this relates directly to the number of matters you work on at any given time (and to a related extent, the amount of mid-market work you do vs. upmarket work, and the related pressure on making your billed time look valuable). But the bottom line is that if you're docketing to 30 matters a day, it's enormously more difficult to have a "good" day for hours than someone docketing to 1 or 2 matters.

Personally I find that I can only bill about 2/3rds of my time if I'm at pretty close to peak efficiency. For the rest of my time, I'm capturing less than that (the cause of this is everything from lots of involvement with NB activities, to time spent getting organized and reprioritizing various matters, to docketing itself which takes much longer if you have many dockets per day, etc.). 

My point is that if you're in Rashabon's group where it's decently easy to hit target and take four+ weeks of vacation, you probably feel like this is much ado about nothing, whereas if you're required to put in way more time to hit target, you might be more resentful and/or feel like you can't afford to take vacation because you're already working quite a few evenings and weekends just to hit target-ish numbers.

[Damages]

8 hours ago, C_Terror said:

It's not the confusion, it's just not how anybody else not in law will see vacation as.

Think of it this way; if you're offered a non law job, say base $100K a year and 20% bonus with 4 weeks vacation, you're basically working 11 months, and you won't expect to work more or less depending on how much of that 4 weeks you take, and you'll always get the 20% (assuming it's performance base). 

In a billables system with the same base and % bonus (except now your bonus and your prospect as a partner hinges upon hitting your target), you have to adjust how much more you have to work depending on whether you're taking vacation or not. So when you're taking one month off, you'll have to work more in the other 11 months vs if you only took 2 weeks, or no vacation at all. 

Sure, another way to think of it is to start off your mindset in billing 165 a month to get your 4 weeks "vacation", but I really wouldn't call it a vacation in the traditional sense. 

 

 

 

According to Rashabon, Biglaw lawyer on Bay street makes $150K factoring in bonus in the first year. By 4th year you're clearing over $200K. By 7th year you're clearing $300K. 

Tell me which job or profession that makes the comparable compensation that can just work 40 hours a week, take vacation, and be completely checked out during vacation.

 

Computer programmers making 250K+? 

Business executives making 250K+?

Accountants making 250K+?

Engineers making 250K+?

Consultants making 250K+?

Medical Doctors making 250K+?

 

Most people making that much money don't work strict 40 hour-week and have worry-free vacations. They are often overworked and have to be on-call during off-hours including vacation.

If you want to just work 40 hours and take great vacation when you want, then, sure, just stay as a mid-level manager, senior engineer, senior accountant, senior nurse, etc. making 150k to maybe 180K Cap until retirement. Many people do that.

But if you want to make more than 250K+ a year as an employee like the biglaw associate, then expect to work a lot and be on-call during off-hours whatever your job is.

 

 

[Judgelight]

19 hours ago, CleanHands said:

Then quit.

All you ever have to say about your Crown job is how much you hate it.

"Just quit bro"
Imagine thinking this is a legitimate response to someone airing legitimate grievances about workplace conditions. 
I'm not going to get into this discussion further here, because it isn't the topic for it, but honestly this response is pretty surprising coming from the people that I'd expect post on this subreddit.

[C_Terror]

7 hours ago, Damages said:

According to Rashabon, Biglaw lawyer on Bay street makes $150K factoring in bonus in the first year. By 4th year you're clearing over $200K. By 7th year you're clearing $300K. 

Tell me which job or profession that makes the comparable compensation that can just work 40 hours a week, take vacation, and be completely checked out during vacation.

 

Computer programmers making 250K+? 

Business executives making 250K+?

Accountants making 250K+?

Engineers making 250K+?

Consultants making 250K+?

Medical Doctors making 250K+?

 

Most people making that much money don't work strict 40 hour-week and have worry-free vacations. They are often overworked and have to be on-call during off-hours including vacation.

If you want to just work 40 hours and take great vacation when you want, then, sure, just stay as a mid-level manager, senior engineer, senior accountant, senior nurse, etc. making 150k to maybe 180K Cap until retirement. Many people do that.

But if you want to make more than 250K+ a year as an employee like the biglaw associate, then expect to work a lot and be on-call during off-hours whatever your job is.

 

 

I don't know what strawman argument that you're trying to make, when what I said is big law vacation days is not the same as what people would think traditional vacation days are. You're arguing against a point nobody was making on this thread.  

[CleanHands]

2 hours ago, Judgelight said:

"Just quit bro"
Imagine thinking this is a legitimate response to someone airing legitimate grievances about workplace conditions. 
I'm not going to get into this discussion further here, because it isn't the topic for it, but honestly this response is pretty surprising coming from the people that I'd expect post on this subreddit.

I mean, it's not like you chose a relatively lower paying job (that almost everyone but you in the same role pursued prioritizing factors other than compensation as their main priority) and have a qualification that will allow you to easily secure a higher paying job if that is a major issue for you.

Oh, wait...

[Ghalm]

I wish I had more than anecdotal information here, but my public accounting friend and my industry CPA friend work wild ass hours. My industry CPA friend (who I am very close with) regularly tells me how much she works, how miserable she is sometimes (but overall likes her job). her base is like 92k and she got the maximum bonus of 30% last year. Based on her, she works waaaaaay more than me, to make less than me. She's  3 years into her job, I am 1 year into mine. I definitely do not think her salary trajectory is like mine. I don't know much about my public accounting friend's compensation, except they have said they earn less than me, but that boy is working just as much as me too! 

I also think that C_Terror's overall point is great though, don't be complacent, be vigilant to what comp. looks like in other comparable industries to maximize the chances of higher pay and better conditions -- what's wrong with that? I don't mind critiquing big law all day if that means more $ and better conditions 🙂 

Edited June 29, 2022 by Ghalm

[Cool_name]

4 hours ago, Judgelight said:

"Just quit bro"
Imagine thinking this is a legitimate response to someone airing legitimate grievances about workplace conditions. 
I'm not going to get into this discussion further here, because it isn't the topic for it, but honestly this response is pretty surprising coming from the people that I'd expect post on this subreddit.

If you do not like your job, then quitting is not only a legitimate response but a highly rationale one when you can obtain employment you would like better.
 

Obviously you should line something up before quitting, but that isn’t an overly hard task. Reach out to a recruiter and they will even do the job search for you.

[Damages]

3 hours ago, C_Terror said:

I don't know what strawman argument that you're trying to make, when what I said is big law vacation days is not the same as what people would think traditional vacation days are. You're arguing against a point nobody was making on this thread.  

Thanks for clarifying your point. What I am trying to say is that once you are making close to biglaw lawyer's compensation in your job, whatever your job is, your vacation days are not going to be traditional vacation days because they also would have to either be on-call, work through vacation, or take no vacation to meet their own aggressive target they need to meet for work. So, Biglaw is not unique.

[C_Terror]

1 hour ago, Damages said:

Thanks for clarifying your point. What I am trying to say is that once you are making close to biglaw lawyer's compensation in your job, whatever your job is, your vacation days are not going to be traditional vacation days because they also would have to either be on-call, work through vacation, or take no vacation to meet their own aggressive target they need to meet for work. So, Biglaw is not unique.

No, I still don't think you get my point re; Vacation days. I'm not trying to be condescending but I assume you haven't had experience working a professional non law job before, and as an articling student you haven't necessarily taken vacation under a yearly billable target yet. The billable system of big law is simply unique to any other peer non law job. I'm not talking about being on-call, checking emails, working through vacation (even then, my firm is quite good in making sure the junior associates don't have to work through their vacation).

I'm talking about working more hours because you took/will take vacation because you need to meet your billable target. This doesn't exist in consulting, engineering, business executives, whatever other example you listed.  

[Pantalaimon]

13 minutes ago, C_Terror said:

No, I still don't think you get my point re; Vacation days. I'm not trying to be condescending but I assume you haven't had experience working a professional non law job before, and as an articling student you haven't necessarily taken vacation under a yearly billable target yet. The billable system of big law is simply unique to any other peer non law job. I'm not talking about being on-call, checking emails, working through vacation (even then, my firm is quite good in making sure the junior associates don't have to work through their vacation).

I'm talking about working more hours because you took/will take vacation because you need to meet your billable target. This doesn't exist in consulting, engineering, business executives, whatever other example you listed.  

Engineering has utilization targets, which is really just a billables target in a different form. If your target utilization is 80% you need to bill 1664 for the year, because the denominator in utilization is just 40 hours/wk. So your 0% utilization while you're on vacation drags down your annual utilization and produces the exact same phenomenon.

[WhoKnows]

6 minutes ago, Pantalaimon said:

Engineering has utilization targets, which is really just a billables target in a different form. If your target utilization is 80% you need to bill 1664 for the year, because the denominator in utilization is just 40 hours/wk. So your 0% utilization while you're on vacation drags down your annual utilization and produces the exact same phenomenon.

I'm not denying that this may happen at some eng firms, but generally I've seen utilization calculated on the basis of those weeks you actually worked. My friends in other professional services definitely do not have 0% utilization on vacation weeks added to their averages over the year. 

Edited June 29, 2022 by WhoKnows