Big Law Salary Increase

[asparagus4444]

4 minutes ago, Pantalaimon said:

… returning to the main point, my thought is: so few associates stay where they start. Why not take an extra 60k over a few years and then lateral to wherever you want to make partner? Maybe Calgary is different but if a firm paid more here I'd take their offer for sure.

10/10. Totally valid that different people have different career considerations but at this stage salary is the most important factor for me.

[Rashabon]

15 minutes ago, Pantalaimon said:

There was a Globe article about the gender pay gap at Cassels last year. If the gap was 25% or 200k, the inferred average equity partner pay is 800k for men and 600k for women. Since 75% of partners are men that's an average partner pay of 750k.

Not sure how that compares to the rest of the street. The wiki article (I know, I know) on the sisters, citing American Lawyer, pegged McCarthy at 768k per equity partner, Blakes at 837k, and Osler at 1272k. So other than Osler it seems comparable.

But returning to the main point, my thought is: so few associates stay where they start. Why not take an extra 60k over a few years and then lateral to wherever you want to make partner? Maybe Calgary is different but if a firm paid more here I'd take their offer for sure.

It's a lot easier to make partner at the firm you start at than lateralling, unless you have a book of business with you, which the vast majority of associates do not have. I've seen it happen a lot - a lot of the laterals that have come in late here that aren't superstars or right place right time don't end up making it. A lot of the laterals who do did not lateral from Bay Street. Making partner is both an economic and a relationship based decision and if you have no history somewhere, that's a much tougher sell.

Also if the wiki is accurate, just be aware it's in USD so roughly 30% more than Cassels - not really comparable since that means each of those firms pays on average $1M to their equity partners compared to less than 800k at Cassels. Also I'll just say that there is no chance there is an equity partner at Blakes, Osler or McCarthys making 335k (which was apparently the case at Cassels).

Edit: To be clear, you're getting paid well wherever, and if you don't want to be on Bay in the long run, making some extra money (what are Cassels bonuses btw - all this talk on salary ignores bonus all the time - I expect they paid the 20% retention bonus most firms gave out but what do they pay for their annual bonus, how easy is it to achieve) is the right call for some folks. But we talk opportunity cost and what not here all the time. If two years into partnership, around year 8-9 you're making 100k more than Cassels partners at the equivalent stage are making, did you win or lose by getting the extra 20k a year?

Me, personally, with the practice area I'm in? The extra 20k Cassels is offering would not sway me in the slightest.

Edited September 25, 2021 by Rashabon

[Lycidas]

On 9/24/2021 at 11:04 AM, C_Terror said:

Right now, 2021 calls are encouraged to apply and given interviews to NY, San Fran, LA and London essentially whenever they want.

The 2022s are on their way out too, skipping articling. 

[Rashabon]

38 minutes ago, asparagus4444 said:

Yeah, this is great food for thought. Thanks for sharing your points.

I still disagree with you on some topics but it might be, again, personal reasons for being on Bay:

1. The Sisters are the Sisters because their clients pay the most, yes - but they attract their talent because they have historically rewarded their workers the most as well, especially with bonuses. I do think that there are associates who will be attracted to higher salaries, like me. If larger firms expect high hours for a Canadian salary but are not market front-runners, I can see there being issues. At the end of the day all these firms have excellent lawyers. What is the point of being at a Sister if your buddy at Cassels makes more than you? I can understand BJs, but Cassels just took a pretty big swing at old firm notions of prestige and mid-market status (good for them). I would rather be making more but again, fully a personal choice. Cassels also probably is trying to recruit frustrated mid-levels from larger shops.

Yes, but what is "talent"? Every first year associate/articling student is a baby bird that can't fly. Do you think legal talent is inherently innate? If so, you'll have a different view. I don't think legal talent is inherently innate. People don't walk into law firms as fully formed lawyers. They develop based on the mentorship they receive, the people they work for/opposite, the experience they receive and the files they work on. So yes, you might lose a paper talent to Cassels. So what? This argument somewhat presumes the current crop of associates at Cassels are shittier by default, which I don't think is the case. I think Cassels gets some great talent as is, as do all the big firms. By and large people getting hired on Bay Street have some really high ceilings. And as I said, they aren't going to lose all their talent to Cassels because Cassels isn't going to quadruple in size. The brain drain is to New York.

The "my buddy at X makes more than me" is the absolute classic big firm partner piss off. Even within firms. It's what eats partners alive constantly and has for decades. But if everyone just wanted to get the most dollars with no other variables, we'd all be in ads at the Raptors game talking about how tough we are.

Also, again, pay gap is likely exclusively for associates. Partners at the Sisters make more on average than their counterparts at Cassels. And if they recruit frustrated mid-levels from other shops, that's great. How many can they afford to hire? 10? 20?

38 minutes ago, asparagus4444 said:

 

1. Great point about partnership profit. But if you get burned out for hours before you even get to that stage at an income level in Canada … are people lateraling out to in-house or firm exits from these larger shops because of exhaustion or because it’s what they’ve always wanted? It’s definitely a consideration when shopping for an employer.

It's always a mix of all of the above. No two people leave for the exact same reason. 

38 minutes ago, asparagus4444 said:

1. Both Sisters and mid-markets have had brutal retention crises. NY has been poaching both.

Mid-markets have been poached by New York a bit, but also by other Bay Street firms. The big Bay Street firms have largely only been poached by New York. Cassels might be feeling the heat in both directions. The only associate my group has seen leave for another Bay Street firm was someone who lateraled in 2020 and left in early 2021 to rejoin her former colleagues at another firm (they all left BJ btw).

38 minutes ago, asparagus4444 said:

1. I don’t know that I agree with you that in-house exit opportunities are all that different between the Bay St firms. It seems more departmental than anything. I would agree generally that if you want to go in-house that spending a few years at a Sister is a sure thing, but so is the other firms.

We can agree to disagree, I don't think it's true that opportunities are equal everywhere. Someone at Torkin Manes isn't becoming GC of a large public company in a hurry.

38 minutes ago, asparagus4444 said:

At the end of the day, my only point is that I’m still hopeful that the market will need to eventually react. Otherwise it will create a talent shift in juniors - even if not seismic, one will still form. We might disagree but I really do stand by my point that people follow money. Good on Cassels for upping the pressure and I hope others follow.

I agree, I hope the firms react. I want to get paid more for as short a time as that will be the case. But I don't agree that Cassels along will do anything other than put Cassels in the BJ tier of "pays more but is [Cassels/BJ]".

Law jobs are finite. That bears repeating. Cassels isn't growing at a rapid pace - they're going to hire the same number of people that they always do, which means the "talent shift" in juniors isn't going to be noticeable. If the Sisters (let's exclude Davies because they pay more so for our hypothetical they don't work) hire something like 145 first years, Cassels 15 or so represents about 10% of the overall hiring. If you assume that all 15 of those are now the "top" talent (whatever that means), the remaining 6 Sisters lose on, average, 2-3 of their associate class, or roughly 10% again. They're not losing as much as you think.

Leaving aside this entire debate presumes the current Cassels class is chopped liver, which it's not. They are great, as are most of the hiring classes at the big firms. But for the hypothetical talent shift to work, all you're really doing is shuffling deck chairs. 3 students that would have gone to Blakes and Stikeman each, now go to Cassels. 6 students that would have gone to Cassels end up at Blakes and Stikeman.

Edited September 25, 2021 by Rashabon

[Pantalaimon]

41 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

It's a lot easier to make partner at the firm you start at than lateralling

Interesting. I'd have to double check with LinkedIn, but I can only think of a single partner to my knowledge, out of my entire network, that did their entire associateship at a single shop. I'll have to ask around, maybe people just move around more here.

Edit: oh and my bad with the USD, fair enough.

Edited September 25, 2021 by Pantalaimon

[Ghalm]

All good discussion. I think the impact on morale ought to be a key consideration for these firms. Associates will not feel as valued and they’ll likely consider US more so than they already are. Like, I am applying to New York and San Fran and part of my motivation has been the reluctance of my sister firm (who continues to bleed associates to New York and San Fran) to do anything about the previous BJ bump and Cassels bump. And I’m someone who used to be very not down to live in the US. 

[asparagus4444]

42 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

… personally, with the practice area I'm in? The extra 20k Cassels is offering would not sway me in the slightest.

I think we just have some fundamental disagreements about goals/career paths, which is to be expected and is fine. Personally, I just view the larger firms’ name brands as shifting downwards for talent attraction if they refuse to match Cassels. BJs is totally separate because the client base was always more similar, from my experience, and they have always traditionally fought with the Sisters for files.

As I said before, the money would sway me if I was lateraling within Bay. I am sure some students/associates would also follow. Not a massive shift for sure, but it does raise questions of reordering attractive firms.

As an obvious caveat, all of these firms have great lawyers and are leading in the Canadian market regardless of these raises or not. We’ve all seen times where smaller firms have won mandates above larger ones and vice versa. Different reasons to join each and all are valid.

Guess we’ll just see what happens!

5 minutes ago, Ghalm said:

… Like, I am applying to New York and San Fran and part of my motivation has been the reluctance of my sister firm (who continues to bleed associates to New York and San Fran) to do anything about the previous BJ bump and Cassels bump. And I’m someone who used to be very not down to live in the US. 

Same with the US prospects. I’m basically holding myself back from firing off my resume. A lot of my peers have left for down south. I’m just hanging on because of better hours here, stronger partnership prospects and a great group. But it is so tempting. I really hope these firms match.

[C_Terror]

18 minutes ago, Ghalm said:

All good discussion. I think the impact on morale ought to be a key consideration for these firms. Associates will not feel as valued and they’ll likely consider US more so than they already are. Like, I am applying to New York and San Fran and part of my motivation has been the reluctance of my sister firm (who continues to bleed associates to New York and San Fran) to do anything about the previous BJ bump and Cassels bump. And I’m someone who used to be very not down to live in the US. 

Yeah, I'm pretty irked that my sister firm is basically ignoring the Cassels raise and have no communication with us, as if they're hoping we wouldn't know or something. 

[Ghalm]

12 minutes ago, C_Terror said:

Yeah, I'm pretty irked that my sister firm is basically ignoring the Cassels raise and have no communication with us, as if they're hoping we wouldn't know or something. 

Right… I totally agree. 

[Rashabon]

Likewise. I've had conversations in private with a few folks but nothing substantive. It annoys me and if I wanted to move to New York or San Fran I would. Depending where the balance of my year goes I might agitate about my bonus a bit but I've lost most of my leverage in that regard.

But that was part of my point of my earlier posts - the impact of the Cassels raise is not so much talent shifting to Cassels but people deciding the reaction to the Cassels raise is motivation to leave for the higher salaries of NY/SF etc. Which is arguably worse in the long run, but has almost nothing to do with Cassels becoming the premiere destination for associates.

I mean to put it plainly, it doesn't sound like either of you are looking to move to Cassels for the 20k. You want your existing firm to react or else you'll move somewhere else (that isn't Cassels) because of the message/implication from not doing anything about it.

[C_Terror]

18 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

Likewise. I've had conversations in private with a few folks but nothing substantive. It annoys me and if I wanted to move to New York or San Fran I would. Depending where the balance of my year goes I might agitate about my bonus a bit but I've lost most of my leverage in that regard.

But that was part of my point of my earlier posts - the impact of the Cassels raise is not so much talent shifting to Cassels but people deciding the reaction to the Cassels raise is motivation to leave for the higher salaries of NY/SF etc. Which is arguably worse in the long run, but has almost nothing to do with Cassels becoming the premiere destination for associates.

I mean to put it plainly, it doesn't sound like either of you are looking to move to Cassels for the 20k. You want your existing firm to react or else you'll move somewhere else (that isn't Cassels) because of the message/implication from not doing anything about it.

Absolutely, I agreed with your previous points. It's not about the extra 20K, but moreso how our firm reacts to it is a reflection on the value they put on their own associates. 

If I were to look to move, I'd take advantage of the hot foreign market, accelerate my timeline and start applying outside of Canada.

[Ghalm]

3 hours ago, Rashabon said:

Likewise. I've had conversations in private with a few folks but nothing substantive. It annoys me and if I wanted to move to New York or San Fran I would. Depending where the balance of my year goes I might agitate about my bonus a bit but I've lost most of my leverage in that regard.

But that was part of my point of my earlier posts - the impact of the Cassels raise is not so much talent shifting to Cassels but people deciding the reaction to the Cassels raise is motivation to leave for the higher salaries of NY/SF etc. Which is arguably worse in the long run, but has almost nothing to do with Cassels becoming the premiere destination for associates.

I mean to put it plainly, it doesn't sound like either of you are looking to move to Cassels for the 20k. You want your existing firm to react or else you'll move somewhere else (that isn't Cassels) because of the message/implication from not doing anything about it.

Yes you are right. However, I don’t mind beating the “Cassels and BJs are building a brand that lessens the shine of the sister brand in the eyes of some” drum to add more reasons as to why sisters should match. Like I still find it odd that sisters see themselves as premier but wont pay top of the market (save for Davies). 

But your earlier point you raised is also interesting: why the fruit has no other firm (particular those that compare more closely to Cassels) been silent on this too?

[Rashabon]

58 minutes ago, Ghalm said:

Yes you are right. However, I don’t mind beating the “Cassels and BJs are building a brand that lessens the shine of the sister brand in the eyes of some” drum to add more reasons as to why sisters should match. Like I still find it odd that sisters see themselves as premier but wont pay top of the market (save for Davies). 

But your earlier point you raised is also interesting: why the fruit has no other firm (particular those that compare more closely to Cassels) been silent on this too?

They probably want to happen what BQ suggested - Cassels becomes a funny little outlier like BJ and not a norm.

My guess is if push comes to shove they do something with a bonus so they aren’t bound to it next year and it’s also not necessarily across the board.

[C_Terror]

29 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

They probably want to happen what BQ suggested - Cassels becomes a funny little outlier like BJ and not a norm.

My guess is if push comes to shove they do something with a bonus so they aren’t bound to it next year and it’s also not necessarily across the board.

They could always just open their bonus scale past the traditional 20-30%; this way they can get away with paying a lower base but also be flexible in how to retain/incentivize associates.

[Rashabon]

20 minutes ago, C_Terror said:

They could always just open their bonus scale past the traditional 20-30%; this way they can get away with paying a lower base but also be flexible in how to retain/incentivize associates.

Yep that’s my current best guess. No guarantees but open a tier to reward those of us who will be working hours that won’t receive much credit.

[Hitman9172]

21 hours ago, C_Terror said:

Yeah, I'm pretty irked that my sister firm is basically ignoring the Cassels raise and have no communication with us, as if they're hoping we wouldn't know or something. 

Agreed. The $20k in and of itself isn't make-or-break. From my conversations with associate friends at other firms, the general thought process for most seems to be along the lines of "I've been busting my ass all year and the firm still doesn't think I'm worth as much as the associates over there, even though we're already hurting in terms of retention, so maybe I should more seriously consider going down south for way more way money, or in-house for more reasonable work-life balance." Not acknowledging Cassels might cause a pretty significant drop in associate morale.

[Ghalm]

31 minutes ago, Hitman9172 said:

Agreed. The $20k in and of itself isn't make-or-break. From my conversations with associate friends at other firms, the general thought process for most seems to be along the lines of "I've been busting my ass all year and the firm still doesn't think I'm worth as much as the associates over there, even though we're already hurting in terms of retention, so maybe I should more seriously consider going down south for way more way money, or in-house for more reasonable work-life balance." Not acknowledging Cassels might cause a pretty significant drop in associate morale.

Amen. 

[QueensGrad]

On 9/24/2021 at 11:27 AM, QueensGrad said:

Also worth noting approximately 60-70 people from the U of T class of 2021 are heading to NYC—so I hear, anyways.
 

 

This turned out to be a bit inaccurate - the correct number is actually around 50, based on the numbers in a facebook groupchat for U of T students headed to NYC this Fall. 

[RaginaldPipin]

Local small firm owner here in Vancouver. I can confirm most income partners here in Vancouver earn between $220k and $270k. Most equity partners at the average level earn between $375k to $550k. 
 

You may wish to consider launching your own firm, because your earning potential is way greater doing so. I’m a 4th year call and earn more than most equity partners.

[C_Terror]

The lack of response from firms seem to suggest that the chances of other firms increasing the base to match Cassel's by the end of this week extremely unlikely. 

Can't say I'm not disappointed, lol. 

 

[Andalusian2400]

On 9/25/2021 at 9:48 AM, asparagus4444 said:

First off, just want to say that I completely agree that Sisters are a thing. The old forum made no sense on halting those conversations. Of course, obvious disclaimer: pound for pound, an equity partner in corporate, FS or restructuring at a smaller shop would likely out-earn a general litigation or insurance equity partner at a larger one (hence why department matters so much). But you’re totally right to note that Sisters often dictate market control. (That being said, I’ve also seen a few interesting moves from senior and mid-level big firm associates choosing to lateral to smaller shops, along with the regular jumps to Sisters or America. Goes to show different approaches to careers/partnership prospects and the whole “big fish small pond” concept.)

I will say that prestige only goes so far. And a firm is only as strong as its rising juniors. At the end of the day, personally, I would take the extra 20k at Cassels and better partnership options than a firm with neither of those. Some of the more ‘prestigious’ firms actually have pretty low retention rates on associates (to partners) and unless you’re just putting in one or two years to go in-house, it can be a consideration for some laterals who want to one day start their own book (and are debating against astronomical American signing bonuses for similar hours). At the end of the day, Cassels is a leading Canadian firm. If the remaining firms don’t match, it will create a tier.

 

What do you mean by FS?

[Rashabon]

Financial services.

[CheeseToast]

 

On 9/27/2021 at 9:32 AM, QueensGrad said:

This turned out to be a bit inaccurate - the correct number is actually around 50, based on the numbers in a facebook groupchat for U of T students headed to NYC this Fall. 

That's wild

[JohnsonWest]

On 9/27/2021 at 8:38 AM, RaginaldPipin said:

Local small firm owner here in Vancouver. I can confirm most income partners here in Vancouver earn between $220k and $270k. Most equity partners at the average level earn between $375k to $550k. 
 

You may wish to consider launching your own firm, because your earning potential is way greater doing so. I’m a 4th year call and earn more than most equity partners.

You're way off lol. If this was true the many young equity partners I know at my firm (and various others) wouldn't be buying homes in Deep Cove, Kits, and the North Shore even in this current market. You very likely do not earn more than most equity partners in Van as a 4th year call. 

Edited September 29, 2021 by JohnsonWest

[Hitman9172]

15 minutes ago, JohnsonWest said:

You're way off lol. If this was true the many young equity partners I know at my firm (and various others) wouldn't be buying homes in Deep Cove, Kits, and the North Shore even in this current market. You very likely do not earn more than most equity partners in Van as a 4th year call. 

RaginaldPipin might be underselling equity partnership income in Vancouver a bit, but he's not too far off. I've seen the financials for equity partners at my national firm and spoken to a handful of equity partner friends at other downtown firms. The average is higher than what he quoted, but it's usually skewed upwards by a few heavy hitters who bring in most of the clients.