Partnership Tracks (Bay St. Firms)

[asparagus4444]

Most of the prominent Bay St. firms have made public partnership announcements back in early 2021; tracking these may assist current associates/laterals, especially those hitting their midlevels at years 3 to 5, and debating against in house or American options in a hot job market.

The years are calculated based off of year of call minus 2021 (when partnership was made for (Toronto only) senior associates); all of the information is google-able or from LinkedIn. Please note that these calculations are made against the Toronto offices of the below firms, except where otherwise denoted. If there are multiple years of calls in various jurisdictions, the earliest year was used. 

Osler - 9-11 years, 5 total promoted (Toronto).

Bennett Jones - 8-11 years (excluding one partner with multiple calls), 9 across total firm.

Borden Ladner Gervais - 7-12 years (excluding one partner with a much earlier year of call), 18 across firm, 8 in Toronto.

McMillan - 7-8 years, 3 in Toronto. * Firm publicly denotes difference between income and equity with 8 to Equity, 7 to Income across firm.

Weirfoulds - 9 years, 2 in Toronto.

Blaneys - 6 years, 2 in Toronto.

Goodmans - 6-7 years, 3 in Toronto.

Faskens - 7-13 years (Toronto partners), 22 across whole country.

Norton Rose - 8-12 years (Toronto partners), 5 across Toronto.

Baker & Mckenzie - 10 years, 1 in Toronto.

DLA Piper - 0 in Toronto this year.

Miller Thomson - 6-10 years in Toronto, 25 across national firm. 

Aird & Berlis - 6-7 years (one partner with longer track but noted in-house work), 5 in Toronto. * Firm publicly notes equity-only structure.

Stikeman Elliott - 9 years (one partner with multiple call and longer time), 3 in Toronto, 8 across firm.

McCarthys - 7-9 years, 10 to Toronto income. * Firm publicly denotes difference between income and equity with 7 to Equity, 15 to Income across firm.

Blakes - 8-11 years, 8 in Toronto.

Torkin Manes - 6-11 years, 5 in Toronto.

Cassels - 7 years, 6 across firm, 5 in Toronto.

Considering what were probably entering articling classes ranging from 7 - 30+ across firms, these figures above are pretty significant about attrition rates and chances in the Toronto market. If anyone has stats from firms that I've missed (ex. Davies, Torys - couldn't find the announcements via google search) or public statements on income/equity structures, feel free to add them in here; I probably also forgot a few but it was just from what I could find from googling. It is helpful to see the numbers collated together, especially if it will take associates 7+ years for a shot at income.

If I also made an adding error anywhere above, feel free to correct me below. As a disclaimer, it’s obvious that BD, sales personalities/politics and client sizes contribute to these decisions behind closed doors, but the numbers are still guiding (and are all public). Salaries, budgets and billable targets will differ substantially across groups and firms, but entrance into partnership is often seen as a goal to start building a personal book.

[asparagus4444]

Adding in two more firms to the list with their public information, as released by each for 2021.

Gowlings - 10-11 years, 4 partners in Toronto, 19 across Canada.
Dentons - 8-9 years, 4 partners in Toronto, 19 across Canada.

[QueensGrad]

I think you can expect 1-2 people per Articling year to make partner, if not less, solely based on my own anecdotal experience/observations. 

[Rashabon]

6 hours ago, QueensGrad said:

I think you can expect 1-2 people per Articling year to make partner, if not less, solely based on my own anecdotal experience/observations. 

If your firm is small, sure.

[carlill]

Great job asparagus4444 for putting this together. 

The base salary of a newly minted income partner on Bay Street remains shrouded in mystery. I understand that income partnership is three years in duration, but what is the general/ballpark salary?

I know, I know, the answer is 'ask around at your firm and people will tell you'...but surely this information can be shared on this forum?

 

[Grey]

16 minutes ago, carlill said:

Great job asparagus4444 for putting this together. 

The base salary of a newly minted income partner on Bay Street remains shrouded in mystery. I understand that income partnership is three years in duration, but what is the general/ballpark salary?

I know, I know, the answer is 'ask around at your firm and people will tell you'...but surely this information can be shared on this forum?

 

At my firm I'd say $300k base is probably a very safe guess. I'd ballpark $350 to $400 for all in comp for a first year income partner at my firm. 

[carlill]

Many thanks! 

[Hitman9172]

21 hours ago, Grey said:

At my firm I'd say $300k base is probably a very safe guess. I'd ballpark $350 to $400 for all in comp for a first year income partner at my firm. 

Interesting. That's higher than I thought, but not surprised given the amount of money in Toronto. I'm in Vancouver and I've been told it's roughly between $210-$275k first year base for income partners at most of the large firms. Not sure about all-in.

[RaginaldPipin]

On 9/26/2021 at 11:11 AM, Hitman9172 said:

Interesting. That's higher than I thought, but not surprised given the amount of money in Toronto. I'm in Vancouver and I've been told it's roughly between $210-$275k first year base for income partners at most of the large firms. Not sure about all-in.

Those numbers for Vancouver are about right. I would say the upper limit could be slightly higher in certain circumstances, around $290k.

Problem in Vancouver is the low equity partner incomes. Not many earn more than $550k here. A few pull in $1 million+, but it’s quite rare (I would wager less than 40 lawyers in Vancouver earn that on a consistent basis).

Edited September 27, 2021 by RaginaldPipin

[carlill]

Article in the Globe today reporting, most importantly, on the pay gaps in Big Law, but including the kind of detail seldom disclosed by Bay Street.

Blakes: "Equity partner compensation ranged from $625,000 to $5,250,000. The average was about $1.4 million."

Edited September 30, 2021 by carlill

[PzabbytheLawyer]

If I'm making anywhere near 600k per year once I'm *checks birthday* around 40, I will certainly plan to retire by 50.

[Rashabon]

All the partners say that and then they never do, because the job at that point is easy enough and you get used to it, plus the lifestyle inflation. I was out for dinner with one of the senior partners I work with and I jokingly asked him when he was going to retire and he said he wasn't going to stick it out to retirement, but he's already in his mid to late fifties, so we'll see.

[Jaggers]

I don't make anywhere near $600K, and we have a toddler right now, so obviously retirement isn't anywhere in the cards for the next 15+ years, but I have no intention of working full time after my early '60s or so.

[easttowest]

I don’t plan to ever fully retire. That’s one of the reasons I got into law in the first place, you can keep going as long as you have your faculties. 

[Hitman9172]

I think a lot of partners get lifestyle inflation, but also law is one of the few jobs where you don't "age out" per se.

[Kimura]

Not that I'm a partner or anything...but lifestyle inflation is something I'm actively trying to avoid as I get older lol

[easttowest]

16 hours ago, Kimura said:

Not that I'm a partner or anything...but lifestyle inflation is something I'm actively trying to avoid as I get older lol

[Kimura]

9 minutes ago, easttowest said:

It can work, but you need to be aware of your spending habits and financial planning. It also requires discipline and refusal to keep up with the joneses.

In theory, what you would do is find a lifestyle that is comfortable and affordable for you on a given salary, while being able to hit savings and investment goals, etc. Anything you make above that salary is then put directly into investments, instead of constantly upgrading things in your life that cost more and more money to sustain (i.e. bigger house and bigger mortgage, fancier car and bigger lease, fancier suits, etc.). I'm not a materialistic person myself, so I don't require much to be happy, but I also didn't grow up wealthy so I don't know if my outlook will change when I (hopefully) start to see wealth 30 years from now. 

[Cool_name]

4 minutes ago, Kimura said:

It can work, but you need to be aware of your spending habits and financial planning. It also requires discipline and refusal to keep up with the joneses.

In theory, what you would do is find a lifestyle that is comfortable and affordable for you on a given salary, while being able to hit savings and investment goals, etc. Anything you make above that salary is then put directly into investments, instead of constantly upgrading things in your life that cost more and more money to sustain (i.e. bigger house and bigger mortgage, fancier car and bigger lease, fancier suits, etc.). I'm not a materialistic person myself, so I don't require much to be happy, but I also didn't grow up wealthy so I don't know if my outlook will change when I (hopefully) start to see wealth 30 years from now. 

I remember when I thought the same. Saved every penny above my articling salary after transitioning to an associate at first.

Skip to the present and I’ve bought a condo and am seriously considering joining a members only club 🤷.

Edit: for what it is worth though, saving my articling to associate raise is what let me buy a condo. That and neglecting my student loan.

Edited December 17, 2021 by Cool_name

[chaboywb]

5 minutes ago, Kimura said:

It can work, but you need to be aware of your spending habits and financial planning. It also requires discipline and refusal to keep up with the joneses.

In theory, what you would do is find a lifestyle that is comfortable and affordable for you on a given salary, while being able to hit savings and investment goals, etc. Anything you make above that salary is then put directly into investments, instead of constantly upgrading things in your life that cost more and more money to sustain (i.e. bigger house and bigger mortgage, fancier car and bigger lease, fancier suits, etc.). I'm not a materialistic person myself, so I don't require much to be happy, but I also didn't grow up wealthy so I don't know if my outlook will change when I (hopefully) start to see wealth 30 years from now. 

It sounds like your solution to lifestyle inflation is "don't let lifestyle inflation happen". If it was that easy, I think everyone would do it.

I recall being in grad school with an alright stipend that was enough to get by, and thinking I'd never need more money - I had all the essentials. I look back on how I was living then and wonder how it was possible I was happy. And from a net worth perspective, I'm poorer now than I was then.

It happens very gradually. I was buying a new mattress a little while ago, which is a purchase where you can spend anywhere from a few hundred to thousands. I found it very difficult to figure out what I could afford, because I kept thinking that I was selling my own comfort/physical health for a few hundred dollars or so. At some point, it stops becoming a matter of "I can't afford this without giving up food or rent", to "I can't afford this because I'll have to put less into my student debt or investment account." You're not taking away from your current self, just your future self. And that's a bit easier to rationalize.

This extends to clothes, furniture, vacations, etc. I hated winter my whole life - I could never understand how people did outdoor activities in the snow without being miserable. Then, a few years ago, I splurged on a few nice 100% wool sweaters. Suddenly, I could be outside and feel fine. How could I now go back to buying a cheap cotton sweater and not feel a tinge of annoyance at the discomfort they cause?

I'm not materialistic and did not grow up wealthy. But I value nice things over many things. I'd spend extra on a reliable car rather than a flashy one, or on a pair of shoes that will last a decade over a fashionable pair that will last a year. Lifestyle inflation can happen either way.

I say this as someone who is extremely early on in their career but can already see the temptation of enjoying today rather than socking away everything for the future. I'm actively fighting it too, and still shop for sales and make big debt payments. But if I look back five years, the inflation has undoubtedly began.

[Kimura]

I failed to make my point on lifestyle inflation clear, and for that, I apologize. I was trying to make my point in the context of a high income earner delaying retirement because of lifestyle inflation (among other reasons), which is a point Rashabon alluded to above.

Obviously you are going to have lifestyle inflation when transitioning from a recently graduated law student to a newly minted associate early on in your career. I'll be nearly 30 when I graduate next year and I've never made more than 40k a year up to this point in my life. I'm going to have loads of lifestyle inflation for at least the next 5-10 years because I'll be adjusting to a good salary and pursuing the things I want in life but have been unable to afford (such as owning property, investments, etc).

But what about 15-20 years out? Let's say by the time I'm 50. That's about the time I want lifestyle inflation to stop, because I'll have made a good salary for more than a decade or two, and I'll know by then what I can afford as well as what makes me happy. Lifestyle inflation only becomes an issue when searching for higher ground doesn't stop - when you're constantly trying to upgrade your lifestyle as you approach your later years in life and you can only afford to sustain that increasingly expensive lifestyle by continuously working.   

The only way to stop lifestyle inflation is to be cognizant of it, figure out what is both sustainable and makes you happy, and then set a limit. That should be possible a decade or two into your career. Whether or not you actively want to set that limit is up to you.

Edited December 17, 2021 by Kimura

[Rashabon]

I'll see where I land, but I've had discussions with a few partners and my hope would be to exit at a decent age and try my hand at being a corporate director instead of a lawyer. I'm setting myself up for that, but my mentor has an MBA and a finance degree so he's even better set up for that plan and we've chatted about how that is his goal.

[Jaggers]

My philosophy is to keep the big stuff under control so I never have to worry about the smaller stuff. We make a fair amount of money (not Bay St partner type, but just below) and because we have a two bedroom apartment and drive an Elantra, we never have to worry about our budget for groceries, or (pre-covid) restaurants and traveling). We can choose whatever daycare, Montessori school, or whatever else for the toddler without thinking much about it, because we keep a good buffer.