Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

Post a reply


In an effort to prevent automatic submissions, we require that you complete the following challenge.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: B| 8| :clap:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by ymmv » Sat Jun 12, 2021 2:24 pm

don't polk the bear hurr hurr hurr

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by Stranger » Sat Jun 12, 2021 2:18 pm

So, did folks see that Davis Polk raised the stakes a bit?

https://abovethelaw.com/2021/06/davis-polk-salary-21/

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by BlendedUnicorn » Sat Jun 12, 2021 1:49 pm

obviously it's all theoretical right now because the work is available and partners aren't about to start turning down work to get their associate hours down to 1600 or whatever.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by BlendedUnicorn » Sat Jun 12, 2021 1:47 pm

August Wilson wrote:
Sat Jun 12, 2021 9:43 am
ymmv wrote:
Sat Jun 12, 2021 3:17 am
Maybe my firm was weird in that it was not uncommon for people to be staffed on one all-consuming matter for months, a year, or even years at a time.
My firm is the same. Maybe it’s a difference between lit and Corp. Like I might be on 5 different cases, but one will take up 80-90% of my time for months at a time while the firm finds others to fill in on the cases that aren’t as busy. As soon as the one big case slows down, it’s back to the next biggest case that was on the back burner and then that takes up 80-90% of my time. They’ll burn you out on one matter. They dgaf.
Sure, but under that model you could still do fewer cases and just sort of bounce from really busy month(s) to really slow month(s) instead of from one busy matter to another. It's just the nature of the beast that if you're gearing up for a complex trial or responding to a DOJ subpoena or in the middle of really gross discovery disputes work life balance is going to suck. But lit/investigations also have long down periods, and there's no reason other than they can that firms have to keep rotating you into busy matters.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by August Wilson » Sat Jun 12, 2021 9:43 am

ymmv wrote:
Sat Jun 12, 2021 3:17 am
Maybe my firm was weird in that it was not uncommon for people to be staffed on one all-consuming matter for months, a year, or even years at a time.
My firm is the same. Maybe it’s a difference between lit and Corp. Like I might be on 5 different cases, but one will take up 80-90% of my time for months at a time while the firm finds others to fill in on the cases that aren’t as busy. As soon as the one big case slows down, it’s back to the next biggest case that was on the back burner and then that takes up 80-90% of my time. They’ll burn you out on one matter. They dgaf.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by ymmv » Sat Jun 12, 2021 3:17 am

Maybe my firm was weird in that it was not uncommon for people to be staffed on one all-consuming matter for months, a year, or even years at a time.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by Jubo » Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:01 pm

ymmv wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:21 pm
Jubo wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:05 pm
If law firms cut hours requirements down to, like, 1600/year, cut pay proportionally, and just hired more attorneys, I'm pretty sure that would solve a lot of problems about people quitting. Overhead not a big deal with new WFH paradigm anyway.
I have trouble imagining a world in which this actually means a better life for biglawyers though. “Full-time without overpay” in an industry where clients expect constant contact and last-minute turnarounds is always going to translate to fire drills, 24/7 availability expectations, and 1 AM draft revisions. Except now with less pay, under this model.

Like there just aren’t the same work-life barriers available in a lot of legal practice that you have in other client-facing professions. Too much is too time-sensitive, and too unpredictable for strict on-off hours (at least probably not without losing out to the competition in the arms race for full service).
BU said it, but it's just fewer matters per attorney, so you'll still have fire drills and be expected to be available, but if I'm staffed on 3 deals at a time instead of 10, my life is still infinitely better.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by BlendedUnicorn » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:05 pm

ymmv wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:21 pm
Jubo wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:05 pm
If law firms cut hours requirements down to, like, 1600/year, cut pay proportionally, and just hired more attorneys, I'm pretty sure that would solve a lot of problems about people quitting. Overhead not a big deal with new WFH paradigm anyway.
I have trouble imagining a world in which this actually means a better life for biglawyers though. “Full-time without overpay” in an industry where clients expect constant contact and last-minute turnarounds is always going to translate to fire drills, 24/7 availability expectations, and 1 AM draft revisions. Except now with less pay, under this model.

Like there just aren’t the same work-life barriers available in a lot of legal practice that you have in other client-facing professions. Too much is too time-sensitive, and too unpredictable for strict on-off hours (at least probably not without losing out to the competition in the arms race for full service).
only thing you can really do is staff people on fewer matters. Obviously the problem with that is that there's more big law work than there are big law bodies at the moment, which is why firms are in this salary arms race to begin with. Still way better for partners to pay a 4th year 300k to work to death than to start turning down work that will bring in many multiples of that.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by ymmv » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:21 pm

Jubo wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:05 pm
If law firms cut hours requirements down to, like, 1600/year, cut pay proportionally, and just hired more attorneys, I'm pretty sure that would solve a lot of problems about people quitting. Overhead not a big deal with new WFH paradigm anyway.
I have trouble imagining a world in which this actually means a better life for biglawyers though. “Full-time without overpay” in an industry where clients expect constant contact and last-minute turnarounds is always going to translate to fire drills, 24/7 availability expectations, and 1 AM draft revisions. Except now with less pay, under this model.

Like there just aren’t the same work-life barriers available in a lot of legal practice that you have in other client-facing professions. Too much is too time-sensitive, and too unpredictable for strict on-off hours (at least probably not without losing out to the competition in the arms race for full service).

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by Jubo » Fri Jun 11, 2021 1:34 pm

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by somelawperson » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:18 pm

who do we think won't match?

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by Jubo » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:05 pm

If law firms cut hours requirements down to, like, 1600/year, cut pay proportionally, and just hired more attorneys, I'm pretty sure that would solve a lot of problems about people quitting. Overhead not a big deal with new WFH paradigm anyway.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by Danger Zone » Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:52 pm

Jubo wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:10 pm
Also tons of midlevel/senior associates deciding the money isn't worth it and just quitting, maybe not even to go in-house.
I know two people that have done this now, neither seem to have any regrets

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by UVA2B » Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:19 pm

How did cadwalader match this quickly? McDermott makes sense, but there’s gotta be miserly things happening at cadwalader.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by Jubo » Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:10 pm

Wouldn't be surprised if the lateral market is also competitive as more and more companies decide to take legal work in-house, so it's not firms competing with each other so much as with companies generally.

Also tons of midlevel/senior associates deciding the money isn't worth it and just quitting, maybe not even to go in-house.

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by Danger Zone » Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:17 pm

More evidence that it’s a really competitive market for laterals

Re: Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by wizzy » Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:19 pm

Milbank the goat

Milbank Does it Again: NY to $200k

by icechicken » Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:08 pm


Top