Young lawyers outraged -- Bonuses only $17,500!

[Mike Anderson]

I get a big kick out of this. First-year associates (25-yr-olds roughly) at "Big Law" law firm Cravath, Swaine & Moore are outraged - OUTRAGED! - that they'll "only" be getting bonuses of $17,500 this year:

http://abovethelaw.com/2008/11/associate_bonus_watch_cravath_1.php

Mind you, this is on top of a starting salary that is probably in the neighborhood of $150k. For first years, right out of law school.

Now, it's true, these kids put in an insane number of hours, but... Hey man, when you sell your soul, you get the going price.

One poor guy in the comments has the gall to point out that many people in the country won't even have jobs this year, and that maybe, just maybe, a bonus of $17,500 isn't such a horrible thing in this environment. Of course he gets rudely shouted down...

[XKnight]

My heart goes out to all the young lawyer dudes. Such a sad state of affairs indeed. They may have to start lining up at the soup kitchens soon.

[A-Bone]

I get a big kick out of this. First-year associates (25-yr-olds roughly) at "Big Law" law firm Cravath, Swaine & Moore are outraged - OUTRAGED! - that they'll "only" be getting bonuses of $17,500 this year:

http://abovethelaw.com/2008/11/associate_bonus_watch_cravath_1.php

Mind you, this is on top of a starting salary that is probably in the neighborhood of $150k. For first years, right out of law school.

Now, it's true, these kids put in an insane number of hours, but... Hey man, when you sell your soul, you get the going price.

One poor guy in the comments has the gall to point out that many people in the country won't even have jobs this year, and that maybe, just maybe, a bonus of $17,500 isn't such a horrible thing in this environment. Of course he gets rudely shouted down...

And that guy is also likely not long for that particular big law environment, as he is going to become aware of the fact that he is no longer on the "partner track" at Cravath. Good old "big law"; you have to love it.

Wasn't yesterday also the release of the July '08 bar results for California?

[Lawn Jockey]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/2/1362599_02bcdea730.jpg

[crosse79]

Just bout 10K short to buy a used Deumble... no wonder they were outraged.

[Mike Anderson]

Wasn't yesterday also the release of the July '08 bar results for California?

Ah, that explains the unusually large number of drunken youngsters stumbling around town last night.

[BluesForDan]

but, but, that's barely a decent downpayment on a 7-series beemer, how am I supposed to look rich with a measly bonus like that?:cry:

I'm trying to find my miniature violin, but my magnifying glass is dusty so the search was futile.
:stir:horse:munch

[grego7]

I got through a handful of those "comments", and just closed the browser shaking my head...

The only thing that made me chuckle was the Malkovich "Rounders" quote.

[TimBascom]

Poor babies. :rolleyes:

A classic example of the "entitlement" mentality.

Christmas bonuses are just that...bonuses.

[fetishfrog]

Strange...I thought my tears would flow naturally after reading that...but, I must be getting hardened to even the purest tragedies.

[buchla300]

Maybe all of us here at the gear page could sell stuff, club together and make their Christmas bearable, no?




Wankers :NUTS

[SonicGator]

I'm not sure about the $150k figure for a 1st year Lawyer. Many lawyers don't make anywhere close to $150k after years of practicing law. My brother is an attorney that made $50k his first year with one of the "big" firms; he has since moved into a smaller practice and makes a great deal more now, but it is still rare for those making that much.

As for the $17,500 bonus, they may be right to be upset. One of the reason my brother left the "big" firm was that he made more money in one year for the firm than any other attorney there, including the Sr. Partners, but was the lowest paid for that year of any of them.

There obviously can be many different circumstances for these guys, but just having a law degree is not a golden ticket.

[DavidE]

Just remember, these fat cats don't represent the majority of working lawyers.

[v-verb]

man - what a bunch of a-holes

[James Dawson]

I would think that I were a client of those firms and saw the level of maturity posted by some of the junior attorneys, I'd look for another firm to represent me.

[Suproman77]

I'm not sure about the $150k figure for a 1st year Lawyer. Many lawyers don't make anywhere close to $150k after years of practicing law. My brother is an attorney that made $50k his first year with one of the "big" firms; he has since moved into a smaller practice and makes a great deal more now, but it is still rare for those making that much.

As for the $17,500 bonus, they may be right to be upset. One of the reason my brother left the "big" firm was that he made more money in one year for the firm than any other attorney there, including the Sr. Partners, but was the lowest paid for that year of any of them.

There obviously can be many different circumstances for these guys, but just having a law degree is not a golden ticket.

All very true. My brother is also a lawyer and he struggled something fierce coming out of law school.

To those that think lawyers have 'sense of entitlement' issues, remember that you actually have to work your ass off at a 4 year degree, 3 years of law school, and then pass the god awful boards. Meanwhile, you have tuition loans coming out your ears that need to be paid back. No free tickets in that business...you're gonna work and work hard to get anywhere.

[Mike Anderson]

This is Cravath, it's pure "Big Law", one of the best law firms in the country. I guarantee you these guys were making roughly $150k to start.

That is definitely not to say all lawyers make that much coming out of school -- most don't. But these guys do.

To those that think lawyers have 'sense of entitlement' issues, remember that you actually have to work your ass off at a 4 year degree, 3 years of law school, and then pass the god awful boards. Meanwhile, you have tuition loans coming out your ears that need to be paid back. No free tickets in that business...you're gonna work and work hard to get anywhere.

That's all true. I'm a lawyer myself, so I know what it takes to get there.

But stop and think about all the law students who went through the same thing, yet instead decided to go into public interest, or govt service (public defenders and prosecutors, etc), or environmental law, or whatever line of work for much less than half what these guys are making.

Now who deserves more sympathy?

[Mike Anderson]

Actually, I underestimated it. Starting at Cravath in 2007 got you a $160k salary. Here's piece from October 2007, before the crash:

Law firm bonus season got off to an early start this year as Cravath, Swaine & Moore on Monday announced both one-time special bonuses and year-end bonuses for associates.


The firm said it would pay special bonuses ranging from $10,000 for first-years to $50,000 for senior associates, with year-end bonuses running from $35,000 to $60,000.


The two bonuses come on top of salaries starting at $160,000.
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/at-cravath-bonus-season-comes-early/

So in 2007, a first year associate made $160k salary + $10k special bonus + $35k year-end bonus = $205k/year total.

[Blue Strat]

Poor babies. :rolleyes:

A classic example of the "entitlement" mentality.

Christmas bonuses are just that...bonuses.


LOL! Yeah, what ever happened to the days when you had to do something special to EARN a bonus. ;)

[stevieboy]

As unsympathetic as I might be about their particular plight, I don't think you give up your right to complain when you become a lawyer.

[Suproman77]

That's all true. I'm a lawyer myself, so I know what it takes to get there.

But stop and think about all the law students who went through the same thing, yet instead decided to go into public interest, or govt service (public defenders and prosecutors, etc), or environmental law, or whatever line of work for much less than half what these guys are making.

Now who deserves more sympathy?

Sympathy or pity? Almost the same thing, but not quite. I can sympathize with both, but I pity neither...meaning I have a sense for what it's like to be in their shoes, but I don't feel sorry for either of them. It's up to them how they want their careers to go, but I do understand where these lawyers are coming from and I feel no desire to demonize them for it.

[XKnight]

But stop and think about all the law students who went through the same thing, yet instead decided to go into public interest, or govt service (public defenders and prosecutors, etc), or environmental law, or whatever line of work for much less than half what these guys are making.

Now who deserves more sympathy?

Cravath and firms like it generally only hire the top 5 - 10% of the graduating class from top tier law schools. Although I have a lot of respect for those lawyers that went into public service, I'm confident that the majority of them had no shot at being hired by the likes of Cravath.

[GDking]

This is why there are so many bluezzz wanking lawyers!

I got da no bonus blues now I talk like da kingfish.

[TimBascom]

LOL! Yeah, what ever happened to the days when you had to do something special to EARN a bonus. ;)

Thank you....my point exaxctly. :D

[Mike Anderson]

Although I have a lot of respect for those lawyers that went into public service, I'm confident that the majority of them had no shot at being hired by the likes of Cravath.

I don't know about "majority", but I can tell you I personally know a lot of lawyers who could have gone into Big Law, but decided to do something more beneficial to society. (Of course my perspective is somewhat biased, as I came from a very public-interest oriented top ten law school.)

Look at public interest firms like the ACLU or EFF. They hire the best of the best. Anybody hired by them has the skills and credentials to get hired by Big Law in short order. The same is true of the Federal Public Defenders or US Attorneys' offices. Around here, even the county PD and DA offices hire the cream of the crop.

[stevieboy]

As far as what constitutes a "bonus" and whatever they might have meant to you or meant in the past, it's different for every company. I know the company I work for has year end "bonuses" based on company performance plus employee performance, they are written in to the system and are part of the deal.

I don't know about the lawyers' particular situation, but don't assume it's like a gratuity or something.

[MBreinin]

I don't get ANY bonus. If you knew how many hours I worked in '07 your jaw would hit the floor. Not as many in 2008, but still a ton.

[nsureit]

Look at public interest firms like the ACLU or EFF. They hire the best of the best. Anybody hired by them has the skills and credentials to get hired by Big Law in short order. The same is true of the Federal Public Defenders or US Attorneys' offices. Around here, even the county PD and DA offices hire the cream of the crop.

My daughter is intern for president of ACLU this coming spring...then she graduates...yeeehawwwwww! Off my payroll!

[Guitar Josh]

I worked for a big law firm before moving to a small boutique (much happier, btw).

Trust me, say what you want about the "entitlement" of these young attorneys, but this is ridiculous. These guys are getting billed out at $350/hr (conservative). Billables are probably at 2250 for the year. That's $675,000 into the firm. Let's assume their salary is $150,000. The firm is then making over $500,000 off their work.

Generally speaking in a firm like this, you should expect about 1/3 of what you bring in back in salary and bonus. So yes, the firm is keeping far more than they are entitled to, and what is customary. And I can promise you the bigwigs aren't cutting their equity shares back at all.

Don't forget - most of these associates are probably like me and paying $1k per MONTH in student loans. If I took $12k a year out of your take home salary, you would probably cringe at that.

When you provide services, you expect to be fairly compensated. Getting less than 20% in an industry where 33% is customary is a bad deal.

[Frankee]

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg298/pacbastard/reservoirdogs2.jpg

[EricPeterson]

I'm not sure about the $150k figure for a 1st year Lawyer. Many lawyers don't make anywhere close to $150k after years of practicing law. My brother is an attorney that made $50k his first year with one of the "big" firms; he has since moved into a smaller practice and makes a great deal more now, but it is still rare for those making that much.

As for the $17,500 bonus, they may be right to be upset. One of the reason my brother left the "big" firm was that he made more money in one year for the firm than any other attorney there, including the Sr. Partners, but was the lowest paid for that year of any of them.

There obviously can be many different circumstances for these guys, but just having a law degree is not a golden ticket.

Most major markets are 120+ for first years with bonuses, Chicago and New York are in the 160K range, I know I just went through the interviewing process. It is absurd but they expect crazy hours, 80/week so they have to pay that or no one would work there.


I am appalled by their reaction though, 17,500! that is a good bonus as far as I am concerned, especially in this market, finding a job for next year was crazy hard every firm I interviewed with was hiring half of the associates they hired the previous year, I have many friends that are still searching. These guys should be happy to just be employed

[John Mayes]

The last christmas bonus I got (from a co. that made over 50 million) was $100 gift card. That's what we all got, and we were all pretty happy with that. A bonus is just that. A bonus.

[Rod]

"lawyers guns and money"

[lcjc800]

Primoris res nos operor, permissum nos iuguolo totus forensis consiliarii ...

Henry VI

:tapedshut

[DavidE]

I worked for a big law firm before moving to a small boutique (much happier, btw).
Trust me, say what you want about the "entitlement" of these young attorneys, but this is ridiculous. These guys are getting billed out at $350/hr (conservative). Billables are probably at 2250 for the year. That's $675,000 into the firm. Let's assume their salary is $150,000. The firm is then making over $500,000 off their work.

You completely forgot overhead. Overhead for these guys is HUGE. Probably somewhere between 100k and 200k each (benefits, staff, rent etc....). Take that off the top.

[DavidE]

Most major markets are 120+ for first years with bonuses, Chicago and New York are in the 160K range, I know I just went through the interviewing process. It is absurd but they expect crazy hours, 80/week so they have to pay that or no one would work there.


I am appalled by their reaction though, 17,500! that is a good bonus as far as I am concerned, especially in this market, finding a job for next year was crazy hard every firm I interviewed with was hiring half of the associates they hired the previous year, I have many friends that are still searching. These guys should be happy to just be employed

Those numbers only apply to the big firms. 80 hours billed per week?

[Guitar Josh]

You completely forgot overhead. Overhead for these guys is HUGE. Probably somewhere between 100k and 200k each (benefits, staff, rent etc....). Take that off the top.

No, it's not.

[Guitar Josh]

The last christmas bonus I got (from a co. that made over 50 million) was $100 gift card. That's what we all got, and we were all pretty happy with that. A bonus is just that. A bonus.

You miss the point. What did YOU make the company? These associates are PERSONALLY responsible for $500K in revenue to the firm after salaries and bonuses. If you gave your company $500k and they gave you a $100 gift card, you might feel a little cheated, and rightly so.

[EricPeterson]

Those numbers only apply to the big firms. 80 hours billed per week?

Ok, so that is hyperbole, but you cant bill 1:1. And yes these are for big firms but that is what these guys are talking about. Most of the firms Chicago firms I interviewed with said they wanted around 2300 hours a year, but when you asked the associates they were doing 2500 and more. to bill that kind of hours you probably spend at least +60 hours a week working.

[Mike Anderson]

Trust me, say what you want about the "entitlement" of these young attorneys, but this is ridiculous. These guys are getting billed out at $350/hr (conservative). Billables are probably at 2250 for the year. That's $675,000 into the firm. Let's assume their salary is $150,000. The firm is then making over $500,000 off their work.

I don't think that's quite accurate, especially for first-years. The firm bears much, much more in the way of expenses for these guys than just the salaries and bonuses.

I've been told by big firm hiring partners that the firm basically makes nothing off associates in the first year, because of the amount of time it takes to train them and get them up to speed on huge cases (which is time taken away from partners and senior associates).

More importantly, the first-years aren't actually doing much to get the job done, which is what matters to the client. It's a lot of document review and memos on questions the partners already know the answers to.

The firm really makes its money on the older associates and the rain-making partners. Nobody client would hire the firm in the first place, if it wasn't for these folks.

They only pay first-years this much because nobody would join the firm if they only got paid what they were worth at the start. (Much like the way they lock in summer associates, who are clearly a losing proposition).

[Mike Anderson]

By the way, GuitarJosh, even if I grant you the premise, that doesn't really lead to the conclusion.

So the firm makes a lot of money off associates - so what? Apparently, this year the firm is making a lot less off of them. By your own logic, isn't a decrease in their pay entirely reasonable?

[drgonzoguitar]

Primoris res nos operor, permissum nos iuguolo totus forensis consiliarii ...

Henry VI

:tapedshut


Wow! "The first deed we do is butcher the counselors!" That might be a bit extreme...

:D

[Mike Anderson]

Wow! "The first deed we do is butcher the counselors!" That might be a bit extreme...

:D

One might also keep in mind that the line in question was spoken by a killer named "Dick the Butcher".

[Greggy]

Actually, I underestimated it. Starting at Cravath in 2007 got you a $160k salary. Here's piece from October 2007, before the crash:

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/at-cravath-bonus-season-comes-early/

So in 2007, a first year associate made $160k salary + $10k special bonus + $35k year-end bonus = $205k/year total.

Wow, I've been in academia too long and have lost track of law salaries. I was hired out of law school by one of the best firms in the Southeast (one of Dupont's 33 preferred firms worldwide). This firm paid at the highest rate in the immediate SE region, i.e., $53,000/year. At that time the big boys in NY were paying $89,000/year. This was 1996, not that long ago. Hell, first year attorneys today make more than a Somali pirate for chrissakes. What's the world coming to?

[Greggy]

You completely forgot overhead. Overhead for these guys is HUGE. Probably somewhere between 100k and 200k each (benefits, staff, rent etc....). Take that off the top.

At the firms I've worked with, overhead varied from 33% to 40%. There are many schemes for divying up the billable hours and allocating salary, draws, etc. Some better than others.

[Old Tele man]

...nothing but "legalized" PYRAMID schemes, money comes "in" through the bottom people only to be "funneled" up to those at the top.

[Jon Silberman]

Try paying for and completing 3 years at a top law school with grades high enough to get hired at a major firm that pays signing bonuses where you work 70 hour weeks. Then come back and tell us how you turned the bonuses down.

P.S. The above is not addressed to the OP, personally.

P.P.S. Myself, I'm a less-well renumerated government lawyer. I feel like I'm contributing to improving the planet, though, which is worth more to me than a private-firm salary plus I usually work a legit 40 hour week and get to see my family and guitars. :)

[Guitar Josh]

By the way, GuitarJosh, even if I grant you the premise, that doesn't really lead to the conclusion.

So the firm makes a lot of money off associates - so what? Apparently, this year the firm is making a lot less off of them. By your own logic, isn't a decrease in their pay entirely reasonable?

By my own logic? I'm not sure you quite understand it my friend :)

These associates aren't sitting around. They are doing billable work. Having been inside these big law firms (the one I worked for is top 20), it's more likely the partners are pissing away money than the associates. Most of the work these younger associates are doing is research, writing and discovery, pretty much all of which is difficult to argue. Now it may get cut down, but not that much.

The associates are not the ones causing the firm's profits to go down, it's much more likely the partners.

[Guitar Josh]

I don't think that's quite accurate, especially for first-years. The firm bears much, much more in the way of expenses for these guys than just the salaries and bonuses.

I've been told by big firm hiring partners that the firm basically makes nothing off associates in the first year, because of the amount of time it takes to train them and get them up to speed on huge cases (which is time taken away from partners and senior associates).

More importantly, the first-years aren't actually doing much to get the job done, which is what matters to the client. It's a lot of document review and memos on questions the partners already know the answers to.

The firm really makes its money on the older associates and the rain-making partners. Nobody client would hire the firm in the first place, if it wasn't for these folks.

They only pay first-years this much because nobody would join the firm if they only got paid what they were worth at the start. (Much like the way they lock in summer associates, who are clearly a losing proposition).

Please do me the favor of not working for whatever firm(s) told this nonsense.

I can promise you that at the very very least, they are recovering salaries and expenses off associates. At my rate, I had to only bill (and firm recover) 30 hours a month to recover what I was paid. Considering I billed close to 200...I'm having a hard time finding where they were "losing" money on me.

[kovachian]

:cry:

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/9035/tinyviolinxq2.jpg

[Mike Anderson]

PI'm having a hard time finding where they were "losing" money on me.

I think they roughly break even on first-years.

But let's break down the other costs in addition to your salary and bonuses:

Did you get trained by more senior associates and partners? How much time did they spend on you, and what were their hourly rates?

How about the employer's FICA payment, how much was that?

Were you in a big city? Tell us how much per month they would have spent to rent your office.

Did you share a secretary or other administrative types who didn't bill out? How much did they get paid?

Did you ever use Westlaw, Lexis, or other legal programs the firm didn't bill for? Those programs are enormously expensive, aren't they?

Did the firm pay your malpractice insurance? How much did that cost?

Did the firm pay your bar fees?

What about health insurance, did you get that? Any other benes? Free lunches, dinners, retreats, holiday parties, etc?

Did the firm pay for your Bar/Bri course and your bar exam fees?

How about the cost of your computer, the copying jobs you ran, the binders you made, the mail you sent, FedEx's, other office supplies?

Did the firm hire you for a summer out of law school? How much did that cost them?

Back all that out, and then see how much money you made for them.

[Mike Anderson]

P.P.S. Myself, I'm a less-well renumerated government lawyer. I feel like I'm contributing to improving the planet, though, which is worth more to me than a private-firm salary plus I usually work a legit 40 hour week and get to see my family and guitars. :)

Congrats Jon, people like you are the unsung heroes of the legal world.

[JELLIS]

Legalize lynch mobs.

[Mike Anderson]

BTW, nobody should take it for granted that all big firms and their partners are making a huge amount of money these days.

Here in SF, two big firms just imploded. More are likely to follow.

[PinoyBoy]

Why shouldn't they be upset?

Like any profession, you enter it with an expectation that if you put in X amount of work, you will get Y in return. The legal, medical, i-banking, management consulting, etc. profession are known to pay high-$s so people work hard to enter those fields. If you end up not getting the usual stuff, then you have every right to be upset.

Think of it this way: if the returns from long study hours, tough clients, stressful client hours, etc. are the same as a "simpler" profession, then maybe people would opt for the "simpler" profession instead. But the returns should (as dictated by the marketplace) be different.

[PinoyBoy]

The last christmas bonus I got (from a co. that made over 50 million) was $100 gift card. That's what we all got, and we were all pretty happy with that. A bonus is just that. A bonus.

Wrong. Maybe in your line of work, a bonus is just that. Something extra. A pleasant surprise. An add-on.

In other professions, bonus (variable compensation) is a big part of the package, and people factor that in when they make a career decision.

[Guitar Josh]

I think they roughly break even on first-years.

But let's break down the other costs in addition to your salary and bonuses:

Did you get trained by more senior associates and partners? How much time did they spend on you, and what were their hourly rates?

How about the employer's FICA payment, how much was that?

Were you in a big city? Tell us how much per month they would have spent to rent your office.

Did you share a secretary or other administrative types who didn't bill out? How much did they get paid?

Did you ever use Westlaw, Lexis, or other legal programs the firm didn't bill for? Those programs are enormously expensive, aren't they?

Did the firm pay your malpractice insurance? How much did that cost?

Did the firm pay your bar fees?

What about health insurance, did you get that? Any other benes? Free lunches, dinners, retreats, holiday parties, etc?

Did the firm pay for your Bar/Bri course and your bar exam fees?

How about the cost of your computer, the copying jobs you ran, the binders you made, the mail you sent, FedEx's, other office supplies?

Did the firm hire you for a summer out of law school? How much did that cost them?

Back all that out, and then see how much money you made for them.

Rather than answer all of these questions (and most are yes, btw, except bar/bri), the answer is still quite a bit. Let's say I billed 200 hours that month, at $350/hr. That's $70k. For just that month. $10k is my salary. That leaves $60k

That $60k, would EASILY cover every single one of those expenses above, for the entire year. Probably twice over.

[bjjp2]

I think they roughly break even on first-years.

But let's break down the other costs in addition to your salary and bonuses:

Did you get trained by more senior associates and partners? How much time did they spend on you, and what were their hourly rates?

How about the employer's FICA payment, how much was that?

Were you in a big city? Tell us how much per month they would have spent to rent your office.

Did you share a secretary or other administrative types who didn't bill out? How much did they get paid?

Did you ever use Westlaw, Lexis, or other legal programs the firm didn't bill for? Those programs are enormously expensive, aren't they?

Did the firm pay your malpractice insurance? How much did that cost?

Did the firm pay your bar fees?

What about health insurance, did you get that? Any other benes? Free lunches, dinners, retreats, holiday parties, etc?

Did the firm pay for your Bar/Bri course and your bar exam fees?

How about the cost of your computer, the copying jobs you ran, the binders you made, the mail you sent, FedEx's, other office supplies?

Did the firm hire you for a summer out of law school? How much did that cost them?

Back all that out, and then see how much money you made for them.

Don't forget: how much of your time was written off by the partners, rather than billed to the client, since it was clearly excessive and/or because the client wouldn't pay for training?

[Guitar Josh]

Don't forget: how much of your time was written off by the partners, rather than billed to the client, since it was clearly excessive and/or because the client wouldn't pay for training?

The firm would have to write down 85% of my time to "lose" money on me.

Firms are smart. You are going to spend plenty of time on projects like discovery that a client just can't argue down all that much. But clients also realize the value of a lower cost associate doing more of the work. Some of the partners at my big firm made $1k per hour. That's three hours of my time. In a big case, that adds up quick.

[ljplum12]

Why shouldn't they be upset?

Like any profession, you enter it with an expectation that if you put in X amount of work, you will get Y in return...

I think that's called a salary.

...people factor that in when they make a career decision.

Sounds like they made a stupid assumption to me then.

If it were promised to them, and they didn't get it, they have a right to be upset. If they assumed they were going to get it and didn't, well, I hate to be cliche, but you know what they say about assuming.

[Mike Anderson]

BTW, Josh - I think there's a much larger question, which isn't specific to associates, but which is very important nonetheless:

Does the fact that someone can get paid that much necessarily mean that they should get paid that much -- that is, that they are providing a commensurate degree of value either to the client, or to society at large?

Case in point: Think of the Big Law clients that got us into the mess we're in now, i.e. the investment banks. The work the lawyers did for them turned out to be very costly, to the clients and the rest of us too.

Do you suppose that there was one single lawyer in the entire mess who ever once said to one of the investment bank clients: "It appears to me that the representations you are making in regards to these securities are completely fraudulent. Our firm can no longer represent you."

[Guitar Josh]

BTW, Josh - I think there's a much larger question, which isn't specific to associates, but which is very important nonetheless:

Does the fact that someone can get paid that much necessarily mean that they should get paid that much -- that is, that they are providing a commensurate degree of value either to the client, or to society at large?

Case in point: Think of the Big Law clients that got us into the mess we're in now, i.e. the investment banks. The work the lawyers did for them turned out to be very costly, to the clients and the rest of us too.

Do you suppose that there was one single lawyer in the entire mess who ever once said to one of the investment bank clients: "It appears to me that the representations you are making in regards to these securities are completely fraudulent. Our firm can no longer represent you."


Mike, that's probably the age old question for any lawyer-client relationship. For the client that wins a $100M lawsuit the answer is very different for the client that loses it.

My small firm just completed a case where we netted $7M in fees. The client recovered well over $100M in value. I would venture to say that they felt it was worth it.

I don't think that society really plays into it because lawyers aren't trying to benefit society at large, but their client.

In any service based industry where your work is directly related to the profits of the entity, like a lawyer, I strongly believe that what you put in should be fairly returned to you. Why else bust your ass 70-80 hours a week? The firm is trying to make money, and so are the associates. It's not unlike any other business.

And the answer to your last question is YES. If you look around, you'll see lawyers from different firms speaking on behalf of different investment firms. The reason is that at some point, someone said "guys, this isn't going to work for us any longer." The other sad truth is that if you think these banks hid facts from the public, there's a strong chance they hid it from their lawyers too.

I am 100% than many big law firms would look the other way and profit regardless, by not everyone, and in these days of sky-high malpractice insurance and bars demanding above board conduct, more firms are saying no. But probably not enough.

[Jon C]

No, it's not.

Uh, yes it (overhead) is... the general rule of thumb is 50% overhead, so if you are making $160k + 17,500 bonus, your overhead is approx. $175-200,000 ... more for a new associate who is being trained and who can't be expected to work as efficiently and to have 100% of billed time collected by the firm. As Mike A points out, your 1st few years you're not nearly the profit center you may think you are.

Even so, as you point out, the partners are making out big time and per partner profits at the BigLaw firms are obscene.

But even compared to an 8th yr. associate, after 28 yrs. in practice and 21 w/ the federal govt. (managing attorney the past 17 yrs.) , I'm probably making as much per hour as they are and I get to also have a personal life (IMO they truly are just high priced wage slaves, only their work is far less interesting than mine and they have to spend absurd hours doing it).

My own opinion based on my time in private practice is that a good paralegal is worth as much or more than a new (1st-4th yr.) associate, though salaries don't reflect that.

My friends in private practice generally envy my situation: imperfect, but I'll take it over theirs even if they do make $200-300k a year. My "bonus", while not guaranteed ever, is a mere morsel of a fraction of the $30k it would be at Cravath even in this down year. They can have it.

[Guitar Josh]

Uh, yes it (overhead) is... the general rule of thumb is 50% overhead, so if you are making $160k + 17,500 bonus, your overhead is approx. $175-200,000 ... a bit more for a new associate who is being trained and who can't be expected to work as efficiently and to have 100% of billed time collected by the firm.

Even so, as you point out, the partners are making out big time and per partner profits at the BigLaw firms are obscene.

But even compared to an 8th yr. associate, after 28 yrs. in practice and 21 w/ the federal govt. (managing attorney the past 17 yrs.) , I'm probably making as much per hour as they are and I get to also have a personal life (IMO they truly are just high priced wage slaves, only their work is far less interesting than mine and they have to spend absurd hours doing it).

My friends in private practice generally envy my situation: imperfect, but I'll take it over theirs even if they do make $200-300k a year.

Sorry my friend, there is no way possible expenses for just me was $200k. None. Not to mention that you can't extrapolate general business to law firms like that, where costs like supplies and even secretary and paralegal work is billable.

[Jon C]

Sorry my friend, there is no way possible expenses for just me was $200k. None. Not to mention that you can't extrapolate general business to law firms like that, where costs like supplies and even secretary and paralegal work is billable.

What exactly is your experience in law firm management? I'm basing this on personal knowledge of what firms I worked at and where my friends work (partners & associates in Wash., DC, NJ, NY and Boston). In any case, as I mention above, a 1st-3d yr. or so associate is really not that valuable a commodity and if anything the firm is investing in them, not deriving profitable cash flow from them. If you don't believe me, make friends with a partner at a big firm who will give you some honest numbers, your conclusions assume a lot.

In any case, as a big law wage slave you have my condolences. You probably should be billing time tonight, right?;):eek:

[Guitar Josh]

What exactly is your experience in law firm management? I'm basing this on personal knowledge of what firms I worked at and where my friends work (partners & associates in Wash., DC, NJ, NY and Boston). In any case, as I mention above, a 1st-3d yr. or so associate is really not that valuable a commodity and if anything the firm is investing in them, not deriving profitable cash flow from them. If you don't believe me, make friends with a partner at a big firm who will give you some honest numbers, your conclusions assume a lot.

In any case, as a big law wage slave you have my condolences. You probably should be billing time tonight, right?;):eek:

I escaped, just like you Jon! Although, yes there were plenty of Saturday nights I was at the office.

Considering how much those partners muled me out, I believe that I had some value to them, lol.

[Jon C]

I escaped, just like you Jon! Although, yes there were plenty of Saturday nights I was at the office.

Considering how much those partners muled me out, I believe that I had some value to them, lol.

yes ... of course... I agree w/ your larger point that profits per partner are probably still obscene even though they're cutting back here... I got my numbers from what my friends told me I should ask for when I was thinking of going back into private practice, but as "of counsel" without the stupid 2,200+ hr. minimums, etc.

... the problem that I see (and that my friend here who has his own firm and refuses to merge with the large firms that have been constantly courting him for 20 yrs. sees all the time) is that too many of these partners (and even associates/counsel) ratchet up their lifestyle with the salary, so their personal overhead increases... that's when they are really caught on the high-priced-wage-slave treadmill because they can't ratchet down the lifestyle they've gotten used to.

My friend told me a few yrs. ago that because he only takes a set draw and plows profits back into his firm (including owning a prime office/townhouse bldg in DC) he didn't know til he filed his taxes that he had doubled his income the prior year ... still lives in the same house he bought in the 70s, doesn't drive a new BMW or Mercedes, etc.

It's tough for the "poor" shnooks who get all caught up in it when fortunes turn, even temporarily.

jc

[phoenix 7]

They should go to Congress and request a bailout.

[Jon C]

They should go to Congress and request a bailout.

you're such a softie ... :D

[scott]

You guys just cant give it up even on a guitar board? Lawyers....always arguing thier point no matter what. Ive never met one I could just have a conversation with, it always turns into him/her trying to argue thier point no matter how stupid it is..It could be anything........You guys must be a blast to hang out with. In case you couldnt tell I was being sarcastic.
Wonder how many pages this will go?

[Suproman77]

You guys just cant give it up even on a guitar board? Lawyers....always arguing thier point no matter what. Ive never met one I could just have a conversation with, it always turns into him/her trying to argue thier point no matter how stupid it is..It could be anything........You guys must be a blast to hang out with. In case you couldnt tell I was being sarcastic.
Wonder how many pages this will go?

So, you want to appease the argument by half-insulting them?

Haha, good luck.

[Mike Anderson]

I don't think that society really plays into it because lawyers aren't trying to benefit society at large, but their client.

I think society plays into it big time, particularly at the boundaries. As lawyers, we are governed by ethical rules that are designed to protect society. We cannot assist our clients in perpetuating frauds and crimes, and that's precisely what I'm talking about.


And the answer to your last question is YES. If you look around, you'll see lawyers from different firms speaking on behalf of different investment firms. The reason is that at some point, someone said "guys, this isn't going to work for us any longer."

Can you point to an example of a lawyer or law firm who said this back in '02-'06, when it might have mattered? I will be even more impressed if you can show me a law firm that withdrew from representation.

The other sad truth is that if you think these banks hid facts from the public, there's a strong chance they hid it from their lawyers too.

I think there absolutely must have been a significant number of lawyers who knew exactly what was going on. The guys who put together the closing binders for these deals are extremely sharp, and must have been intimately aware of their clients' situations. I've never seen a set of large, complicated transactions in which the lawyers weren't fully informed and complicit in the workings of the deal.

[amigo30]

Honestly, I think if lawyers provide such an expensive value, there must be something wrong with our laws and our legal system.

Things really shouldn't be that complicated or that expensive.

[Mike Anderson]

BTW Josh, if you want an even starker example, I'd point you to this case (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-law_notebook09oct09,0,5018859.story) which is currently on trial in SDNY.

[Mike Anderson]

You guys just cant give it up even on a guitar board? Lawyers....always arguing thier point no matter what. Ive never met one I could just have a conversation with, it always turns into him/her trying to argue thier point no matter how stupid it is.

Scott, this might seem like a stupid thing to debate at first glance, but it's actually a pretty important issue. Personally, I think it's emblematic of much of what's wrong with the legal world today (and I'm talking both about the associates' bonus issue as well as the larger issue of whether such high levels of compensation are deserved or justifiable).

[bjjp2]

You guys just cant give it up even on a guitar board? Lawyers....always arguing thier point no matter what. Ive never met one I could just have a conversation with, it always turns into him/her trying to argue thier point no matter how stupid it is..It could be anything........You guys must be a blast to hang out with. In case you couldnt tell I was being sarcastic.
Wonder how many pages this will go?

Ooh, lawyer bashing. How original!

[Mike Anderson]

Honestly, I think if lawyers provide such an expensive value, there must be something wrong with our laws and our legal system.

Things really shouldn't be that complicated or that expensive.

I think it's a tough question.

First (and directed more to Josh), I don't mean to argue that lawyers never deserve high compensation -- often they do -- I am simply saying that we should not take it for granted that someone deserves a lot of money just because they can make it.

Now, as for the legal system itself, there are many areas that are over-complicated, but frankly, it's hard to imagine how, in this day and age, we could have a system that isn't complicated.

Think about how a basic area of law - like contract law, or property law - is so essential to a working society. Now look at the history of how these areas of law evolved.

Centuries ago, law-makers and rulers originally started out with a fairly simple set of rules. But over time, certain situations arose which showed those rules were patently unjust in certain fact patterns. Thus, the rules were changed to allow for a specific exception (and in most cases, justifiably so).

What you end up with are centuries' worth of exceptions that require a great deal of training and expertise to master. It's necessarily complicated because modern life is complicated, and simply does not allow for simple rules that just anybody can understand.

If you think that is wrong, try setting forth a simple rule of contract law, for instance, that you think should be absolute. I can practically guarantee you I'll be able to come up with numerous situations where in the rule as applied would be patently unjust.

[re-animator]

wow. no sympathy for lawyers. I guess its not ok to care unless you carry a lunch-pale and work in a factory.

I'm currently a senior working on my undergrad, taking the LSAT in a few weeks then applying to some law schools. Average starting salary for a lawyer is about $80k if you look at the broad spectrum of career possibilities. I'm looking at working for the state dept., which pretty much falls in line with that average.


Keep in mind that many attorneys have to deal with $200k+ in student loans as soon as they get out. For example, living in California even going to an in-state public law school like Hastings or UCLA is going to cost $35k+ just for tuition each year. You're looking at at least $100k for three years of law school, and whatever you paid for undergrad (usually also around that number).

Bright kids that want to be rich when they get out of college become investment bankers, not lawyers.

[DamianL]

not nowadays they won't....:jo

[XKnight]

Bright kids that want to be rich when they get out of college become investment bankers, not lawyers.

I guess you haven't been following the news lately. :confused:

[scott]

Scott, this might seem like a stupid thing to debate at first glance, but it's actually a pretty important issue. Personally, I think it's emblematic of much of what's wrong with the legal world today (and I'm talking both about the associates' bonus issue as well as the larger issue of whether such high levels of compensation are deserved or justifiable).

I understand that Mike, and I agree with you. These guys seem like a bunch of whining bitch's. Thier mommys need to smack them. It just seems like everytime I try to have a conversation with a lawyer it always ends up with them trying to convince me that he/she is right about something.....anything. Its like it cant be shut off. I usually give up and walk away.


So, you want to appease the argument by half-insulting them?

Haha, good luck.

Never said I was trying to appease anyone, just throwing a bit of gas on the fire to see if the whole backyard burns down...lol. Just kidding.
Lawyers get on my nerves sometimes. And BTW it wasnt half anything it was full on.

[Jon C]

I understand that Mike, and I agree with you. These guys seem like a bunch of whining bitch's. Thier mommys need to smack them. It just seems like everytime I try to have a conversation with a lawyer it always ends up with them trying to convince me that he/she is right about something.....anything. Its like it cant be shut off. I usually give up and walk away.



... this isn't a whole lot different than a whole lot of people I deal with all the time who aren't lawyers ... it's part of the profession but it's also part of being human. Nothing wrong with walking away if you don't want to be lobbied.

it also never ceases to amaze me as a general observation, that the same folks who bash & bash are often the first to seek out those who they bash when they are in a pickle and want someone on their side. :cool:

[bluesjuke]

What's a "bonus"?

[Robert Rowe]

[quo.llte=BluesForDan;5062967]but, but, that's barely a decent downpayment on a 7-series beemer, how am I supposed to look rich with a measly bonus like that?:cry:

I'm trying to find my miniature violin, but my magnifying glass is dusty so the search was futile.
:stir:horse:munch[/quote]


Long story ... but, it's "bimmer" if you're talking about a BMW automobile. "Beamer" is apropos for a BMW motorcycle.

Trust me ... I know what I am saying.

[Robert Rowe]

The Bard had it right ....

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" .... :stir

Henry The Sixth, Part 2, Act 4, Scene 2 -- William Shakespeare

[mouldynudger]

Never had a bonus. Earned less than 17.5K this year and I pay $10/gal for gas.

I also seem to have a better command of The Queens English than most of the people on that board. They didn`t strike me as a high IQ bunch at all.

Damian.

[lcjc800]

Primoris res nos operor, permissum nos iuguolo totus forensis consiliarii ...

Henry VI

:tapedshut

The Bard had it right ....

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" .... :stir

Henry The Sixth, Part 2, Act 4, Scene 2 -- William Shakespeare


Peniculus sursum in vestri Latin....;)

[soulohio]

this thread is makes my penus numb

[Blue Strat]

The Bard had it right ....

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" .... :stir

Henry The Sixth, Part 2, Act 4, Scene 2 -- William Shakespeare

Willie forgot to include lobbyists. While we're at it, investment bankers may qualify as well :D

[Suproman77]

Never said I was trying to appease anyone, just throwing a bit of gas on the fire to see if the whole backyard burns down...lol. Just kidding. Lawyers get on my nerves sometimes. And BTW it wasnt half anything it was full on.

LOL! At least you're honest about your ruthlessness.

:D

[Greggy]

You guys just cant give it up even on a guitar board? Lawyers....always arguing thier point no matter what. Ive never met one I could just have a conversation with, it always turns into him/her trying to argue thier point no matter how stupid it is..It could be anything........You guys must be a blast to hang out with. In case you couldnt tell I was being sarcastic.
Wonder how many pages this will go?

Well, you won't douse a flame with lighter fluid. LOL.

[Jon C]

The Bard had it right ....

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" .... :stir

Henry The Sixth, Part 2, Act 4, Scene 2 -- William Shakespeare

mindless quotes of this, which folks love to do, just reveal ignorance of the play and the message ... in context, the quote is spoken by one of the plotters to illustrate that the law (and lawyers) is what stands between the legitimate government and the murderous plotters ...

so in context it means exactly the opposite of what it's quoted to illustrate ... hardly something you'd want to trot out as an example though it is attractive for simplistic and inaccurate twaddle.:jo

[The Pipast]

The US now comprises roughly 5% of the world's population,but has 70% of the world's lawyers! :huh

Seriously guys/gals...you're NOT worth that much! :confused:

[Greggy]

The US now comprises roughly 5% of the world's population,but has 70% of the world's lawyers! :huh

Seriously guys...you're NOT worth that much! :confused:

I won't vouch for those percentages, not sure where they come from. Anyway, one should suspect the percentage of lawyers to rise among a population as that population carries on more commerce and generates more economic output per person. It would be interesting to compare say GDP per capita with lawyers per 100,000 population across nations.

[The Pipast]

I won't vouch for those percentages, not sure where they come from. Anyway, one should suspect the percentage of lawyers to rise among a population as that population carries on more commerce and generates more economic output per person. It would be interesting to compare say GDP per capita with lawyers per 100,000 population across nations. Regardless,don't you find these numbers to be kind of :messedup?

Then again,in a nation where 'everyone' is looking to sue,I understand that we need a few of them thar lawww yerzzzz now don't we? :worried

[A-Bone]

all you do by mindlessly quoting this is reveal your ignorance... in context, the quote is spoken by one of the plotters to illustrate the the law (and lawyers) is what stands between the legitimate government and the murderous plotters ... hardly something you'd want to trot out as an example though it is attractive for simplistic and inaccurate twaddle.:jo

This is true, but have you noticed how it is only those of us that are lawyers that are aware of the original context?

[A-Bone]

Regardless,don't you find these numbers to be kind of :messedup?

Then again,in a nation where 'everyone' is looking to sue,I understand that we need a few of them thar lawww yerzzzz now don't we? :worried

Of course, an awful lot of "us lawyers" don't sue anyone. I wonder what percentage of the attorneys listed in these demographics are not practicing at all, and what percentage are transactional attorneys, rather than litigators.

[The Pipast]

Of course, an awful lot of "us lawyers" don't sue anyone. I wonder what percentage of the attorneys listed in these demographics are not practicing at all, and what percentage are transactional attorneys, rather than litigators. ...and what percentage are pissing and moaning about not getting paid enough? :puh

[Mike Anderson]

...and what percentage are pissing and moaning about not getting paid enough? :puh

Pretty small, actually.

[The Pipast]

Pretty small, actually. Probably true...the lion's share are laughing all the way to the bank!

[PaulM]

Do you really want to get sick? See how much the Cravath PARTNERS make--over $3 Million per year, on average:

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1177491868356

[lukeII]

Yeah I doubt the Cravath partners will be taking that home this year. The Cravath thing is kind of reflective of junior associates at many big top tier firms and junior in house in banks. There doesn't seem to be the realisation that the economy that affects them is in the toilet. I've had to explain to some juniors that they were lucky enough to have a job and that the employment market is dire so to expect a symbolic bonus if any at all. Other colleagues are having the same experience with their junior associates.

[Jon C]

This is true, but have you noticed how it is only those of us that are lawyers that are aware of the original context?


... my wife is a non-lawyer, was an English major and she knows it too. :eek::cool::hide

[Jon Silberman]

Which country with fewer lawyers would some of you prefer to live in (serious question)?

[aram]

while i don't feel bad for them, they do work their asses off, at least here in nyc.

i'm a real estate broker, and have a lot of lawyers as clients.

keep in mind that to work at these high end firms, you often have to go to the top law schools, and accumulate hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.

A client of mine recently put it this way.

"Aram," she said "they're killing me, I've had to work from 9 to 6 three days in a row!"

I laughed and said "What's so bad about that?"

"9 AM to 6 AM," she replied.

Another client once told me about how the a fellow lawyer started having seizures because of the lack of sleep. While they called the ambulance, everyone kept working away.

So yeah, while I don't feel bad for them for only getting a $17,500 bonus, I don't think that their salaries, given the amount of work they do, are unreasonable.

[RichieRich]

that makes me want to shit.

[lcjc800]

Which country with fewer lawyers would some of you prefer to live in (serious question)?

Why does the solution need to be that extreme, can't members express their opinions without having to change their circumstances?
I respect your personal position and opinion, but if I have a view of the situation posted and other feelings that form an opinion, a more mitigated solution is by far my choice.
The OP presented a story of a few individuals being unsatisfied with a less than expected bonus, I for one find that humorous considering todays economic terrain. But none the less we are presented a set of circumstances that seems out of touch in today's real economic world.
Work hard, get paid, not a bad precept in any line of work. Work hard, come back tomorrow, do it again and maybe someday it pays off was the norm that most of us had. Expecting more than what was offered and then openly complaining about it in this world will get you lynched every time.
So I don't want to move anywhere else, I'd prefer to see things change here. In that arena, and several others. Other than gas prices, there isn't much to look forward to these days, so a little fun at these clowns expense here is not a big deal, mis-applied quotes and all.

[soulohio]

right on

[The Pipast]

Why does the solution need to be that extreme, can't members express their opinions without having to change their circumstances?
I respect your personal position and opinion, but if I have a view of the situation posted and other feelings that form an opinion, a more mitigated solution is by far my choice.
The OP presented a story of a few individuals being unsatisfied with a less than expected bonus, I for one find that humorous considering todays economic terrain. But none the less we are presented a set of circumstances that seems out of touch in today's real economic world.
Work hard, get paid, not a bad precept in any line of work. Work hard, come back tomorrow, do it again and maybe someday it pays off was the norm that most of us had. Expecting more than what was offered and then openly complaining about it in this world will get you lynched every time.
So I don't want to move anywhere else, I'd prefer to see things change here. In that arena, a several others. Other than gas prices, there isn't much to look forward to these days, so a little fun at these clowns expense here is not a big deal, mis-applied quotes and all. +1000...and it's truly a shame that in light of the last year or so's events,this actually still has to be explained to some folks. :tapedshut

[Luke]

Most law graduates are lucky to find a job at $50,000 a year.

There are simply too many lawyers out there at this time and too many graduating each year.

At the moment we are allowing the basic supply/demand curve to try to reduce the pool via reduced wages, but it doesn't seem to be working. Other options could be either making the bar exam 50% more difficult or limiting the number of licenses available.

[jaycee]

It ain't just lawyers, guys. "Kids these days" especially in my company don't want to put the time in. They want to do the job for 6 months and then they expect an automatic promotion. They don't understand that you have put in the hours to get a better position. They want it right away without showing anything.

As far as "only 17 grand"? You gotta be kidding me.

[lcjc800]

:agree

[Greggy]

Yeah I doubt the Cravath partners will be taking that home this year. The Cravath thing is kind of reflective of junior associates at many big top tier firms and junior in house in banks. There doesn't seem to be the realisation that the economy that affects them is in the toilet. I've had to explain to some juniors that they were lucky enough to have a job and that the employment market is dire so to expect a symbolic bonus if any at all. Other colleagues are having the same experience with their junior associates.

Good points. I have not actively practiced since 2000. Since then, I have taught economics and law and economics at a major 4 year university. I was recently offered a position at a small but well respected law firm in the St. Louis region. The problem was that the offer was in litigation, which is where I practiced as a lawyer. I told the firm that I was only interested in non-litigation (wills and estates, real estate, etc.).

Keep in mind that when the economy hits the skids, litigation takes off. This firm made that very clear to me (their transactional practice is slow but litigation is thru the roof, and this is generally true for many firms now). So perhaps the labor market for litigators runs counter-cyclical to a large extent. I know that many firms locally are in need of litigators. I passed on that job offer.

[Greggy]

Another client once told me about how the a fellow lawyer started having seizures because of the lack of sleep. While they called the ambulance, everyone kept working away.



I couldn't let this pass. At a former firm of mine I witnessed my primary paralegal pass out at her desk. Her brother had recently died in a horrible accident (was hit by a car while parked on the side of a highway fixing a flat tire). My secretary called an ambulance and I informed the senior attorneys. I was kinda struck by their lack of "apparent" compassion and their unrelenting dedication to their immediate work. Was a strange revelation for me, I wasn't raised that way.

[John Alexander]

...I think musician's (young and old) should be outraged about how difficult it can be to get paid a decent amount...lawyers have it easy in comparison...

...the reason a lot of lawyers, doctors, etc. play guitar is because it requires a lot of "reasoning" to play well...it gives back what you put into it...music-making goes hand-in-hand with "logical reasoning" or excessive arguing.":messedup

...kind of like a lawyer...hopefully...I like lawyers because they can help you if you need it...:RoCkIn

[dougb415]

I would think that I were a client of those firms and saw the level of maturity posted by some of the junior attorneys, I'd look for another firm to represent me.

Not to mention one of the poor darlings spelled 'match' as 'much' (won't they try to much the other firm?)

I know business owners that barely clear that amount after expenses.

[Jason Calieri]

I'm not sure about the $150k figure for a 1st year Lawyer. Many lawyers don't make anywhere close to $150k after years of practicing law. My brother is an attorney that made $50k his first year with one of the "big" firms; he has since moved into a smaller practice and makes a great deal more now, but it is still rare for those making that much.

A buddy of mine went to NYU law and made around $150k his first year out of school. That was standard for a top school and a top firm.

[jcoloccia]

I read through the thread and there's something I haven't seen anyone touch on yet.

High school grads enter the work force at 18 years of age.

College grads enter the workforce at about 22 years of age. That's 4 additional years of lost wages, plus 4 more years of paying tuition/dorm fees.

Lawyers go for 8 years with no wages plus paying for tuition. They need to make a more just to break even with the high school grad. It's even worse for doctors.

How would you like to be 26 or 27 years old with no job, no house, and $250,000 in student loans? It's like you have to pay off someone else's house before you can even think about buying your own house.

In the mean time, the high school grad's been working for almost 10 years, if he's lucky has a nice nest egg saved up and is ready to buy his first home, start his own business, etc etc.

Sure, they make a lot, but they've earned it and it will be a LONG time before any of them can really enjoy it. Don't be so hard on them.

[lcjc800]

one word....

...choices...

[TieDyedDevil]

Well boo hoo. Lawyers are getting squeezed just like everyone else...

Actually, that makes me feel that there's some justice in the business world after all.

BTW, what's a "bonus"...?

[Robert Rowe]

mindless quotes of this, which folks love to do, just reveal ignorance of the play and the message ... in context, the quote is spoken by one of the plotters to illustrate that the law (and lawyers) is what stands between the legitimate government and the murderous plotters ...

so in context it means exactly the opposite of what it's quoted to illustrate ... hardly something you'd want to trot out as an example though it is attractive for simplistic and inaccurate twaddle.:jo

Hold on, Jon C .... I have news for you.

Forget Wm Shakespeare; more importantly, this quote could very well be something John Q. Public might champion.

"Go, hang yourselves all! you are idle shallow things." Twelfth Night. l,v.

Stock-brokers have temporarily displaced lawyers at the bottom of the list of detested professionals. But, not for long, likely.

Lawyers continue to insulate their machinations through perpetuating an obsolete language (Latin).

"Better a witty fool than a foolish wit." Twelfth Night. 3,4.

[loudboy]

If your employer cut your compensation after posting record profits, would you complain?

Sure, but I wouldn't be stupid enough to do it on the internet.

You might as well walk into your boss's office and tell him to his face.

[Jon C]

Hold on, Jon C .... I have news for you.

Forget Wm Shakespeare; more importantly, this quote could very well be something John Q. Public might champion.

"Go, hang yourselves all! you are idle shallow things." Twelfth Night. l,v.

Stock-brokers have temporarily displaced lawyers at the bottom of the list of detested professionals. But, not for long, likely.

Lawyers continue to insulate their machinations through perpetuating an obsolete language (Latin).

"Better a witty fool than a foolish wit." Twelfth Night. 3,4.

I don't see any news there ... just a couple more random quotes that don't necessarily illuminate much.

Those who know much about lawyering and the law know that out-of-left-field, cause-and-effect notions and assumptions or accusations of lawyers using Latin to facilitate "machinations" makes little sense :NUTS (I am also fairly sure you would want a lawyer to "machinate" on your behalf if you had a legal claim, even if he had to use Latin to do it in your interest).

Let's not let those awful doctors off the hook either, good grief, they use all those anatomical terms just FILLED with Latin and its derivatives ... lord knows what mischief they must be up to!

It's the concept that counts, not the label, whether it's in English, French, Latin, or Pig Latin. And the concept illustrated in your original quote is that the speaker meant that the law is all that stood between evildoers and their success in overthrowing the crown/state.

cheers,
:cool::YinYang

[Greggy]

Lawyers continue to insulate their machinations through perpetuating an obsolete language (Latin).



Ipse dixit.:banana

[Jon C]

Ipse dixit.:banana

de minimis non curit lex (thank god!) :RoCkIn:hide

[A-Bone]

de minimis non curit lex (thank god!) :RoCkIn:hide

Beat me to it. the "de minimis" doctrine is one of the best latin phrases taught in law school.

[Mike Anderson]

Well this seems apropos:

American Bar Association Recalls 230,000 Defective Lawyers (http://www.theonion.com/content/radio_news/american_bar_association?utm_source=onion_rss_dail y)

[lcjc800]

:rotflmao

[A-Bone]

Well this seems apropos:

American Bar Association Recalls 230,000 Defective Lawyers (http://www.theonion.com/content/radio_news/american_bar_association?utm_source=onion_rss_dail y)

It is a pretty damn hilarious Onion story.

[GDking]

de minimis non curit lex (thank god!) :RoCkIn:hide


It is "curat" if you are going to be pedantic go all the way :P

[A-Bone]

Maybe that's just another example of the kind of trifle with which the law does not concern itself...