Thursday, January 31, 2013

Above the Law: Associate Bonus Watch: Angry Associates at Arnold & Porter

Above the Law
A Legal Web Site – News, Commentary, and Opinions on Law Firms, Lawyers, Law School, Law Suits, Judges and Courts
Associate Bonus Watch: Angry Associates at Arnold & Porter
Jan 31st 2013, 15:15

With a few exceptions (including a situation that was remedied), Biglaw associates were fairly happy with their bonuses for 2012. This was largely due to Cravath setting a solid scale for the market.

But happiness is not universal. We’ve heard from several sources who are unhappy with the payouts over at Arnold & Porter. Let’s see what all the fuss is about….

There are a lot of nice things that could be said about A&P. Looking back through our archives, we see lots of women in leadership roles, a partner moving to a top position at the Justice Department, an admirable commitment to diversity, and double-digit increases in revenue and profit.

But is that money making its way down to associates? Some claim that it isn’t. This report is representative of others that we’ve received:

Have you guys gotten tipped yet to Arnold & Porter’s terrible, below-market bonus scale? I can tell you that starting at the 2010 year it is below market for 2000 hours, and beyond that 50% or less of market.

Is that accurate? Let’s have a look at the scale (complete A&P bonus memo on the next page):

So yes, the class of 2010 payout is below market for 2000 hours; A&P pays $10,000, while the Cravath scale provides for $14,000. If you’re in the class of 2010, you’re sub-Cravath even at 2200 hours. You have to rack up 2400 hours, no small feat, to beat the Cravath scale. To refresh your recollection, this is the Cravath scale:

Class of 2004 — $60,000
Class of 2005 — $50,000
Class of 2006 — $40,000
Class of 2007 — $34,000
Class of 2008 — $27,000
Class of 2009 — $20,000
Class of 2010 — $14,000
Class of 2011 — $10,000
Class of 2012 — $10,000 (pro-rated)

In general, you need to rack up 2400 hours at A&P to match or beat Cravath. That’s a lot of hours — especially given that, according to our latest hours survey, the median associate bills somewhere between 2000 and 2100 hours. It would be fair to call this scale “below market.” Put another way, the “base” bonus, for 2000 hours, is 50 percent (or less) of what you’d get at a firm on the New York scale.

And don’t forget: unlike lockstep firms like Cravath, A&P doesn’t pay bonuses to all (or almost all) associates. According to the memo, reprinted in full on the next page, “[a]pproximately 66% of all Firm associates will be receiving bonuses” for 2012 work — meaning that a third got zilch.

Of course, complaints about compensation at Arnold & Porter are nothing new. Last year, we described the Arnold & Porter bonuses as “underwhelming” (which was understated compared to one source’s characterization of them as “insulting”).

But look, as we’ve said before, Biglaw isn’t all about the benjamins. There are so many other factors to consider when picking a firm. What type of work does the firm do, and does it line up with your interests? What is the firm culture like? Do you enjoy the company of your colleagues? Does the firm have a commitment to diversity? What about pro bono work?

Based on these criteria, A&P has a lot going for it. But if your goal is maximizing your income relative to the hours you work, you should probably look elsewhere.

(You can flip to the next page to see the complete Arnold & Porter bonus memo.)

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Above the Law: Quote of the Day: The Law School Dream Is Dead

Above the Law
A Legal Web Site – News, Commentary, and Opinions on Law Firms, Lawyers, Law School, Law Suits, Judges and Courts
Quote of the Day: The Law School Dream Is Dead
Jan 31st 2013, 16:19

We are going through a revolution in law with a time bomb on our admissions books. Thirty years ago if you were looking to get on the escalator to upward mobility, you went to business or law school. Today, the law school escalator is broken.

William D. Henderson, a professor of law at Indiana University (Maurer), commenting on the rigor mortis that’s quickly spreading now that everyone’s fantasies of fame and fortune in the once storied legal profession have died.

(Enough doom and gloom. What are law schools planning to do about it?)

As we sarcastically noted in Morning Docket, law schools are swirling down the drain at warp speed, and the New York Times is on it. Although everyone and their mother and their dog reported on this developing story since the beginning of the new year, apparently when the Grey Lady speaks, people actually listen (and then proceed to email us incessantly with links to the article as if we didn’t already know about what was going on).

Anyway, here’s what the New York Times observed most recently about the ongoing law school crisis:

Law school applications are headed for a 30-year low, reflecting increased concern over soaring tuition, crushing student debt and diminishing prospects of lucrative employment upon graduation. …

Such startling numbers have plunged law school administrations into soul-searching debate about the future of legal education and the profession overall.

When we spoke about the drop in applications earlier this week, we noted that all things considered, the market seemed to be reacting properly. Law schools have been forced to become more transparent about everything from tuition, scholarship retention, and most importantly, employment rates. Prospective law school applicants can now see that the return on their investment may not be as profitable as expected.

As a result, law schools are finally starting to get with the program. Who knows, maybe someone caught wind of that old quote about the definition of insanity. At least the precipitous drop in applications has spurred some debate on how to change what no longer seems to be working. Here’s a brief glimpse at some of their ideas:

In the legal academy, there has been discussion about how to make training less costly and more relevant, with special emphasis on the last year of law school. …

There is also discussion about permitting students to take the bar after only two years rather than three, a decision that would have to be made by the highest officials of a state court system.

Changing the third year of law school to make the study of law less of a money pit is a start, but if it’s truly unneeded — which we suspect is why they’re thinking of changing it in the first place — axing it entirely would be the most prudent solution. If only the ABA would get on board with the systemic change that needs to occur, then perhaps future law students might have a hope and a prayer of being successful in the legal profession.

But why hasn’t the New York Times brought down fire and brimstone upon the American Bar Association? The paper of record notes that New York is considering doing away with the third year of law school, but what they don’t get into is the fact that if 3L year were to be eliminated, those who opt out wouldn’t graduate with juris doctor degrees because of the ABA’s credit-hour requirements. We suppose that as the arbiter of law school accreditation, it would just make too much sense for the ABA to assist their constituents in this time of turmoil.

Meanwhile, it’s not just law students and law graduates who will suffer because of the ABA’s stubbornness:

"In the '80s and '90s, a liberal arts graduate who didn't know what to do went to law school," Professor Henderson of Indiana said. "Now you get $120,000 in debt and a default plan of last resort whose value is just too speculative. Students are voting with their feet. There are going to be massive layoffs in law schools this fall. We won't have the bodies we need to meet the payroll."

Alas, the law school dream is dead, even for the professors. Condolences aren’t necessary, and don’t even bother sending flowers — your money is better spent paying down the interest on your student loans.

Law Schools' Applications Fall as Costs Rise and Jobs Are Cut [New York Times]

Earlier: Law School Applications Crater

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Tom & Lorenzo: Emmy Rossum in Naeem Khan on Chelsea Lately

Tom & Lorenzo
Fabulous & Opinionated
Emmy Rossum in Naeem Khan on Chelsea Lately
Jan 31st 2013, 15:44

What a cute-fab little dress:   Emmy Rossum makes an appearance on ‘Chelsea Lately’ in a Naeem Khan black wool crepe sheath dress with beaded medallion bodice. Naeem Khan Pre-Fall 2013 Collection/Model: Vika Kukandina Looks fantastic onscreen, standing or sitting. But man, is that not her makeup or what? Do not like anything going on [...]

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Tom & Lorenzo: Selena Gomez in Atelier Versace

Tom & Lorenzo
Fabulous & Opinionated
Selena Gomez in Atelier Versace
Jan 31st 2013, 14:45

Selena got herself a Nylon Mag cover and we all know what that means: a party in her honor and a really showy Versace dress. In this instance it’s the most Frankendress-y dress we’ve ever seen. A Frankendress to out-Frankendress all other Frankendresses.   Selena Gomez celebrates her Nylon magazine February 2013 cover in Los [...]

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Above the Law: Morning Docket: 01.31.13

Above the Law
A Legal Web Site – News, Commentary, and Opinions on Law Firms, Lawyers, Law School, Law Suits, Judges and Courts
Morning Docket: 01.31.13
Jan 31st 2013, 14:06

This is cool with the Ninth Circuit.

* Lanny Breuer finally announced his retirement from the DOJ. He’s going back to the private sector, and perhaps Covington and Jenner & Block will duel to see which firm gets dibs. [Thomson Reuters News & Insight]

* You may be wondering if it’s ever constitutional to testify in a drug cartel case while wearing a disguise — namely, a mustache, a wig, and sunglasses. Behold, the Ninth Circuit’s opinion! [WSJ Law Blog (sub. req.)]

* It may be a new year, but suing Biglaw firms never seems to get old. From Blank Rome to White & Case, here’s a thrilling roundup of all suits that have made waves in 2013, a “lawsuit-palooza,” if you will. [Am Law Daily]

* "We are going through a revolution in law with a time bomb on our admissions books." The entire law school dream is continuing to swirl down the drain at warp speed, and the New York Times is on it! [New York Times]

* Is anyone actually surprised that every single one of Jerry Sandusky’s post-conviction motions was flat-out denied? If so, then it seems you may be in very serious need of a 1-800-REALITY check. [Legal Intelligencer]

* George Zimmerman's attorney asked a judge to delay his client's trial because he claims the prosecution is causing problems. Also, he'd kind of like to get paid, but that's neither here nor there. [Orlando Sentinel]

* If you weren’t aware, there was a law firm office shooting in Arizona yesterday, and one of the wounded is Mark Hummels, a partner with Osborn Maledon. Best wishes for a very speedy recovery! [Arizona Republic]

* When they tell you stop writing when time is called during the bar exam, you STOP FREAKING WRITING when time is called on the bar exam — unless you don’t like bar admission, of course. [National Law Journal]

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Tom & Lorenzo: Julianne Moore for The Sunday Times Style Magazine

Tom & Lorenzo
Fabulous & Opinionated
Julianne Moore for The Sunday Times Style Magazine
Jan 30th 2013, 22:53

Julianne gives her best thousand-yard stare to the Sunday Times Style Magazine:   Julianne Moore covers The Sunday Times Style Magazine.   She’s striking as hell and, in an editorial setting, she can work some pretty odd clothes, but her face in every picture could have been copied and pasted from the same shot. For [...]

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Tom & Lorenzo: Teresa Palmer in Philip Armstrong

Tom & Lorenzo
Fabulous & Opinionated
Teresa Palmer in Philip Armstrong
Jan 30th 2013, 23:35

Teresa Palmer attends the premiere of ‘Warm Bodies’ in a Philip Armstrong gown paired with a Judith Leiber clutch.     [Photo Credit: PR Photos]

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Blog Archive