Super frustrated re dh’s salary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You shouldn't have been spending to the limit of your income in the first place; counting on a bonus is always risky. If the firm profits went down by 20 percent, then partner comp will go down, because that's what it means to be a partner. (It also means that you need to bring in your own business, and that you need to be sure that your billables are also collectible.) You don't say whether most other partners' comp was reduced by about the same amount, or whether your husband was an outlier. If it's the latter, they are nudging him out the door.

I never said we are spending to the limit, and yes we expected his comp to go down somewhat, but considering how much he billed we didn’t expect it to go down more than the firm did. He only knows about the one other partner he works most closely with, and he’s trying to speak with others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op - he’s in a very niche practice group and considered a star in his field. Unfortunately it’s not a practice group that makes a ton of money for any firm but he did collect well (95% I think last year). He works with a lot of different clients including his own and those he shares with partners in other practice areas. He does a ton of BD and markets himself a lot.
He’s involved in very important aspects of the firm (thinking hiring, pro Bono, diversity) in additional to billing a lot.
Yes, we have saved, and we will be ok. He asked if he was being softly pushed out and was told no, that this was simply an across the board reduction. His closest partner in his group was also down 25%.

I worked (staff) in Big Law for a very short period, and my DH was in Big Law (as an associate) for a few years, but my experience is that the bolded things are not assets to most firms when bonus time comes. It sucks, but it is what it is. Which is why so many good hardworking people burn out or decide they don't want to be there anymore.

Did you guys golden handcuff it early on with a 2M house and kids in private school or similar?

[Anonymous]

I think being moved down a level in partnership (is he a nonequity partner now?) is a big red flag. It sounds like the firm is having continuing financial issues. He should start looking elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think being moved down a level in partnership (is he a nonequity partner now?) is a big red flag. It sounds like the firm is having continuing financial issues. He should start looking elsewhere.

He is equity. They have a sort of ladder system and he was moved up last year and then moved down to the prior “rung”. Last year they also increased base comp levels for all rungs.

[Anonymous]

How much are we talking about here? I think it's going to be hard to muster sympathy from a group when you take pay cut from seven figures to six figures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op - he’s in a very niche practice group and considered a star in his field. Unfortunately it’s not a practice group that makes a ton of money for any firm but he did collect well (95% I think last year). He works with a lot of different clients including his own and those he shares with partners in other practice areas. He does a ton of BD and markets himself a lot.
He’s involved in very important aspects of the firm (thinking hiring, pro Bono, diversity) in additional to billing a lot.
Yes, we have saved, and we will be ok. He asked if he was being softly pushed out and was told no, that this was simply an across the board reduction. His closest partner in his group was also down 25%.

In that case he should look around. Has he considered teaching at Georgetown/GW/AU as an adjunct? It's not much money, but it may help him feel better and those schools love being able to offer niche classes tought by well regarded practitioners

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op - he’s in a very niche practice group and considered a star in his field. Unfortunately it’s not a practice group that makes a ton of money for any firm but he did collect well (95% I think last year). He works with a lot of different clients including his own and those he shares with partners in other practice areas. He does a ton of BD and markets himself a lot.
He’s involved in very important aspects of the firm (thinking hiring, pro Bono, diversity) in additional to billing a lot.
Yes, we have saved, and we will be ok. He asked if he was being softly pushed out and was told no, that this was simply an across the board reduction. His closest partner in his group was also down 25%.

In that case he should look around. Has he considered teaching at Georgetown/GW/AU as an adjunct? It's not much money, but it may help him feel better and those schools love being able to offer niche classes tought by well regarded practitioners

He does adjunct already at a couple of schools (not in the area), and he enjoys it but the money is very little and it takes a lot of time. He really does it because he likes to and he’s helping some friends out.

[Anonymous]

“If your DH is one of the top billers in the firm, he shouldn't be demoted and punished financially. Something else is going on.”

This. But also, it sounds like you’re confused. And he’s not being moved to non-equity, just moved to a different tier of comp. That’s normal if his numbers are significantly different from the past. But if he doesn’t know what’s going on, he hasn’t developed the right relationships and it won’t matter how much extra non-billable work he takes on. The only way to survive in biglaw is have powerful people like you or bring in $$$$

[Anonymous]

Hmm. As a PP said, it's really hard to have sympathy when other people work just as hard and will never make that kind of money.

[Anonymous]

First, being a top biller doesn’t matter. What matters is how much he generates in billables/collections, not just for his own work but also for work others do for his clients. The most valuable partners don’t bill a whole lot of their own time, but generate a ton of billable time by others.

Second, there’s no way to know what this means without knowing whether it’s isolated to him/his practice, or is a first-wide equity restructuring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op - he’s in a very niche practice group and considered a star in his field. Unfortunately it’s not a practice group that makes a ton of money for any firm but he did collect well (95% I think last year). He works with a lot of different clients including his own and those he shares with partners in other practice areas. He does a ton of BD and markets himself a lot.
He’s involved in very important aspects of the firm (thinking hiring, pro Bono, diversity) in additional to billing a lot.
Yes, we have saved, and we will be ok. He asked if he was being softly pushed out and was told no, that this was simply an across the board reduction. His closest partner in his group was also down 25%.

Don't kid yourself. These are all areas that are going to get the axe if there is a recession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op - he’s in a very niche practice group and considered a star in his field. Unfortunately it’s not a practice group that makes a ton of money for any firm but he did collect well (95% I think last year). He works with a lot of different clients including his own and those he shares with partners in other practice areas. He does a ton of BD and markets himself a lot.
He’s involved in very important aspects of the firm (thinking hiring, pro Bono, diversity) in additional to billing a lot.
Yes, we have saved, and we will be ok. He asked if he was being softly pushed out and was told no, that this was simply an across the board reduction. His closest partner in his group was also down 25%.

The new hotness in law firm management is a laser-like focus on the profitability of a particular practice, as measured by a host of debatable metrics. If his practice area can’t justify the high fees and high levels of leverage currently being demanded at major law firms, his days are likely numbered no matter how many hours or how high the collection rates, with non-equity status or the need to move to a different and less profitable kind of firm pretty foreseeable. Firms are very focused on shedding lower margin practices IME.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First, being a top biller doesn’t matter. What matters is how much he generates in billables/collections, not just for his own work but also for work others do for his clients. The most valuable partners don’t bill a whole lot of their own time, but generate a ton of billable time by others.

Second, there’s no way to know what this means without knowing whether it’s isolated to him/his practice, or is a first-wide equity restructuring.

This guy gets it. It's not about the hours he bills, it's about how much he originates. Being a high biller as a partner is economically the same as a high billing associate.

[Anonymous]

Cry me a river! My husband works incredibly hard, does an amazing job that really makes a difference for people who need it and earns less than $40k a year. It’s all relative. You are lucky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, being a top biller doesn’t matter. What matters is how much he generates in billables/collections, not just for his own work but also for work others do for his clients. The most valuable partners don’t bill a whole lot of their own time, but generate a ton of billable time by others.

Second, there’s no way to know what this means without knowing whether it’s isolated to him/his practice, or is a first-wide equity restructuring.

This guy gets it. It's not about the hours he bills, it's about how much he originates. Being a high biller as a partner is economically the same as a high billing associate.

Ypu mean this woman gets it.