Biglaw - twelfth-year associate??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really that much of a difference between the associate, the "counsel" paid a salary, or the income partner? They're all paid a salary and are employees, not owners -- it is just nomenclature?

I wish. My DH went from federal government to a big law firm a few years ago, to an income partner position. It was a lot easier when he was a W-2 employee, than to have to pay the quarterly estimated taxes and file a Schedule K. (I do the taxes for our household.) Also, the benefits seem very stingy (compared to my job in-house in corporate America), but maybe that's true for associates too.

I'm assuming he's making more than what he made as a Fed? How do you go from being a Fed to an income partner? How do you have a book of business coming over as a Fed? I'm assuming others in the firm are giving him the work?

Also, what type of law did he practice while a fed? And how long was a fed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really that much of a difference between the associate, the "counsel" paid a salary, or the income partner? They're all paid a salary and are employees, not owners -- it is just nomenclature?

I wish. My DH went from federal government to a big law firm a few years ago, to an income partner position. It was a lot easier when he was a W-2 employee, than to have to pay the quarterly estimated taxes and file a Schedule K. (I do the taxes for our household.) Also, the benefits seem very stingy (compared to my job in-house in corporate America), but maybe that's true for associates too.

I'm assuming he's making more than what he made as a Fed? How do you go from being a Fed to an income partner? How do you have a book of business coming over as a Fed? I'm assuming others in the firm are giving him the work?

Yes, he's making more money, but not a lot more. He thought that the firm would give him billable work, but he has had to hustle to bring in clients, which he has been pretty successful in doing (perhaps because his area is a unique niche). Even though it's not big money (compared to the federal government), he prefers working at the law firm because he's got more freedom and likes the challenge of being his own boss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really that much of a difference between the associate, the "counsel" paid a salary, or the income partner? They're all paid a salary and are employees, not owners -- it is just nomenclature?

I wish. My DH went from federal government to a big law firm a few years ago, to an income partner position. It was a lot easier when he was a W-2 employee, than to have to pay the quarterly estimated taxes and file a Schedule K. (I do the taxes for our household.) Also, the benefits seem very stingy (compared to my job in-house in corporate America), but maybe that's true for associates too.

I'm assuming he's making more than what he made as a Fed? How do you go from being a Fed to an income partner? How do you have a book of business coming over as a Fed? I'm assuming others in the firm are giving him the work?

Yes, he's making more money, but not a lot more. He thought that the firm would give him billable work, but he has had to hustle to bring in clients, which he has been pretty successful in doing (perhaps because his area is a unique niche). Even though it's not big money (compared to the federal government), he prefers working at the law firm because he's got more freedom and likes the challenge of being his own boss.

No one going to BIGLAW should ever believe they're going to be fed clients/hours unless they have that in writing with the firm. Your husband should have created a plan for developing business before he left the government. This involves being honest with yourself whether you can generate business from your business contacts. Never promise more than you can deliver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really that much of a difference between the associate, the "counsel" paid a salary, or the income partner? They're all paid a salary and are employees, not owners -- it is just nomenclature?

I wish. My DH went from federal government to a big law firm a few years ago, to an income partner position. It was a lot easier when he was a W-2 employee, than to have to pay the quarterly estimated taxes and file a Schedule K. (I do the taxes for our household.) Also, the benefits seem very stingy (compared to my job in-house in corporate America), but maybe that's true for associates too.

I'm assuming he's making more than what he made as a Fed? How do you go from being a Fed to an income partner? How do you have a book of business coming over as a Fed? I'm assuming others in the firm are giving him the work?

Yes, he's making more money, but not a lot more. He thought that the firm would give him billable work, but he has had to hustle to bring in clients, which he has been pretty successful in doing (perhaps because his area is a unique niche). Even though it's not big money (compared to the federal government), he prefers working at the law firm because he's got more freedom and likes the challenge of being his own boss.

I'm curious about what kind of payment arrangement he was given. Percentage of fees collected? Draw? Salary? Combination of these?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really that much of a difference between the associate, the "counsel" paid a salary, or the income partner? They're all paid a salary and are employees, not owners -- it is just nomenclature?

I wish. My DH went from federal government to a big law firm a few years ago, to an income partner position. It was a lot easier when he was a W-2 employee, than to have to pay the quarterly estimated taxes and file a Schedule K. (I do the taxes for our household.) Also, the benefits seem very stingy (compared to my job in-house in corporate America), but maybe that's true for associates too.

I'm assuming he's making more than what he made as a Fed? How do you go from being a Fed to an income partner? How do you have a book of business coming over as a Fed? I'm assuming others in the firm are giving him the work?

Yes, he's making more money, but not a lot more. He thought that the firm would give him billable work, but he has had to hustle to bring in clients, which he has been pretty successful in doing (perhaps because his area is a unique niche). Even though it's not big money (compared to the federal government), he prefers working at the law firm because he's got more freedom and likes the challenge of being his own boss.

I'm curious about what kind of payment arrangement he was given. Percentage of fees collected? Draw? Salary? Combination of these?

Also, I thought income partners were W-2 employees still?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really that much of a difference between the associate, the "counsel" paid a salary, or the income partner? They're all paid a salary and are employees, not owners -- it is just nomenclature?

I wish. My DH went from federal government to a big law firm a few years ago, to an income partner position. It was a lot easier when he was a W-2 employee, than to have to pay the quarterly estimated taxes and file a Schedule K. (I do the taxes for our household.) Also, the benefits seem very stingy (compared to my job in-house in corporate America), but maybe that's true for associates too.

I'm assuming he's making more than what he made as a Fed? How do you go from being a Fed to an income partner? How do you have a book of business coming over as a Fed? I'm assuming others in the firm are giving him the work?

Yes, he's making more money, but not a lot more. He thought that the firm would give him billable work, but he has had to hustle to bring in clients, which he has been pretty successful in doing (perhaps because his area is a unique niche). Even though it's not big money (compared to the federal government), he prefers working at the law firm because he's got more freedom and likes the challenge of being his own boss.

No one going to BIGLAW should ever believe they're going to be fed clients/hours unless they have that in writing with the firm. Your husband should have created a plan for developing business before he left the government. This involves being honest with yourself whether you can generate business from your business contacts. Never promise more than you can deliver.

I think my DH is a big more savvy that your perception, but sure, it was perhaps not a seamless transition. He had reason to believe that they could use his expertise with existing clients. No matter, he's been able to build up a book of business (good well-regarded companies). He serves his own clients, and does not use associates. He's not making a ton of money (more than a fed), but he's content and has a good quality of life. The firm seems to like him. But if they want to ditch him, that's OK and he's confident that his firm will follow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really that much of a difference between the associate, the "counsel" paid a salary, or the income partner? They're all paid a salary and are employees, not owners -- it is just nomenclature?

I wish. My DH went from federal government to a big law firm a few years ago, to an income partner position. It was a lot easier when he was a W-2 employee, than to have to pay the quarterly estimated taxes and file a Schedule K. (I do the taxes for our household.) Also, the benefits seem very stingy (compared to my job in-house in corporate America), but maybe that's true for associates too.

I'm assuming he's making more than what he made as a Fed? How do you go from being a Fed to an income partner? How do you have a book of business coming over as a Fed? I'm assuming others in the firm are giving him the work?

Yes, he's making more money, but not a lot more. He thought that the firm would give him billable work, but he has had to hustle to bring in clients, which he has been pretty successful in doing (perhaps because his area is a unique niche). Even though it's not big money (compared to the federal government), he prefers working at the law firm because he's got more freedom and likes the challenge of being his own boss.

No one going to BIGLAW should ever believe they're going to be fed clients/hours unless they have that in writing with the firm. Your husband should have created a plan for developing business before he left the government. This involves being honest with yourself whether you can generate business from your business contacts. Never promise more than you can deliver.

I think my DH is a big more savvy that your perception, but sure, it was perhaps not a seamless transition. He had reason to believe that they could use his expertise with existing clients. No matter, he's been able to build up a book of business (good well-regarded companies). He serves his own clients, and does not use associates. He's not making a ton of money (more than a fed), but he's content and has a good quality of life. The firm seems to like him. But if they want to ditch him, that's OK and he's confident that his firm will follow.

Kind of off topic, but I'm curious how he built a book of business from the ground up within a few years coming out of the federal government. It seems like it would be a challenge coming from an environment where there is zero expectation of having to get clients.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really that much of a difference between the associate, the "counsel" paid a salary, or the income partner? They're all paid a salary and are employees, not owners -- it is just nomenclature?

I wish. My DH went from federal government to a big law firm a few years ago, to an income partner position. It was a lot easier when he was a W-2 employee, than to have to pay the quarterly estimated taxes and file a Schedule K. (I do the taxes for our household.) Also, the benefits seem very stingy (compared to my job in-house in corporate America), but maybe that's true for associates too.

I'm assuming he's making more than what he made as a Fed? How do you go from being a Fed to an income partner? How do you have a book of business coming over as a Fed? I'm assuming others in the firm are giving him the work?

Yes, he's making more money, but not a lot more. He thought that the firm would give him billable work, but he has had to hustle to bring in clients, which he has been pretty successful in doing (perhaps because his area is a unique niche). Even though it's not big money (compared to the federal government), he prefers working at the law firm because he's got more freedom and likes the challenge of being his own boss.

No one going to BIGLAW should ever believe they're going to be fed clients/hours unless they have that in writing with the firm. Your husband should have created a plan for developing business before he left the government. This involves being honest with yourself whether you can generate business from your business contacts. Never promise more than you can deliver.

I think my DH is a big more savvy that your perception, but sure, it was perhaps not a seamless transition. He had reason to believe that they could use his expertise with existing clients. No matter, he's been able to build up a book of business (good well-regarded companies). He serves his own clients, and does not use associates. He's not making a ton of money (more than a fed), but he's content and has a good quality of life. The firm seems to like him. But if they want to ditch him, that's OK and he's confident that his firm will follow.

Kind of off topic, but I'm curious how he built a book of business from the ground up within a few years coming out of the federal government. It seems like it would be a challenge coming from an environment where there is zero expectation of having to get clients.

OP indicated her DH was in a niche area. With niche practice areas, you tend to get to know the private practice lawyers and in-house counsel who practice in that area. If they think you're someone who: (a) was a reasonable regulatory to deal with, and (b) really knows the law and how your agency will respond in a given situation, you'll attract business pretty quickly. Anecdotally, I know a woman who specializes in an area of tax law and helped write the regulations when she was at Treasury. She's had no problem at all getting clients.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would someone like that make? $400K base + bonus?

550 base and 450-500 bonus.

I find this hard to believe. Probably more like $415,000 base and bonus potential of no more than $150,000.

If I was a 8+ year associate I would definitely try to cap myself at around 600k total as that is about 1.8 mil revenue, pretty easy to generate at a top firm.

To put that in context the GS pay scale tops out at 180k, SESs cap out at 220k working 50+ hours, DC corporate executives at the VP level will rarely make over 400k, surgeons make 500-700k, and financial regulators top out at 275k. If you are in a niche big law practice, 600k is great. Take the rest of the time to build client base and lateral to junior partner or senior in-house role. DC biglaw employees are insanely rich by all local metrics.

$1.8 revenue for an associate is about as good as it gets, in my experience. There are always write-offs, write-downs, whatever your firm’s jargon is, and the result is that only 1850-1950 of those 2000 hours ultimately get paid to the client. 2,000 hours billed per year, at an hourly rate of $900, if paid in full (not happening), is $1.8M. Again, paying an associate $600k is borderline unsustainable in my opinion. But I’m just a non-equity partner so what do I know.

by 12th year associate you are billing 1300 to 1600.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would someone like that make? $400K base + bonus?

550 base and 450-500 bonus.

I find this hard to believe. Probably more like $415,000 base and bonus potential of no more than $150,000.

If I was a 8+ year associate I would definitely try to cap myself at around 600k total as that is about 1.8 mil revenue, pretty easy to generate at a top firm.

To put that in context the GS pay scale tops out at 180k, SESs cap out at 220k working 50+ hours, DC corporate executives at the VP level will rarely make over 400k, surgeons make 500-700k, and financial regulators top out at 275k. If you are in a niche big law practice, 600k is great. Take the rest of the time to build client base and lateral to junior partner or senior in-house role. DC biglaw employees are insanely rich by all local metrics.

$1.8 revenue for an associate is about as good as it gets, in my experience. There are always write-offs, write-downs, whatever your firm’s jargon is, and the result is that only 1850-1950 of those 2000 hours ultimately get paid to the client. 2,000 hours billed per year, at an hourly rate of $900, if paid in full (not happening), is $1.8M. Again, paying an associate $600k is borderline unsustainable in my opinion. But I’m just a non-equity partner so what do I know.

by 12th year associate you are billing 1300 to 1600.

LOL LOL LOL where???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would someone like that make? $400K base + bonus?

550 base and 450-500 bonus.

I find this hard to believe. Probably more like $415,000 base and bonus potential of no more than $150,000.

If I was a 8+ year associate I would definitely try to cap myself at around 600k total as that is about 1.8 mil revenue, pretty easy to generate at a top firm.

To put that in context the GS pay scale tops out at 180k, SESs cap out at 220k working 50+ hours, DC corporate executives at the VP level will rarely make over 400k, surgeons make 500-700k, and financial regulators top out at 275k. If you are in a niche big law practice, 600k is great. Take the rest of the time to build client base and lateral to junior partner or senior in-house role. DC biglaw employees are insanely rich by all local metrics.

$1.8 revenue for an associate is about as good as it gets, in my experience. There are always write-offs, write-downs, whatever your firm’s jargon is, and the result is that only 1850-1950 of those 2000 hours ultimately get paid to the client. 2,000 hours billed per year, at an hourly rate of $900, if paid in full (not happening), is $1.8M. Again, paying an associate $600k is borderline unsustainable in my opinion. But I’m just a non-equity partner so what do I know.

6th year biglaw here already generating $1.8M revenue (1800 hr @ $1000/hr).

Are you sure that you're actually billing at $1k an hour? I'm client with a $20m litigation/regulatory budget and we don't pay that for a 6th year, even at tippy top firms. We have discounted rates.

+1. Almost every major client has discounted rates. No 6th year associate billing 1800 hours is bringing in $1.8 million because no 6th year associate anywhere is being billed out to every client they work for at their full hourly rate.

I find the $1,000/hr figure for a 6th year associate rather questionable. For a mid-level partner or highly-specialized Of Counsel, maybe...

Word to the wise, if you're making BIGLAW money, that gravy train will end unless you build your own book ($1M+ in origination) or have someone to feed you billable hours (i.e. a client willing to pay for your work, not the partner's work). Also, it's also a good idea to acquire a bit of humility if you're looking to move in-house. There are plenty of incredibly smart, ambitious, and politically savvy in-house counsel who can make or break your career. They are trusted by the business leaders who make money for their companies, which in turn makes your BIGLAW money possible in the first place.

Mid-level partner is $1600-$1900. Counsel the same. 1,000 for a 6th year does not seem off.

Yes there are discounted rates but don't assume the average discount is all that great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would someone like that make? $400K base + bonus?

550 base and 450-500 bonus.

I find this hard to believe. Probably more like $415,000 base and bonus potential of no more than $150,000.

If I was a 8+ year associate I would definitely try to cap myself at around 600k total as that is about 1.8 mil revenue, pretty easy to generate at a top firm.

To put that in context the GS pay scale tops out at 180k, SESs cap out at 220k working 50+ hours, DC corporate executives at the VP level will rarely make over 400k, surgeons make 500-700k, and financial regulators top out at 275k. If you are in a niche big law practice, 600k is great. Take the rest of the time to build client base and lateral to junior partner or senior in-house role. DC biglaw employees are insanely rich by all local metrics.

$1.8 revenue for an associate is about as good as it gets, in my experience. There are always write-offs, write-downs, whatever your firm’s jargon is, and the result is that only 1850-1950 of those 2000 hours ultimately get paid to the client. 2,000 hours billed per year, at an hourly rate of $900, if paid in full (not happening), is $1.8M. Again, paying an associate $600k is borderline unsustainable in my opinion. But I’m just a non-equity partner so what do I know.

6th year biglaw here already generating $1.8M revenue (1800 hr @ $1000/hr).

Are you sure that you're actually billing at $1k an hour? I'm client with a $20m litigation/regulatory budget and we don't pay that for a 6th year, even at tippy top firms. We have discounted rates.

+1. Almost every major client has discounted rates. No 6th year associate billing 1800 hours is bringing in $1.8 million because no 6th year associate anywhere is being billed out to every client they work for at their full hourly rate.

I find the $1,000/hr figure for a 6th year associate rather questionable. For a mid-level partner or highly-specialized Of Counsel, maybe...

Word to the wise, if you're making BIGLAW money, that gravy train will end unless you build your own book ($1M+ in origination) or have someone to feed you billable hours (i.e. a client willing to pay for your work, not the partner's work). Also, it's also a good idea to acquire a bit of humility if you're looking to move in-house. There are plenty of incredibly smart, ambitious, and politically savvy in-house counsel who can make or break your career. They are trusted by the business leaders who make money for their companies, which in turn makes your BIGLAW money possible in the first place.

Mid-level partner is $1600-$1900. Counsel the same. 1,000 for a 6th year does not seem off.

Yes there are discounted rates but don't assume the average discount is all that great.

The rates in the previous two posts seem way off. I'm at a very expensive, prestigious biglaw firm and those are the kind of rates that only the most high-profile senior partners bill at. Very talented mid-level partners bill at more like 1300-1500.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would someone like that make? $400K base + bonus?

550 base and 450-500 bonus.

I find this hard to believe. Probably more like $415,000 base and bonus potential of no more than $150,000.

If I was a 8+ year associate I would definitely try to cap myself at around 600k total as that is about 1.8 mil revenue, pretty easy to generate at a top firm.

To put that in context the GS pay scale tops out at 180k, SESs cap out at 220k working 50+ hours, DC corporate executives at the VP level will rarely make over 400k, surgeons make 500-700k, and financial regulators top out at 275k. If you are in a niche big law practice, 600k is great. Take the rest of the time to build client base and lateral to junior partner or senior in-house role. DC biglaw employees are insanely rich by all local metrics.

$1.8 revenue for an associate is about as good as it gets, in my experience. There are always write-offs, write-downs, whatever your firm’s jargon is, and the result is that only 1850-1950 of those 2000 hours ultimately get paid to the client. 2,000 hours billed per year, at an hourly rate of $900, if paid in full (not happening), is $1.8M. Again, paying an associate $600k is borderline unsustainable in my opinion. But I’m just a non-equity partner so what do I know.

6th year biglaw here already generating $1.8M revenue (1800 hr @ $1000/hr).

Are you sure that you're actually billing at $1k an hour? I'm client with a $20m litigation/regulatory budget and we don't pay that for a 6th year, even at tippy top firms. We have discounted rates.

+1. Almost every major client has discounted rates. No 6th year associate billing 1800 hours is bringing in $1.8 million because no 6th year associate anywhere is being billed out to every client they work for at their full hourly rate.

I find the $1,000/hr figure for a 6th year associate rather questionable. For a mid-level partner or highly-specialized Of Counsel, maybe...

Word to the wise, if you're making BIGLAW money, that gravy train will end unless you build your own book ($1M+ in origination) or have someone to feed you billable hours (i.e. a client willing to pay for your work, not the partner's work). Also, it's also a good idea to acquire a bit of humility if you're looking to move in-house. There are plenty of incredibly smart, ambitious, and politically savvy in-house counsel who can make or break your career. They are trusted by the business leaders who make money for their companies, which in turn makes your BIGLAW money possible in the first place.

Mid-level partner is $1600-$1900. Counsel the same. 1,000 for a 6th year does not seem off.

Yes there are discounted rates but don't assume the average discount is all that great.

The rates in the previous two posts seem way off. I'm at a very expensive, prestigious biglaw firm and those are the kind of rates that only the most high-profile senior partners bill at. Very talented mid-level partners bill at more like 1300-1500.

We recently did a RFP for a big new case at the corporation where I work. We requested bids from 4 very top firms, and all 4 responded. A few of the partners in these firms charge $2000 per firm. That rate just seemed kind of tone deaf to us (as if they were trying to take advantage of the company's profitability), and so we chose the "cheapest" of the 4 firms, as they were all equally impressive.

[Anonymous]

I'm a non-partner at a top biglaw firm. I'm in a prominent practice group. I've been practicing for almost two decades, but the first half was not at a firm, so I kind of started over when I came here. My reviews have consistently said my work is at the absolute highest level. I consistently bill 2000 hours. I consistently originate at least $500k. I run matters and manage client relationships. And my group has put me up for partner multiple times, but management rejects me every time entirely for business reasons. It's single-tier; I'm 100% certain I'd be at least an income partner at any two-tier firm. My firm is thrilled to have me stay on, since they're making about $2 mil off me annually. On the one hand, I make more money than 99.9% of the population. On the other hand, it seems like all my peers, and a lot of junior people who couldn't even shine my shoes as a lawyer, have made partner at my firm and others, and it really sucks because of the money, status, and control they get. But I'm basically trapped unless I want to take a huge pay cut to go into government or a nonprofit, which I don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would someone like that make? $400K base + bonus?

550 base and 450-500 bonus.

I find this hard to believe. Probably more like $415,000 base and bonus potential of no more than $150,000.

If I was a 8+ year associate I would definitely try to cap myself at around 600k total as that is about 1.8 mil revenue, pretty easy to generate at a top firm.

To put that in context the GS pay scale tops out at 180k, SESs cap out at 220k working 50+ hours, DC corporate executives at the VP level will rarely make over 400k, surgeons make 500-700k, and financial regulators top out at 275k. If you are in a niche big law practice, 600k is great. Take the rest of the time to build client base and lateral to junior partner or senior in-house role. DC biglaw employees are insanely rich by all local metrics.

$1.8 revenue for an associate is about as good as it gets, in my experience. There are always write-offs, write-downs, whatever your firm’s jargon is, and the result is that only 1850-1950 of those 2000 hours ultimately get paid to the client. 2,000 hours billed per year, at an hourly rate of $900, if paid in full (not happening), is $1.8M. Again, paying an associate $600k is borderline unsustainable in my opinion. But I’m just a non-equity partner so what do I know.

by 12th year associate you are billing 1300 to 1600.

LOL LOL LOL where???

Yea this is a ridiculous comment. No client is going to pay that much for an associate regardless of what year they are. It’s so obvious on threads like these who actually IS a Biglaw partner and who isn’t.