Awful. I'm a legal librarian in gov't and you just reminded me why I stay away from those BIG LAW firms. Can you go back to school and retrain for something where you don't have to work with attorneys? Ick.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you want more money, you will never get it the way you are going about it. You don't ask for more money because you NEED it. You ask for more money because you EARNED it.

You have to put together a compelling reason for the firm to pay you more than you make now. What makes you valuable? What have you done that adds to their bottom line in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, customer service, building work relationships for/with your boss, etc? If you don't have an objective reason that you should be paid more, it's not the right time to ask. Have a plan for making yourself more valuable to the firm and then act on it and ask later.

I hate to say it, but run-of-the-mill legal assistants are a dime a dozen in DC. You don't have any leverage unless you become more than run-of-the-mill in your boss's eyes. Once you're indispensible, you have all sorts of bargaining power to ask for more money.

And stop with the comparison of your boss's salary to yours. He probably works his ass off for that salary - and he chose a career that has high income potential, and became indispensible enough to be selected as a partner. It's obnoxious that he complains about money to you, but his salary has no bearing on yours.

I agree with this, especially the bolded parts. I think the OP sounds totally entitled. Yes. it's obnoxious that he complains, but bottom line is, he is much more valuable to the firm than you are. I don't expect my salary to be a percentage of/related to my boss's - it's an independent calculation based on my own merits and comps of others who do what I do.

And although it's harsh, I think it can help you argue for a wage increase in the future. Your boss at least *feels* entitled to his salary because he probably paid his dues, puts in a TON of hours, and has that big fancy law degree. And he also figured out how to make himself valuable to his firm to up his earning potential. So this is the man that you need to convince that you're work the extra 3k or whatever.

A 3-4% increase isn't bad, honestly.

I agree that it's not bad (not the OP but the poster whose firm did the 3-4% increase). That was the maximum anyone could get, for anything. My issue was less with the actual amount, but with the way that one would get the maximum increase. My issue was the same 3-4% for a person who works for 2 people as a person who works for 6 people, for a person who works straight 9-5 as a person who works a ton of overtime doing trial prep work. One could argue that overtime pay is compensation for working overtime, and I wouldn't disagree, but I also think that going above and beyond and becoming indispensable in that capacity should have some possibility of additional compensation. The policy was that 3-4% was the maximum anyone could get. There was no bonus structure, and the 9-5er who gets good reviews for doing consistently average work gets the same 3-5% that I got for doing consistently stellar work.

It was a firm policy, but not totally uncommon in my experience.

As for the OP's boss, it sounds like he's just kind of a clueless brat on this issue. As for "working his ass off" for his salary, I'd like to believe that's true, but one of the partners I worked for got the same $700k the year that he spent 3 hours a day sleeping in his office right before going home early.

Original PP here. Two things to remember:

1. Law firms are NOT the best place for fair management and promotion/raise possibilities. They are largely managed by attorneys rather than OD or HR professionals who attempt to create growth opportunities to retain staff (attorneys usually do not have the background for this). If you're looking for perfectly fair treatment -- well, it doesn't exist. But it's more likely that you'll be treated as fairly as possible elsewhere in the private sector, say at a large contractor or a professional services firm.

2. That partner you're talking about may be napping 3 hours a day, but trust me, if he weren't bringing in mad money (which is usually a result of years of backbreaking work and networking), the firm would fire his ass ASAP. After the legal services crash around 2008, lawyers who don't either work like dogs or have a huge book are not kept around. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323689604578221891691032424.html) It's possible you worked for this person pre-2008, in which case, I have no idea what the circumstances are/were, but the fact is, even making partner in the first place takes a ton of work. He may have been napping because he's up late working every night.

My point about my former boss was not that he doesn't deserve his salary or that everyone does that. It was simply that it should not just be ASSUMED that every person making a high salary continues to maintain a high standard of work. The behavior in question happened in 2011. It certainly wasn't ideal, but I actually have never heard of a partner at this particular firm being dismissed, even under some pretty egregious circumstances.

My larger point was that there are many structural problems in the BigLaw industry. My current firm is nothing like my previous firm. They seem to have made better choices and prioritized quality of worklife for people at all levels of employment in a way that my previous firm really did not. There is a difference between lipservice appreciation of people's contributions and meaningful appreciation of people's contributions. In my opinion, meaningful appreciation would be to have an updated and comprehensive understanding of people's individual jobs and slightly more nuanced compensation based on those jobs and the performance in that review cycle. I personally received exactly the same 3% raise the year I worked 12 hour days most of the year while my other boss ran a couple different DOJ investigations and made partner as I did the year that I spent 3 months phoning it in prior to maternity leave and 6 months on maternity leave and another 3 months being sleep deprived and getting back up to speed on everything I've missed. While I'm obviously glad for the 3% I got the year that I did the bare minimum, I also wish it was more possible to extend bonuses for truly excellent work. Not just mine, but the work of the colleague that covered for me while I was out for 6 months or the colleague who works for 6 people instead of 3 or the colleague who always goes out of her way to see if anyone needs any help. I think such efforts and quality should be recognized by MORE than the minimum increase, but that firm did not have any allowance for bonuses like that, which is one reason that I left.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you want more money, you will never get it the way you are going about it. You don't ask for more money because you NEED it. You ask for more money because you EARNED it.

You have to put together a compelling reason for the firm to pay you more than you make now. What makes you valuable? What have you done that adds to their bottom line in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, customer service, building work relationships for/with your boss, etc? If you don't have an objective reason that you should be paid more, it's not the right time to ask. Have a plan for making yourself more valuable to the firm and then act on it and ask later.

I hate to say it, but run-of-the-mill legal assistants are a dime a dozen in DC. You don't have any leverage unless you become more than run-of-the-mill in your boss's eyes. Once you're indispensible, you have all sorts of bargaining power to ask for more money.

And stop with the comparison of your boss's salary to yours. He probably works his ass off for that salary - and he chose a career that has high income potential, and became indispensible enough to be selected as a partner. It's obnoxious that he complains about money to you, but his salary has no bearing on yours.

I agree with this, especially the bolded parts. I think the OP sounds totally entitled. Yes. it's obnoxious that he complains, but bottom line is, he is much more valuable to the firm than you are. I don't expect my salary to be a percentage of/related to my boss's - it's an independent calculation based on my own merits and comps of others who do what I do.

OP here. I don't expect my salary to be a percentage of/related to my boss. Where did I ever say that? And, I was NOT trying to say my boss doensn't deserve his salary. He works very hard for it and totally deserves it. I was only meaning to say, how can someone who finds it hard to live off that much money, and constantly complains about it, say that what I make is "a lot".

Anonymous wrote:Don't they give 4 figure cash bonuses tho at yearend to their assistants?

OP here, are you joking?? My firm doesn't give holiday bonuses to staff at all. The attorneys I work for generally give me a $50 - $100 gift card as a Christmas gift....last year, one gave me some "designer" soap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you want more money, you will never get it the way you are going about it. You don't ask for more money because you NEED it. You ask for more money because you EARNED it.

You have to put together a compelling reason for the firm to pay you more than you make now. What makes you valuable? What have you done that adds to their bottom line in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, customer service, building work relationships for/with your boss, etc? If you don't have an objective reason that you should be paid more, it's not the right time to ask. Have a plan for making yourself more valuable to the firm and then act on it and ask later.

I hate to say it, but run-of-the-mill legal assistants are a dime a dozen in DC. You don't have any leverage unless you become more than run-of-the-mill in your boss's eyes. Once you're indispensible, you have all sorts of bargaining power to ask for more money.

And stop with the comparison of your boss's salary to yours. He probably works his ass off for that salary - and he chose a career that has high income potential, and became indispensible enough to be selected as a partner. It's obnoxious that he complains about money to you, but his salary has no bearing on yours.

I agree with this, especially the bolded parts. I think the OP sounds totally entitled. Yes. it's obnoxious that he complains, but bottom line is, he is much more valuable to the firm than you are. I don't expect my salary to be a percentage of/related to my boss's - it's an independent calculation based on my own merits and comps of others who do what I do.

And although it's harsh, I think it can help you argue for a wage increase in the future. Your boss at least *feels* entitled to his salary because he probably paid his dues, puts in a TON of hours, and has that big fancy law degree. And he also figured out how to make himself valuable to his firm to up his earning potential. So this is the man that you need to convince that you're work the extra 3k or whatever.

A 3-4% increase isn't bad, honestly.

I agree that it's not bad (not the OP but the poster whose firm did the 3-4% increase). That was the maximum anyone could get, for anything. My issue was less with the actual amount, but with the way that one would get the maximum increase. My issue was the same 3-4% for a person who works for 2 people as a person who works for 6 people, for a person who works straight 9-5 as a person who works a ton of overtime doing trial prep work. One could argue that overtime pay is compensation for working overtime, and I wouldn't disagree, but I also think that going above and beyond and becoming indispensable in that capacity should have some possibility of additional compensation. The policy was that 3-4% was the maximum anyone could get. There was no bonus structure, and the 9-5er who gets good reviews for doing consistently average work gets the same 3-5% that I got for doing consistently stellar work.

It was a firm policy, but not totally uncommon in my experience.

As for the OP's boss, it sounds like he's just kind of a clueless brat on this issue. As for "working his ass off" for his salary, I'd like to believe that's true, but one of the partners I worked for got the same $700k the year that he spent 3 hours a day sleeping in his office right before going home early.

Original PP here. Two things to remember:

1. Law firms are NOT the best place for fair management and promotion/raise possibilities. They are largely managed by attorneys rather than OD or HR professionals who attempt to create growth opportunities to retain staff (attorneys usually do not have the background for this). If you're looking for perfectly fair treatment -- well, it doesn't exist. But it's more likely that you'll be treated as fairly as possible elsewhere in the private sector, say at a large contractor or a professional services firm.

2. That partner you're talking about may be napping 3 hours a day, but trust me, if he weren't bringing in mad money (which is usually a result of years of backbreaking work and networking), the firm would fire his ass ASAP. After the legal services crash around 2008, lawyers who don't either work like dogs or have a huge book are not kept around. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323689604578221891691032424.html) It's possible you worked for this person pre-2008, in which case, I have no idea what the circumstances are/were, but the fact is, even making partner in the first place takes a ton of work. He may have been napping because he's up late working every night.

I think rather than focusing on how much he makes, it would be more useful for you to present information on how much legal assistants with comparable experience to you make. That would be more compelling in establishing that you should receive a raise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you want more money, you will never get it the way you are going about it. You don't ask for more money because you NEED it. You ask for more money because you EARNED it.

You have to put together a compelling reason for the firm to pay you more than you make now. What makes you valuable? What have you done that adds to their bottom line in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, customer service, building work relationships for/with your boss, etc? If you don't have an objective reason that you should be paid more, it's not the right time to ask. Have a plan for making yourself more valuable to the firm and then act on it and ask later.

I hate to say it, but run-of-the-mill legal assistants are a dime a dozen in DC. You don't have any leverage unless you become more than run-of-the-mill in your boss's eyes. Once you're indispensible, you have all sorts of bargaining power to ask for more money.

And stop with the comparison of your boss's salary to yours. He probably works his ass off for that salary - and he chose a career that has high income potential, and became indispensible enough to be selected as a partner. It's obnoxious that he complains about money to you, but his salary has no bearing on yours.

I agree with this, especially the bolded parts. I think the OP sounds totally entitled. Yes. it's obnoxious that he complains, but bottom line is, he is much more valuable to the firm than you are. I don't expect my salary to be a percentage of/related to my boss's - it's an independent calculation based on my own merits and comps of others who do what I do.

And although it's harsh, I think it can help you argue for a wage increase in the future. Your boss at least *feels* entitled to his salary because he probably paid his dues, puts in a TON of hours, and has that big fancy law degree. And he also figured out how to make himself valuable to his firm to up his earning potential. So this is the man that you need to convince that you're work the extra 3k or whatever.

A 3-4% increase isn't bad, honestly.

I agree that it's not bad (not the OP but the poster whose firm did the 3-4% increase). That was the maximum anyone could get, for anything. My issue was less with the actual amount, but with the way that one would get the maximum increase. My issue was the same 3-4% for a person who works for 2 people as a person who works for 6 people, for a person who works straight 9-5 as a person who works a ton of overtime doing trial prep work. One could argue that overtime pay is compensation for working overtime, and I wouldn't disagree, but I also think that going above and beyond and becoming indispensable in that capacity should have some possibility of additional compensation. The policy was that 3-4% was the maximum anyone could get. There was no bonus structure, and the 9-5er who gets good reviews for doing consistently average work gets the same 3-5% that I got for doing consistently stellar work.

It was a firm policy, but not totally uncommon in my experience.

As for the OP's boss, it sounds like he's just kind of a clueless brat on this issue. As for "working his ass off" for his salary, I'd like to believe that's true, but one of the partners I worked for got the same $700k the year that he spent 3 hours a day sleeping in his office right before going home early.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you want more money, you will never get it the way you are going about it. You don't ask for more money because you NEED it. You ask for more money because you EARNED it.

You have to put together a compelling reason for the firm to pay you more than you make now. What makes you valuable? What have you done that adds to their bottom line in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, customer service, building work relationships for/with your boss, etc? If you don't have an objective reason that you should be paid more, it's not the right time to ask. Have a plan for making yourself more valuable to the firm and then act on it and ask later.

I hate to say it, but run-of-the-mill legal assistants are a dime a dozen in DC. You don't have any leverage unless you become more than run-of-the-mill in your boss's eyes. Once you're indispensible, you have all sorts of bargaining power to ask for more money.

And stop with the comparison of your boss's salary to yours. He probably works his ass off for that salary - and he chose a career that has high income potential, and became indispensible enough to be selected as a partner. It's obnoxious that he complains about money to you, but his salary has no bearing on yours.

I agree with this, especially the bolded parts. I think the OP sounds totally entitled. Yes. it's obnoxious that he complains, but bottom line is, he is much more valuable to the firm than you are. I don't expect my salary to be a percentage of/related to my boss's - it's an independent calculation based on my own merits and comps of others who do what I do.

And although it's harsh, I think it can help you argue for a wage increase in the future. Your boss at least *feels* entitled to his salary because he probably paid his dues, puts in a TON of hours, and has that big fancy law degree. And he also figured out how to make himself valuable to his firm to up his earning potential. So this is the man that you need to convince that you're work the extra 3k or whatever.

A 3-4% increase isn't bad, honestly.

Don't they give 4 figure cash bonuses tho at yearend to their assistants?

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you want more money, you will never get it the way you are going about it. You don't ask for more money because you NEED it. You ask for more money because you EARNED it.

You have to put together a compelling reason for the firm to pay you more than you make now. What makes you valuable? What have you done that adds to their bottom line in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, customer service, building work relationships for/with your boss, etc? If you don't have an objective reason that you should be paid more, it's not the right time to ask. Have a plan for making yourself more valuable to the firm and then act on it and ask later.

I hate to say it, but run-of-the-mill legal assistants are a dime a dozen in DC. You don't have any leverage unless you become more than run-of-the-mill in your boss's eyes. Once you're indispensible, you have all sorts of bargaining power to ask for more money.

And stop with the comparison of your boss's salary to yours. He probably works his ass off for that salary - and he chose a career that has high income potential, and became indispensible enough to be selected as a partner. It's obnoxious that he complains about money to you, but his salary has no bearing on yours.

I agree with this, especially the bolded parts. I think the OP sounds totally entitled. Yes. it's obnoxious that he complains, but bottom line is, he is much more valuable to the firm than you are. I don't expect my salary to be a percentage of/related to my boss's - it's an independent calculation based on my own merits and comps of others who do what I do.

OP, if you want more money, you will never get it the way you are going about it. You don't ask for more money because you NEED it. You ask for more money because you EARNED it.

You have to put together a compelling reason for the firm to pay you more than you make now. What makes you valuable? What have you done that adds to their bottom line in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, customer service, building work relationships for/with your boss, etc? If you don't have an objective reason that you should be paid more, it's not the right time to ask. Have a plan for making yourself more valuable to the firm and then act on it and ask later.

I hate to say it, but run-of-the-mill legal assistants are a dime a dozen in DC. You don't have any leverage unless you become more than run-of-the-mill in your boss's eyes. Once you're indispensible, you have all sorts of bargaining power to ask for more money.

And stop with the comparison of your boss's salary to yours. He probably works his ass off for that salary - and he chose a career that has high income potential, and became indispensible enough to be selected as a partner. It's obnoxious that he complains about money to you, but his salary has no bearing on yours.

There are a lot of really great BigLaw attorneys in this town. I know this because I've worked for several. I posted at 14:27 on the 24th.

It's possible that the OP works for a jerk. Those exist too. I know this because I've worked for them as well. I also know that the lifestyle I'm accustomed to at $55,000/year is pretty different from the lifestyle my boss is used to at $500,000/year.

One of the things that has always bothered me about the culture of the firms I've been in was sort of mentioned by the BigLaw associate above. Compensation (at least in the two firms I've worked in here) is only partially dependent on your actual job performance. At my previous firm, only 50% of my review came from the attorneys I work for directly. The other 50% came from HR and was based on things like attendance and willingness to help out with projects assigned to/by the admin department itself. The woman who wrote that 50% of my review was someone I saw maybe 10 times a year in the coffee room plus my review meeting. She did not have a good understanding of what the daily responsibilities of my job were. Given that, she didn't really understand the times when I did truly go above and beyond the call of duty. I could show up to work 50 weeks of the year, on time, and as far as they were concerned, that was all that mattered. There were other admins who would show up 50 weeks a year, on time, and sit around and shop on the internet while other people did their work for them, and they'd get the same glowing review from HR and the same 3% raise that those of us who were doing their work for them would get. It was not a fair compensation structure, and is one of the reasons I left that firm.

I always appreciated the glowing reviews that my attorneys gave me at that firm, but I also understood that those reviews were pretty much meaningless. The incentives to do an amazing job instead of an acceptable one were not high.

Anonymous wrote:I would try to move to govt or another firm if I was you. How do you know he makes 750k? I'm curious about partner salaries.

I work for 2 partners, and they both have me scan their K-1's when they get them, so I see how much they made that year. The boss I'm talking about here made 750k last year, but he was just promoted, so will definitely make more this year. The other partner made about 1.7m last year - he is also the chairperson of our group.

Anonymous wrote:He's an asshole is probably paying alimony to multiple ex wives.

He doesn't have any ex-wives, he's still married to his first wife and they have 3 kids together. She's a SAHM.

I would try to move to govt or another firm if I was you. How do you know he makes 750k? I'm curious about partner salaries. Anyways I never worked with a more self-absorbed and miserable group of people as I did in a law firm. Not to excuse it but most people in that bracket know that income (unless you have a portable book) will be difficult if not impossible to replicate if they are let go.