Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
harveyspecter993

Bay Street Bonuses

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Jaggers said:

I have represented Bay St law firms in lawsuits where associate compensation is the principal issue. I have some understanding of this issue.

But did you talk to their recruiter? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

I must have fallen asleep in US history, because I always thought slaves were rather well known for not being compensated well :rolleyes:

OMG, please not the "slavies" conversation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jaggers said:

I have represented Bay St law firms in lawsuits where associate compensation is the principal issue. I have some understanding of this issue.

So what your opinion? I would love for you to share it.

I said: Davies pays the highest in Toronto for early associates at any large Canadian firm, because they have a bonus and profit sharing system that guarantees a higher compensation than the highest bonus and total compensation you can get at another firm. For example, higher than 110k + 30%.

What is your information that you want to bring forward? Do you have some information to tell that disproves what I said?

Edited by chirico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/06/2018 at 10:25 PM, Coolname said:

Isn't there also that satellite New York firm in Toronto that pays on the New York scale?

 

which would make the claim patently false

Skadden?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rearden said:

Skadden?

Yup, just searched it on nalp, 180 usd for first year associates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's true that Davies' recruiters are showing applicants a chart purporting to detail the internal compensation structure of other firms, which is information that is (a) often in flux, (b) increasingly holistic and (c) confidential from even their own senior associates, that's concerning.  Less because it suggests corporate espionage and more because it can only be an estimate held out to be true.

I stand by my comment that it's entirely likely that of Canadian law firms, Davies pays the most in terms of lockstep.  (After a couple of years, any firm will go out of its way to super-compensate a superstar.)  I also stand by my comment that it's impossible to know for sure.  And now I'm also disturbed at a potentially unfair and misleading practice.

For the time being, I'll remain sceptical that this occurred; not because I disbelieve our poster but because I prefer to give Davies the benefit of the doubt that there was some misunderstanding.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I was recently speaking to a buddy of mine who's an equity partner at Davies and he let slip what he pulls in - I was floored, it was close to double what I would have expected relative to other firms.  

They do pay more - so long as you don't do the math on an hourly basis.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chirico said:

So what your opinion? I would love for you to share it.

I said: Davies pays the highest in Toronto for early associates at any large Canadian firm, because they have a bonus and profit sharing system that guarantees a higher compensation than the highest bonus and total compensation you can get at another firm. For example, higher than 110k + 30%.

What is your information that you want to bring forward? Do you have some information to tell that disproves what I said?

One of my colleagues got a six-figure bonus as a fifth-year associate.  I don't know how much profit-sharing the folks at Davies get, but facts like that tend to problematize the sweeping statement that Firm A pays more than Firm B.  It's impossible to know if Davies would have done the same, or valued the associate in the same way.  Would they have beaten that?  Sure, maybe.  But only maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, maximumbob said:

For what it's worth, I was recently speaking to a buddy of mine who's an equity partner at Davies and he let slip what he pulls in - I was floored, it was close to double what I would have expected relative to other firms.  

They do pay more - so long as you don't do the math on an hourly basis.  

If there's one thing I've learned about working on Bay Street, it's that the partners are not at all competitive and are as transparent and humble as they can possibly be in respect of their compensation.

Again, entirely possible.  At the same time, compensation is the GPA for grey-hairs and self-reporting is roughly as reliable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Uriel said:

If there's one thing I've learned about working on Bay Street, it's that the partners are not at all competitive and are as transparent and humble as they can possibly be in respect of their compensation.

This fellow's a good friend, and it came out in the context of a discussion where he wasn't boasting (he was seeking my advice on something).  I believe him entirely.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, maximumbob said:

For what it's worth, I was recently speaking to a buddy of mine who's an equity partner at Davies and he let slip what he pulls in - I was floored, it was close to double what I would have expected relative to other firms.  

They do pay more - so long as you don't do the math on an hourly basis.  

Lol he “let it slip.” :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, maximumbob said:

This fellow's a good friend, and it came out in the context of a discussion where he wasn't boasting (he was seeking my advice on something).  I believe him entirely.  

OK then.  (Not sure how to say this so that it doesn't sound ironic! If you believe him, works for me.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, providence said:

Lol he “let it slip.” :)

In the context, it was reasonable - he had the decency to be sheepish about it. Needless to say, he paid for drinks. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess this is another good time to note, as I often do, for all the youngsters in the crowd that we're talking about degrees of separation within a near-unfathomable amount of money for most people.

That is to say, if you intend to use money as a way of 'keeping score' in life, or if you have particularly expensive ambitions -- owning competitive stables or a larger-than-normal luxury yacht, funding your own enterprise or leaving a headline-grabbing legacy gift -- then the difference between one Bay Street firm's average profits per partner and another's might concern you.

If your aims are more modest -- live in a beautiful home, drive a sweet ride, take opulent vacations a few times a year, and never worry about money for the rest of your life -- then it couldn't matter less which firm you wind up in.  Making partner at any one of these firms (heck, any one of a huge number of smaller firms as well) will see you to being a millionaire a couple times over by age 50.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep thinking I should do a standalone post about what a senior partner's lifestyle seems to be like, and what this kind of money actually means in concrete terms.  But with a negative net personal value, I still feel kind of unqualified.  :) It's all second-hand and observational.  

There are tidbits, though, that I've come across that have helped me sort out what my own goals are.  And with so many of our members aiming at achieving that lifestyle, it might be good for them to have a sense of what the reality smells like, since they might be as far off on that as they are on what being an "environmental lawyer" or "international lawyer" might be like. 

It's interesting to see what "time off" looks like, what social circles they travel in, what hobbies they have and what financial decisions they seem to make, what they think of the galas and the international files they work on... a post on that subject might be revealing, but it would also almost certainly be inaccurate. 

Maybe I should leave it to those that have more experience with successful partners in their personal lives.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing they (senior partners) have that I want most is the projection of this imperturbable, shining aura of confidence, success and belonging. I don’t know how or if that is connected to money but it is amazing to behold. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm, I dunno if I really agree that making 1 million dollars vs 2 million dollars is just imaginary paper gains in the lives of the fabulously rich. If it is that seems like kind of a strange place to draw the line. Making $400k vs $200k more than most people make but 2xing your income is still pretty meaningful for people. But maybe I’m warped by living in NY where 2 million will let you buy a 3br instead of a 2br, not stables to go with your yacht. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uriel said:

I guess this is another good time to note, as I often do, for all the youngsters in the crowd that we're talking about degrees of separation within a near-unfathomable amount of money for most people.

That is to say, if you intend to use money as a way of 'keeping score' in life, or if you have particularly expensive ambitions -- owning competitive stables or a larger-than-normal luxury yacht, funding your own enterprise or leaving a headline-grabbing legacy gift -- then the difference between one Bay Street firm's average profits per partner and another's might concern you.

If your aims are more modest -- live in a beautiful home, drive a sweet ride, take opulent vacations a few times a year, and never worry about money for the rest of your life -- then it couldn't matter less which firm you wind up in.  Making partner at any one of these firms (heck, any one of a huge number of smaller firms as well) will see you to being a millionaire a couple times over by age 50.

It may be small degrees of separation from Bay firm to Bay firm, but it certainly leaves me feeling as if I'm missing out or should try to change jurisdictions. A  6 figure bonus is crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NYCLawyer said:

Hm, I dunno if I really agree that making 1 million dollars vs 2 million dollars is just imaginary paper gains in the lives of the fabulously rich. If it is that seems like kind of a strange place to draw the line. Making $400k vs $200k more than most people make but 2xing your income is still pretty meaningful for people. But maybe I’m warped by living in NY where 2 million will let you buy a 3br instead of a 2br, not stables to go with your yacht. 

Well, strictly speaking if you're making $2M vs. $1M the G is taking 53% of the difference, so it's not as material as all that.  Still, an extra $400-odd K to throw around is nothing to sneeze at.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...