Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
harveyspecter993

Bay Street Bonuses

Recommended Posts

On 6/25/2018 at 6:17 AM, easttowest said:

The horror.

I didn't say this applied to "equity" partners, I said "partners" generally. Just to clarify.

In Canada, there is no data about how many "equity" partners there are. It's not because people are partners that they are equity partners (except at the firms that only have one-tier partnership).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 3:17 PM, easttowest said:

The horror.

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want to work so long and hard, sacrifice so much just to make marginally more (if not less) than some associates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, setto said:

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want to work so long and hard, sacrifice so much just to make marginally more (if not less) than some associates.

Especially if I just invested a half-million-bucks-plus into the place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be surprised if you could be admitted as a partner on Bay Street without enough clients to earn you more than 250K. What would be the point of taking on all the liability and responsibility of a partner with none of the benefits?

Even in a smaller centre and firm, I can't see a partner making 250K. 250K for a partner in a small criminal firm in my part of the country is considered to be on the low side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, lioness said:

I would be surprised if you could be admitted as a partner on Bay Street without enough clients to earn you more than 250K. What would be the point of taking on all the liability and responsibility of a partner with none of the benefits?

Even in a smaller centre and firm, I can't see a partner making 250K. 250K for a partner in a small criminal firm in my part of the country is considered to be on the low side. 

It does seem very low. But it could also depend on the partnership contract. Some firms don't base it on a partner's client book but rather units purchased in the partnership structure. If you own very few units you could end up on the low end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lioness said:

I would be surprised if you could be admitted as a partner on Bay Street without enough clients to earn you more than 250K. What would be the point of taking on all the liability and responsibility of a partner with none of the benefits?

Even in a smaller centre and firm, I can't see a partner making 250K. 250K for a partner in a small criminal firm in my part of the country is considered to be on the low side. 

To be clear, you won't need to make that out of your own book.  I'll probably ring in about $100k on my own clients this year, but I'll earn the firm about $900,000 total; and I'll be a (very unlikely) candidate for the partnership this year.  Plenty of people with small or non-existent books make partner due to current earnings and future potential.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

To be clear, you won't need to make that out of your own book.  I'll probably ring in about $100k on my own clients this year, but I'll earn the firm about $900,000 total; and I'll be a (very unlikely) candidate for the partnership this year.  Plenty of people with small or non-existent books make partner due to current earnings and future potential.

Yeah, but the point is that why would someone who is worth a million bucks to their firm take on the responsibility of partner for a quarter of what they bring in? As an associate that’s fine - you can gain experience and leave to go somewhere else, start your own firm etc, but a partner is more committed. 

Share this post


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

I didn't say this applied to "equity" partners, I said "partners" generally. Just to clarify.

In Canada, there is no data about how many "equity" partners there are. It's not because people are partners that they are equity partners (except at the firms that only have one-tier partnership).

When people talk about “partner compensation” in law they mean equity partners. Some firms have non-equity partners, and both because it’s only some firms and because when people say “I intend to make partner” they literally mean equity partner, and thirdly because equity partners have a different mechanism of compensation than mere salary, “partner compensation” refers to equity and you would say “non-equity partner compensation” to specify the other meaning.

Just as an FYI. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

When people talk about “partner compensation” in law they mean equity partners. Some firms have non-equity partners, and both because it’s only some firms and because when people say “I intend to make partner” they literally mean equity partner, and thirdly because equity partners have a different mechanism of compensation than mere salary, “partner compensation” refers to equity and you would say “non-equity partner compensation” to specify the other meaning.

Just as an FYI. 

I never really get the point of non-equity partners. My husband says they definitely are not to be compared with equity partners - sometimes they are people who are being considered or want to be considered for partner at a later time, sometimes they are people who are not going to be partner but you want to keep them around for their knowledge and make them feel like they are more valuable than a regular associate. I still think it’s kind of weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, lioness said:

I would be surprised if you could be admitted as a partner on Bay Street without enough clients to earn you more than 250K. What would be the point of taking on all the liability and responsibility of a partner with none of the benefits?

Even in a smaller centre and firm, I can't see a partner making 250K. 250K for a partner in a small criminal firm in my part of the country is considered to be on the low side. 

Is your “part of the country” inside Marie Henien’s offices?  I’m pretty far from a criminal lawyer but I have trouble believing that $250k is on the low side for a criminal practice anywhere in the country. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

Is your “part of the country” inside Marie Henien’s offices?  I’m pretty far from a criminal lawyer but I have trouble believing that $250k is on the low side for a criminal practice anywhere in the country. 

Marie Henein charges around $1K an hour and some of her cases bill  $500k or more. I am sure she makes way, way above 250k. 

Successful partners or owners of criminal firms can make way more than 250K. 250K is a lot for an associate, junior or average sole practitioner, but it’s not much for those at the top of the profession. 

Share this post


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

Marie Henein charges around $1K an hour and some of her cases bill  $500k or more. I am sure she makes way, way above 250k. 

Successful partners or owners of criminal firms can make way more than 250K. 250K is a lot for an associate, junior or average sole practitioner, but it’s not much for those at the top of the profession. 

I can’t imagine how you could read my post as any anything other than an implication that Marie Henien makes more than $250k. 

I’m not commenting on criminal law specifically. I don’t think $250k is “on the low side” for any type of practice anywhere in the county.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I can’t imagine how you could read my post as any anything other than an implication that Marie Henien makes more than $250k. 

I’m not commenting on criminal law specifically. I don’t think $250k is “on the low side” for any type of practice anywhere in the county.

It sounded as if you were using 250k as the benchmark for a low salary in Henein’s office. But she sets the benchmark way higher than that. (And I don’t know what everyone in her office gets paid or what the partners get, but I have an idea.) 

I know quite a few criminal practitioners that I know/suspect/have been told make a fair bit more than 250k and would consider 250k low. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, providence said:

It sounded as if you were using 250k as the benchmark for a low salary in Henein’s office. But she sets the benchmark way higher than that. (And I don’t know what everyone in her office gets paid or what the partners get, but I have an idea.) 

I know quite a few criminal practitioners that I know/suspect/have been told make a fair bit more than 250k and would consider 250k low. 

 

 

 

I said that only by defining your “part of the county” as a place like Marie Henien’s offices could $250k be considered low. 

Nobody doubts there are plenty of criminal practioners that make well over $250k but again that has nothing to do with the fact that there’s no area of the country, other than inside an elite practice, where that’s on the low side. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, providence said:

I never really get the point of non-equity partners. My husband says they definitely are not to be compared with equity partners - sometimes they are people who are being considered or want to be considered for partner at a later time, sometimes they are people who are not going to be partner but you want to keep them around for their knowledge and make them feel like they are more valuable than a regular associate. I still think it’s kind of weird.

I always thought that it was primarily a marketing thing, in the sense that saying you are a "partner" is much more appealing than saying you are a "senior associate" to potential new clients

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Coolname said:

I always thought that it was primarily a marketing thing, in the sense that saying you are a "partner" is much more appealing than saying you are a "senior associate" to potential new clients

I always wonder, wouldn't that piss off the equity partners who actually paid money in and have responsibilities that other people can use the same title without having to do all that? 

Share this post


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

I always wonder, wouldn't that piss off the equity partners who actually paid money in and have responsibilities that other people can use the same title without having to do all that? 

Not when they still get a cut of the profit the person gets from using that title haha

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, providence said:

I never really get the point of non-equity partners. My husband says they definitely are not to be compared with equity partners - sometimes they are people who are being considered or want to be considered for partner at a later time, sometimes they are people who are not going to be partner but you want to keep them around for their knowledge and make them feel like they are more valuable than a regular associate. I still think it’s kind of weird.

Non-equity partners are partners - to everyone except the management of the firm. For example, many firms have MANY non-equity partners (the trend is increasing). As a client, you don't know if someone is an equity partner or not (unless you have a close relationship with them and you ask them), and within the firm, associates also don't know.

Edited by chirico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Coolname said:

Not when they still get a cut of the profit the person gets from using that title haha

It's misleading to say that equity partners get a share of the profits. That share can be almost nothing, unless you are at a pure lock-step firm or you are a top performer. It's very misleading to tell people equity partners make a lot of money. It's not necessarily true. It's all tied to the amount of client revenue you generate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NYCLawyer said:

Is your “part of the country” inside Marie Henien’s offices?  I’m pretty far from a criminal lawyer but I have trouble believing that $250k is on the low side for a criminal practice anywhere in the country. 

As Providence has said, you don't seem to understand what was actually said.

  • Like 1

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.



  • Recent Posts

    • I took the LSAT in July and was one of the test centres that got the digital exam. I personally found it way better than the traditional paper exam. I personally didn't have any issues with it, but i've heard of people who did. I especially appreciated the timer in the top right which said exactly how much time you have left in the section. One thing I did which I found helpful (although I realize it may not be for everyone), was I tapped on the time to hide it for most of the section to prevent me from constantly checking on it. Then, when there was 5ish minutes left in the section, I would tap it again to make sure I filled in all the questions and got to any questions that I may have flagged to review. Overall, in my one experience with it, I found that there were no hiccups and I actually found the timer and other aspects (such as highlighting, changing fonts, screen layout, tapping the bubbles as opposed to filling them in with a pencil, etc.) of the digital version to be beneficial to me. It's definitely not for everyone but I preferred it to the paper exam.
    • Also read Hoju’s absolutely amazing response to one of your earlier threads here:   Now read it again. And then one more time.
    • Stop drinking coffee and instead of walking, go for a run. You have a ton of nervous energy you need to 1. Expend and 2. Stop feeding.  I am not going to internet diagnose you. But I want you to consider whether you are using this site for reassurance seeking and/or obsessive info checking. People who have Anxiety (capital A) fall into a number of recognizable patterns. One of those is obsessive information gathering, and one of those is reassurance seeking. These patterns address a sense of paralysis and mask the fact that you cannot move forward with decisions and have peace of mind. If you find you cannot function - and even begin to panic - unless some one is constantly right there with you telling you that you are making all the right choices and setting out exactly what happens next, and assuring you it will all be ok, you are probably getting in over your head and Anxiety may be the culprit. Anxiety is a real honest to goodness diagnosis along with Diabetes and Depression. If this is what you are dealing with, it’s  really time to stop feeding it and start treating it.  You can feel better. This can get better. But get help.   Edit: in case this comes across as presumptuous, I have Anxiety. I treat it. Before I did, Life was pretty fucking shitty. So this is all with the very best wishes for you going forward if this is your particular demon. 
    • You can always talk to students who summered with a firm. There's never a ban on it. 
×
×
  • Create New...