The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Non-attorneys are so delusional about benefits
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:42 AM Author: Supple parlor For an attorney, almost any benefit is good. A 401k? OMG. But for the typical person who works at a big company, they will bash their benefits all day long. They just don't understand what it's like to work for the typical small company. "We only get 2 weeks of vacation!" "I have to pay $1500 deductible on my health insurance!" "We only get matching on 401k up to 3%!" "We only get 6 sick days!" All of that sounds amazing to most attorneys. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394391) |
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:44 AM Author: Know-it-all indian lodge shoulda been a small town DA/PD, bro. Great benefits and a certain chill lifestyle. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394394) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:44 AM Author: dun foreskin Sorry, but this is not really a shitlaw bort. I'm sure they will be happy to commiserate with you over at jd underground. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394398) |
 |
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:46 AM Author: Supple parlor To be fair, I work in-house now. I think the benefits are amazing. I just noticed nearly all my coworkers think the benefits are really bad. They just don't understand. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394416) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:49 AM Author: racy spot DESCRIBE your 401k match. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394430) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:50 AM Author: Supple parlor edit: nvm u asked someone else (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394434) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:45 AM Author: bespoke theater stage prole The TTT I worked at before my current job has a 20% 401k match up to your first $1500 contribution. Lol, just LOL at that tiny pink match that takes 5 years to be fully vested.
Current one is dollar for dollar 6% and discretionary % based on company performance after that usually 2% |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:45 AM Author: Glassy thirsty market elastic band Man one of those 401k matching plans sounds so sick. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394401) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2014 1:04 AM Author: Big indigo meetinghouse (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26400054) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:47 AM Author: rose chest-beating associate My firm matches 401K. It's pretty sweet. Far better for me than another 17K in income that would be getting raped at 40%. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394421) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:51 AM Author: Supple parlor I agree. Any matching is a sweet deal for a lawyer. But in the normal corporate world it's the bare minimum expectation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394447) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:52 AM Author: rose chest-beating associate I think it's typical in-house. For reasons I don't fully understand related to employee benefit rules, big firms typically don't give matching 401K to associates. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394450) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:53 AM Author: Supple parlor I remember there was some urban myth that they weren't allowed to and that's why they give it to staff but not associates, but some firms do so I think it's just BS. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394458) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:55 AM Author: rose chest-beating associate I believe the firms that do so do it at expense of the partners. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394470) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 11:56 AM Author: Supple parlor Well isn't any expenditure at the expense of the partners? Or do you just mean taxwise they take a big hit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26394475) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 9:49 PM Author: Flatulent piazza juggernaut Might just be that law students choosing among firms are more likely to focus on base comp and how that compares to market, and less likely to focus on how good the benfits are (something that may be difficult to value). Benefits are just as difficult to value when provided by a corporation, but the market is generally less transparent in that context, so prospective employees might approach comp/benefits differently. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26398520) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 9:52 PM Author: rose chest-beating associate I think it means the partners may get less of a match. Basically you can't give high-paid employees a substantially bigger tax benefit than low-paid employees. Associates are high paid employees. So by dicking over associates, partners can get even more money tax deferred. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26398539) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 10:06 PM Author: Jet-lagged orchid wagecucks I think this is on the right track (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26398614) |
|
Date: September 25th, 2014 10:48 PM Author: Flatulent piazza juggernaut There are definitely nondiscrimination test issues related to 401(k) match. Not sure if the same issues explain the terrible health insurance plans in biglaw. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683791&forum_id=2#26399001) |