Know Baird/HW/Piper all did so wondering if Blair did yet (in process for lateral position).
If they haven't, does it sound like they're going to? I've seen on here that they historically paid at/above street but haven't seen any threads on their base raise.
| +338 | Return Rates For Interns Are Falling? | 143 | 45m |
| +156 | Evercore > Goldman and I don’t think it’s particularly close anymore | 58 | 19m |
| +152 | Article: Why UBS's Asian M&A bankers are thriving and UBS's American M&A bankers are not | 17 | 10h |
| +124 | I am a drunk MD AMA | 40 | 1d |
| +86 | UBS Offer Day | 30 | 1d |
| +75 | Santander IB? | 10 | 3d |
| +68 | I hate Wells Fargo | 19 | 7h |
| +51 | No return offer - feeling like a failure is an understatement | 20 | 2h |
| +45 | How cooked am I as an incoming WF IB SA 2027? | 17 | 3h |
| +43 | WF Return offers | 28 | 2d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
No update from Blair, still 85/90/95. I assume they will eventually but no word yet.
have not raised
Management said they will raise. No timetable or indication of how much.
.
I'm curious about source as well!
Also curious…
This is not true. There was a firm-wide investment banking call today. It was acknowledged that competitors had recently raised salaries, but there was no indication that Blair would be matching those raises in the near future, or at all for that matter.
well that blows
Wow... did they justify not raising given the news from competitors?
Clearly stated that they were not going to lag behind the market. Didn't state when a raise would occur.
Very unlikely
Just curious, what makes you say that?
how about HL?
They already raised to 90/100/110
WB previously gave a 20k one time bonus which essentially is a raise for the year—they have stated they won’t lag behind competitors. I firmly believe them just for the reason alone that the franchise won’t want to/ can’t afford to lose talent at the rate it is growing.
Baird already gave a one time bonus as well and still gave raises. As someone that works at WB, it’s funny to see all the bootlickers that allegedly work at WB defending the firm’s decision not to raise (so far). They’ll fire you as soon as the market turns. Quit defending their decision to pay below market and assuming they’ll make you whole later on.
There’s a few things here. First off, I hate the industry and am leaving, but I’ll bootlick the firm for a bit/ explain why I think you are being overly cynical:
1) Yeah, when the market turns everywhere is going to want to reduce headcount not just WB, so that’s not really a firm issue. That said, the industry also is going to see massive turnover at the top, which frees up space. Right now all the senior guys are just holding on and when it turns they are going to retire. Point is, this isn’t really a dig at WB, that’s just how the industry and every industry is, so it’s not a fair criticism to make. However, if we are going to talk about that, historically WB has laid off way less people during downturns than other banks.
2) They gave smaller bonuses than they should have last year and people left. They provided the one-time bonus this year, and also sent out the email saying they will provide compensation reflecting the strides the firm has made this year. Could they be lying? Sure, but it wouldn’t make sense from a strategic standpoint. If you were actually going to pay below market, you wouldn’t send an email saying you will pay high bonuses. Again, they could screw over everyone and have basically been lying and have been lying on the call, but it would be a strategic screw up, that I honestly find very unlikely/ think they would have played it differently if their goal was to not pay market or above.
3) Due to the timing of bonuses and psychology, it wouldn’t surprise me if they were planning on just paying larger than market bonuses, so people talk about it, then they salary increase later in the year to keep up with talent. At the end of the day, you pay to retain and attract talent—I agree banks in general will screw over their employees again and again, but I don’t think they are that dumb to lose talent by paying below market pay in the long run. I think you are just being overly cyclical/ might hate the firm because your job sucks rn.
Lincoln, BMO and even CIBC raised… how has Blair not followed suit?
Repellendus rerum voluptatem porro. Neque veniam fugit quaerat id vero enim aut distinctio. Dolorum quia maiores et. Fuga provident quis eum earum autem delectus qui. Quis deserunt architecto harum officia rerum. Iure tenetur et id eos omnis.
Delectus minima a ullam distinctio voluptates. Ut ea laborum culpa illum corporis eaque iure. Enim minus maxime quisquam id praesentium maxime iusto. Maxime et voluptas blanditiis vel est voluptatibus. Qui ut laudantium quidem minima. Dolore deleniti expedita perspiciatis natus. Nemo deleniti animi ipsam sit qui minus nihil consequatur.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...