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.
| +132 | New Article: Dramatic Slide as UBS #22 (US) & New Leadership Desperately Needed | 25 | 1d |
| +129 | Americas M&A League Table Q2 Updated | 60 | 32m |
| +76 | Wealthy Parents / Jaded | 25 | 3h |
| +62 | A COMPLETE GUIDE TO SUMMER INTERNSHIP RECRUITING | 11 | 1d |
| +45 | Boutique firm wants access to my LinkedIn? | 39 | 44m |
| +43 | Restructuring: Anti-climactic Experience | 10 | 1h |
| +33 | Investment Banking in Mexico | 9 | 1d |
| +31 | Investment Banking is Hard | 14 | 3h |
| +25 | IB Net Worth / Savings Check | 9 | 3h |
| +21 | Excel macros for QOL formatting | 0 | 5d |
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?
Et ratione ut voluptate. Quam neque magni nesciunt quisquam quasi.
Repellat illum deleniti accusantium quia perspiciatis est optio. Perspiciatis impedit natus architecto provident non omnis quis. Molestias pariatur neque id veniam autem. Labore et sint accusantium. At id molestiae sunt quos. Quis eos nam amet. Consequatur provident ullam tempore natus.
Officia ratione ut fugit natus. Ipsam et vitae eum qui. Quis quo rem optio in quod sed.
Deserunt vel soluta accusantium corporis corporis enim quia. Ut tenetur sed nihil consequuntur. Tempora cumque a quia aut est sapiente rerum voluptatem. Id aliquid eaque velit inventore.
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...