The team once earned a reputation for quality, professionalism, work-life balance, and more. However, it has now devolved into a chaotic, non-transparent, and unreasonable environment. I still appreciate my colleagues and some of the partners, but the issues are being driven by higher-level partners. Below is a list of the key problems; feel free to add your own thoughts.

1. Irrational, Non-Transparent, and Disgraceful Bonus System

Under the previous policy, those who recovered 6x their salary were awarded a 200% bonus. For instance, someone with a salary of 20L + 5L who recovered 1.5 crore would receive a 10L bonus. Now, the bonus has been capped at 100%, meaning many people earned less this year compared to the last. Current Senior Associates are receiving more as A3s than they did last year. The company expects no complaints because, apparently, we don’t have families to support, loans to pay, or vacations to take. It’s a clear kick in the stomach. To those at other law firms: SAM Competition Associates are now available at a discount.

2. ▮▮▮

▮▮▮

3. Nepotism and Centralized Decision-Making

Nepotism is rampant at the top. There are people in key positions who rarely show up to the office, yet we’re paying them from our billing. They make decisions without consulting other partners. We've heard other partners complain about these so-called collective decisions, but no one has the courage to speak out. Nepotism trickles down from the top, filters through the middle imparting knowledge, and continues down to the coming A2s. The only partner (female) who had balls to take our stand left in 2024.

4. Strict Ban on Work-from-Home (WFH)

There’s now an absolute ban on WFH within the team, as the partnership doesn’t trust their employees. One of the three verticals has imposed this ban with no flexibility. Instead, people are forced to take leave so the firm doesn’t have to sponsor WFH. It’s both frustrating and demoralizing.

5. Mandatory 9:30 AM Clock-In Policy

The new 9:30 AM clock-in policy was introduced after an associate was late to an impromptu internal meeting. Partners, however, can enter at any time as they supposedly work around the clock. My colleagues often work harder than partners, staying up late into the night or waking up at 6 or 7 AM to prepare drafts. Then, we’re expected to be in the office, on time, at 9:30 AM sharp.

6. ▮▮▮ ▮▮▮

One ▮▮▮

7. No Retreats

Self-explanatory.

If you do not have money, do not go to Japan or US and pay us instead OR pay us out of reserves OR pay us out of senior partners’ salaries because they do not even come to office. At least pay us what you owe – no more no less.

My lovely colleagues, I hope you can leave soon. New joinees, please don’t, you will easily get better pay and environment at someplace else.

I may very well be wrong here, but to be the devil's advocate, the partner is not going to work on the transaction document and instead is going to spend his energy getting work for the team and vetting the documents before it goes out to the client. The client actually pays for this. Also, the partner was also an associate once, and I believe has done his share of grinding. You (right now in your griding phase) will also become a partner, and your role will then be to delegate and vet the work that your associates do.

That said, the bonus policy is just arbitrary and unfair, and that cannot be disputed. Work can get very intense, and the team should try to be as accommodating as possible until the work gets done.

Just a question, is this only for a certain team or is it a firm wide poicy?

Ah yes, the classic “just do the LSE summer school” advice, as if law firm hiring works like collecting souvenir badges.

If a two-week crash course were enough to meaningfully signal expertise in competition law economics, firms wouldn’t spend years evaluating candidates on actual academic depth, internships, research, and demonstrable legal reasoning. These programs are interesting exposure at best. It's not some secret hiring hack that suddenly makes recruiters overlook everything else.

Also, let’s not pretend access is equal here. Dropping a few lakhs on a short course abroad isn’t a neutral “choice” everyone can casually make....it’s a privilege. Treating it like a baseline expectation just shows a disconnect from how most candidates actually navigate this field.

So no, I’m not skipping it because I “haven’t thought of it.” I’m skipping it because I’d rather invest time and money into things that actually move the needle in a hiring decision, instead of chasing brand-name optics.