[s1artibartfast]

Read up on the Cravath system for determining lawyer salary[1]. Every top "biglaw" firm in the US pays the same salary and publishes them. This has been found not be collusion because there is no agreement or requirement they stick to the price.

Every once in a while, one law firm will defect and raise salary, and every other law firm will update theirs within a week to the new rate.

https://www.biglawinvestor.com/biglaw-salary-scale/

[fsckboy]

the law firms in that category have their pick when it comes to hiring new graduates; those are coveted jobs and coveted salaries. Students who want to work at a corporate firm who don't get those offers wish they did. So it's difficult to argue that this aspect of the system is oppressing anybody.

after this initial hire, your salary growth (and segue to lucrative partnership) will be based on your performance and how much they want to keep you, again, undermining the notion that you are somehow locked into an oppressive system.

[s1artibartfast]

Who said anything about oppression? I'm talking about the definition of illegal collusion and price fixing. There is nothing illegal about squeezing poor people for every penny they have.

[fsckboy]

does your point hinge on that one word, or do you really think I didn't say anything of value that you could address more broadly?

[s1artibartfast]

Not really. I was responding to a question about price fixing with respect to employment law.

It seems like you want to have some unrelated debate about what group is more oppressed than other groups.

>after this initial hire, your salary growth (and segue to lucrative partnership) will be based on your performance and how much they want to keep you, again, undermining the notion that you are somehow locked into an oppressive system.

as a point of clarification, Biglaw salaries is fixed for associates up to 8th year. Yes they can still be fired, yes they can be made partner. Yes they make more than an Afghani dirt farmer.