Law firms now demoting partners .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread jumped into the douche bag end of the pool pretty quickly.

+1 Scary to know people who think like this walk among us.

Even scarier is that they're paid big bucks too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread jumped into the douche bag end of the pool pretty quickly.

+1 Scary to know people who think like this walk among us.

Even scarier is that they're paid big bucks too.

I laughed.

[Anonymous]

You do all know that, at some point in the next decade (yes, that soon), a lot of legal work will become automated.

http://www.americanbar.org/publications/youraba/2015/october-2015/5-questions-on-automation.html

Lawyers will still be needed. But not nearly as many that exist.

[Anonymous]

De-equitization of partners isn't a new trend, but rather has been going on for years behind the scenes. Older partners are slowly de-equitized in order to free up that equity for younger folks who want to join the ranks. Firms don't necessarily want to grow their outstanding equity. Rather, they would prefer to keep the same number of equity partners so that everyone is generally happy. Likewise, de-equitization isn't a sudden event - it is often preceded by years of declining billables and business generation. In most cases, the older partners know it's going to happen, but that doesn't necessarily make it any easier from a psychological standpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:De-equitization of partners isn't a new trend, but rather has been going on for years behind the scenes. Older partners are slowly de-equitized in order to free up that equity for younger folks who want to join the ranks. Firms don't necessarily want to grow their outstanding equity. Rather, they would prefer to keep the same number of equity partners so that everyone is generally happy. Likewise, de-equitization isn't a sudden event - it is often preceded by years of declining billables and business generation. In most cases, the older partners know it's going to happen, but that doesn't necessarily make it any easier from a psychological standpoint.

How does it happen in reality? Do they take the old guy to lunch and then tell him they're de-equitizing him? Are they allowed to do it at will?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:De-equitization of partners isn't a new trend, but rather has been going on for years behind the scenes. Older partners are slowly de-equitized in order to free up that equity for younger folks who want to join the ranks. Firms don't necessarily want to grow their outstanding equity. Rather, they would prefer to keep the same number of equity partners so that everyone is generally happy. Likewise, de-equitization isn't a sudden event - it is often preceded by years of declining billables and business generation. In most cases, the older partners know it's going to happen, but that doesn't necessarily make it any easier from a psychological standpoint.

How does it happen in reality? Do they take the old guy to lunch and then tell him they're de-equitizing him? Are they allowed to do it at will?

This depends on the particular firm's partnership agreement, but generally it would require a vote of all the partners or perhaps just a vote of a management committee. In more genteel firms, this would be handled "softly" by encouraging a partner to agree to de-equitize. But, the trend is towards just a committee vote. But, agreed with the previous poster that this happens slowly at most firms. It usually follows years of underperformance or low profitability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:De-equitization of partners isn't a new trend, but rather has been going on for years behind the scenes. Older partners are slowly de-equitized in order to free up that equity for younger folks who want to join the ranks. Firms don't necessarily want to grow their outstanding equity. Rather, they would prefer to keep the same number of equity partners so that everyone is generally happy. Likewise, de-equitization isn't a sudden event - it is often preceded by years of declining billables and business generation. In most cases, the older partners know it's going to happen, but that doesn't necessarily make it any easier from a psychological standpoint.

How does it happen in reality? Do they take the old guy to lunch and then tell him they're de-equitizing him? Are they allowed to do it at will?

This depends on the particular firm's partnership agreement, but generally it would require a vote of all the partners or perhaps just a vote of a management committee. In more genteel firms, this would be handled "softly" by encouraging a partner to agree to de-equitize. But, the trend is towards just a committee vote. But, agreed with the previous poster that this happens slowly at most firms. It usually follows years of underperformance or low profitability.

For older partners, it often happens due to firms' mandatory retirement policies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:De-equitization of partners isn't a new trend, but rather has been going on for years behind the scenes. Older partners are slowly de-equitized in order to free up that equity for younger folks who want to join the ranks. Firms don't necessarily want to grow their outstanding equity. Rather, they would prefer to keep the same number of equity partners so that everyone is generally happy. Likewise, de-equitization isn't a sudden event - it is often preceded by years of declining billables and business generation. In most cases, the older partners know it's going to happen, but that doesn't necessarily make it any easier from a psychological standpoint.

How does it happen in reality? Do they take the old guy to lunch and then tell him they're de-equitizing him? Are they allowed to do it at will?

This depends on the particular firm's partnership agreement, but generally it would require a vote of all the partners or perhaps just a vote of a management committee. In more genteel firms, this would be handled "softly" by encouraging a partner to agree to de-equitize. But, the trend is towards just a committee vote. But, agreed with the previous poster that this happens slowly at most firms. It usually follows years of underperformance or low profitability.

For older partners, it often happens due to firms' mandatory retirement policies.

Yes, that's true. I assumed when we were discussing the "trend" of firms de-equitizing partners, we weren't really talking about mandatory retirement ages, but we were talking about pushing out underperforming partners. But, you're right, many partnership agreements contain mandatory retirement policies.

[Anonymous]

What ever happened to GTO?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread jumped into the douche bag end of the pool pretty quickly.

+1 Scary to know people who think like this walk among us.

Even scarier is that they're paid big bucks too.

I laughed.

I happy to know there are some normal people out there. That's the only reason I read past the first page.

[Anonymous]

NOWAG

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread jumped into the douche bag end of the pool pretty quickly.

+1 Scary to know people who think like this walk among us.

Even scarier is that they're paid big bucks too.

I laughed.

I happy to know there are some normal people out there. That's the only reason I read past the first page.

Diversity is the spice of life

[Anonymous]

WGWAG.