Big Law - HR meeting out of the blue

[Anonymous]

I got an email from HR requesting a meeting with the HR representative and the partner I work for to discuss “recent performance”. We had our annual performance review months ago and my reviews were all fine. This email is out of the blue and I’m not sure what to make of it. My initial reaction is it obviously can’t be good and might lead to a performance improvement plan but I have no clue if I’m overthinking it or not. Does anyone have experience or insight?

[Anonymous]

Also need to add that I recently came back from parental leave.

[Anonymous]

When was the review discussion compared to when you came back from leave?

[Anonymous]

I'd update your resume and put out some feelers to recruiters, OP.

How were your billables?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When was the review discussion compared to when you came back from leave?

3 months ago

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd update your resume and put out some feelers to recruiters, OP.

How were your billables?

Low billables. But the market has been slow for our group in general.

[Anonymous]

Yea you’re toast. Good luck. You’re gonna need it

[Anonymous]

If it were me I'd be come to the meeting prepared to discuss severance and related issues (i.e. job placement assistance, resume review, references, etc.). You should be able to get 3 months severance and 6 months listed on the firm website so no pay after 3 months but still get health insurance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was the review discussion compared to when you came back from leave?

3 months ago

Which was 3 months ago? Both the review and the return from leave?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd update your resume and put out some feelers to recruiters, OP.

How were your billables?

Low billables. But the market has been slow for our group in general.

I wouldn’t keep riding on the good performance review from last year.

How does your firm normally handle performance issues? Is it multiple warnings/a PIP? Or immediate separation?

[Anonymous]

Dressing up layoffs as performance related is all the rage in professional services firms in the last year. It’s a thing. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When was the review discussion compared to when you came back from leave?

3 months ago

Which was 3 months ago? Both the review and the return from leave?

Came back from leave 3 months ago and had review for the year prior that same month. The firm year doesn’t track a standard calendar year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd update your resume and put out some feelers to recruiters, OP.

How were your billables?

Low billables. But the market has been slow for our group in general.

I wouldn’t keep riding on the good performance review from last year.

How does your firm normally handle performance issues? Is it multiple warnings/a PIP? Or immediate separation?

Not sure how the firm handles performance issues or “fake performance issues”. I know of one case where an associate was told at his performance review for the year that he had low hours and there is no “business case” for him to make partner. He quit shortly after and went to a new firm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd update your resume and put out some feelers to recruiters, OP.

How were your billables?

Low billables. But the market has been slow for our group in general.

I wouldn’t keep riding on the good performance review from last year.

How does your firm normally handle performance issues? Is it multiple warnings/a PIP? Or immediate separation?

Law firms aren't like this. If there isn't enough work to support the associates on staff, they will fire some until there is a better matching of supply/demand. You can be totally competent, even well liked associate. But if there's not enough work, and the firm predicts the downturn will last, then you still have a high chance of layoff. Firms took too long in 2008 to react to the sudden downturn, and figured out they needed to be quicker - so now assume they will make firing decisions within 3 months of a slowdown. They'll do this even if you're a good lawyer - but they'll pick the least busy associate to lay off, because that is just a general indication of how much partners need/like the associate.

If you're a bad associate, you also don't get a warning - they will just let you go with severance.

OP - i would be surprised that they wouldn't give you more of a 3 month runway to come back after leave and get your feet back on the ground. It's very normal to take a while for work to pick back up. And it's not good optics to fire new moms. But how were your hours before leave? Had you been cruising a bit and already seen as one of the lesser focused associates?

BUt with all that said, in my 17 years in biglaw, I have never heard of an associate or non-equity partner having a meeting asked for by HR where it wasn't to be let go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd update your resume and put out some feelers to recruiters, OP.

How were your billables?

Low billables. But the market has been slow for our group in general.

I wouldn’t keep riding on the good performance review from last year.

How does your firm normally handle performance issues? Is it multiple warnings/a PIP? Or immediate separation?

Not sure how the firm handles performance issues or “fake performance issues”. I know of one case where an associate was told at his performance review for the year that he had low hours and there is no “business case” for him to make partner. He quit shortly after and went to a new firm.

Well it’s not fake performance issues. You said you’ve had low billings. You know you’re not meeting your hours.