Anyone in biglaw get a pay cut?

[Anonymous]

It’s extremely likely that Uncle Joe will be president with a Dem controlled Congress. Uncle Joe will be the most pro union pres since FDR. Companies better brush up on labor law. It’s coming around the bend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. I am in the L&E group, which has been busy. Practice group leader told an of counsel in the group that the firm is seriously looking at furloughs and layoffs, including for partners without a 100% equity interest in the firm.

I’m a traditional labor lawyer and service the book of a fairly of a fairly big rainmaker so I hopefully have some job protection, but who knows. The employment litigators have to be fairly worried right now.

Haven't they been busy counseling clients on FFCRA, CARES, WARN, furloughs, unemployment, severance agreements? The ones I know have been. I can see why traditional labor would not be as busy with manufacturing shut down.

It depends. If you are a pure litigator, you really aren’t that qualified to do the counseling side as they are very different skill sets. I would expect the litigation to heat up at some point, but it will be hard to prove that layoffs were X protected class related, when it will be easy to point to the pandemic.

OP here. at my firm, the employment people do both. i suppose they call people in from the litigation group from time to time (who definitely aren't qualified to give advice) in certain cases. lol at biglaw litigation in general. we in the traditional labor subgroup (or whatever one properly calls it) have more "courtroom" experience than most of the litigators at my firm because we try cases all the time before the NLRB, as well as arbitrations (although those can get awfully informal and start not to resemble a court proceeding).

I guess this is due in large part to costs involved with trying a case, but I wonder if many would be comfortable actually trying a case. It's definitely a skill that improves the more you do it, meaning more than once every 10 years or so. These people almost always settle if they lose their motion for summary judgment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My firm (20-30 range) has a global town hall today. Partners didn't get a draw this quarter and I'm thinking this will be layoffs, but I'm stupidly optimistic they'll start with paycuts.

Update: partner comp reduced by 20% for first half of year, hiring freeze, summer program will get dialed back (but not canceled), no salary reductions for associates or staff. Caveat re: layoffs/pay reductions - this is the absolute last resort; don't want to get there, but we really don't know how long this will last or how bad it will get so no blanket promise to never do so.

At the very least, reviews are going to get a lot tougher and there will be more “performance” terminations. No one wants to be the one to admit to Latham-ing associates, although Latham sure seems to have survived just fine.

What is "Latham-ing" an associate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My firm (20-30 range) has a global town hall today. Partners didn't get a draw this quarter and I'm thinking this will be layoffs, but I'm stupidly optimistic they'll start with paycuts.

Update: partner comp reduced by 20% for first half of year, hiring freeze, summer program will get dialed back (but not canceled), no salary reductions for associates or staff. Caveat re: layoffs/pay reductions - this is the absolute last resort; don't want to get there, but we really don't know how long this will last or how bad it will get so no blanket promise to never do so.

At the very least, reviews are going to get a lot tougher and there will be more “performance” terminations. No one wants to be the one to admit to Latham-ing associates, although Latham sure seems to have survived just fine.

What is "Latham-ing" an associate?

It’s when a firm lays off associates due to financial constraints or to boost profits but tells the associates fired that it was due to their poor performance. Done by most big firms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DH was laid off from biglaw in January '09. That same year his firm posted their highest ever PPP.

Whatever the partners do in the short term, I guarantee they will make it up to themselves in the long term.

I do not understand your point. I do not like big law partners and sorry that your DH was laid off in 09. But if the partners in his firm got their highest ever PPP in the year after your DH was laid off, doesn't that mean the partners did the right thing (financially, not morally, of course) for themselves by laying associates/staff off? So, they would do the same now, right?

You mean you are restating the PPs point? There’s nothing not to understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serious question - if I am an associate at one of the law firms that cut salaries, should I begin looking for a new job? I have been busier than ever, but there is also a feeling that its time to start looking...

Start looking.

[Anonymous]

After every recession and the like we hear things like, clients will never pay this much again, blah, blah, blah. This time that might actually happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question - if I am an associate at one of the law firms that cut salaries, should I begin looking for a new job? I have been busier than ever, but there is also a feeling that its time to start looking...

Start looking.

And don’t stop looking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. I am in the L&E group, which has been busy. Practice group leader told an of counsel in the group that the firm is seriously looking at furloughs and layoffs, including for partners without a 100% equity interest in the firm.

I’m a traditional labor lawyer and service the book of a fairly of a fairly big rainmaker so I hopefully have some job protection, but who knows. The employment litigators have to be fairly worried right now.

Haven't they been busy counseling clients on FFCRA, CARES, WARN, furloughs, unemployment, severance agreements? The ones I know have been. I can see why traditional labor would not be as busy with manufacturing shut down.

It depends. If you are a pure litigator, you really aren’t that qualified to do the counseling side as they are very different skill sets. I would expect the litigation to heat up at some point, but it will be hard to prove that layoffs were X protected class related, when it will be easy to point to the pandemic.

OP here. at my firm, the employment people do both. i suppose they call people in from the litigation group from time to time (who definitely aren't qualified to give advice) in certain cases. lol at biglaw litigation in general. we in the traditional labor subgroup (or whatever one properly calls it) have more "courtroom" experience than most of the litigators at my firm because we try cases all the time before the NLRB, as well as arbitrations (although those can get awfully informal and start not to resemble a court proceeding).

Uh, NLRB hearings are semi-informal too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My firm (20-30 range) has a global town hall today. Partners didn't get a draw this quarter and I'm thinking this will be layoffs, but I'm stupidly optimistic they'll start with paycuts.

Update: partner comp reduced by 20% for first half of year, hiring freeze, summer program will get dialed back (but not canceled), no salary reductions for associates or staff. Caveat re: layoffs/pay reductions - this is the absolute last resort; don't want to get there, but we really don't know how long this will last or how bad it will get so no blanket promise to never do so.

At the very least, reviews are going to get a lot tougher and there will be more “performance” terminations. No one wants to be the one to admit to Latham-ing associates, although Latham sure seems to have survived just fine.

What is "Latham-ing" an associate?

It’s when a firm lays off associates due to financial constraints or to boost profits but tells the associates fired that it was due to their poor performance. Done by most big firms.

Ah, okay. I'm not in the law profession myself but have plenty of friends who are, including a partner at Latham, so I was just curious.

Sounds about right from what I do know about big law!

[Anonymous]

There had been no justification for corporate America to pay the level of fees they did anyway. So maybe this will reset things. Large firm legal bills bear little relation to the value added.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My firm (20-30 range) has a global town hall today. Partners didn't get a draw this quarter and I'm thinking this will be layoffs, but I'm stupidly optimistic they'll start with paycuts.

Update: partner comp reduced by 20% for first half of year, hiring freeze, summer program will get dialed back (but not canceled), no salary reductions for associates or staff. Caveat re: layoffs/pay reductions - this is the absolute last resort; don't want to get there, but we really don't know how long this will last or how bad it will get so no blanket promise to never do so.

At the very least, reviews are going to get a lot tougher and there will be more “performance” terminations. No one wants to be the one to admit to Latham-ing associates, although Latham sure seems to have survived just fine.

What is "Latham-ing" an associate?

It’s when a firm lays off associates due to financial constraints or to boost profits but tells the associates fired that it was due to their poor performance. Done by most big firms.

Ah, okay. I'm not in the law profession myself but have plenty of friends who are, including a partner at Latham, so I was just curious.

Sounds about right from what I do know about big law!

Large law firms have devolved into a horrible cesspool. They need to follow a more corporate model and hire fewer people with a view to have them stay. Charge reasonable rates. Pay associates far less. Allow for more job security. Should devalue billable hours and value good work and team building etc. The accounting firms are like this. Big law can do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. I am in the L&E group, which has been busy. Practice group leader told an of counsel in the group that the firm is seriously looking at furloughs and layoffs, including for partners without a 100% equity interest in the firm.

I’m a traditional labor lawyer and service the book of a fairly of a fairly big rainmaker so I hopefully have some job protection, but who knows. The employment litigators have to be fairly worried right now.

Haven't they been busy counseling clients on FFCRA, CARES, WARN, furloughs, unemployment, severance agreements? The ones I know have been. I can see why traditional labor would not be as busy with manufacturing shut down.

It depends. If you are a pure litigator, you really aren’t that qualified to do the counseling side as they are very different skill sets. I would expect the litigation to heat up at some point, but it will be hard to prove that layoffs were X protected class related, when it will be easy to point to the pandemic.

OP here. at my firm, the employment people do both. i suppose they call people in from the litigation group from time to time (who definitely aren't qualified to give advice) in certain cases. lol at biglaw litigation in general. we in the traditional labor subgroup (or whatever one properly calls it) have more "courtroom" experience than most of the litigators at my firm because we try cases all the time before the NLRB, as well as arbitrations (although those can get awfully informal and start not to resemble a court proceeding).

Uh, NLRB hearings are semi-informal too.

they're formal enough, in that the rules of evidence are generally strictly enforced. they certainly serve as better courtroom experience than papering a lawsuit, depositions and settling after your MSJ gets denied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. I am in the L&E group, which has been busy. Practice group leader told an of counsel in the group that the firm is seriously looking at furloughs and layoffs, including for partners without a 100% equity interest in the firm.

I’m a traditional labor lawyer and service the book of a fairly of a fairly big rainmaker so I hopefully have some job protection, but who knows. The employment litigators have to be fairly worried right now.

My husband is also a big rainmaker law partner at a AM Law rated firm. They are planning for layoffs if needed and already announced 20 percent pay cut. I personally think it’s premature as there is positive news. We are better off than most people but they are talking even more cuts to partner profits, it’s like 50 percent. And this firm makes budget every year so it’s not like they don’t know how to manage money.

How do you know they are better off? If they do strict budgets every year then they know something that you don't and it would be smart to cut off partner's profits right now to make more money later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My firm (20-30 range) has a global town hall today. Partners didn't get a draw this quarter and I'm thinking this will be layoffs, but I'm stupidly optimistic they'll start with paycuts.

Update: partner comp reduced by 20% for first half of year, hiring freeze, summer program will get dialed back (but not canceled), no salary reductions for associates or staff. Caveat re: layoffs/pay reductions - this is the absolute last resort; don't want to get there, but we really don't know how long this will last or how bad it will get so no blanket promise to never do so.

At the very least, reviews are going to get a lot tougher and there will be more “performance” terminations. No one wants to be the one to admit to Latham-ing associates, although Latham sure seems to have survived just fine.

What is "Latham-ing" an associate?

It’s when a firm lays off associates due to financial constraints or to boost profits but tells the associates fired that it was due to their poor performance. Done by most big firms.

Ah, okay. I'm not in the law profession myself but have plenty of friends who are, including a partner at Latham, so I was just curious.

Sounds about right from what I do know about big law!

Large law firms have devolved into a horrible cesspool. They need to follow a more corporate model and hire fewer people with a view to have them stay. Charge reasonable rates. Pay associates far less. Allow for more job security. Should devalue billable hours and value good work and team building etc. The accounting firms are like this. Big law can do it.

You aren’t wrong. The high associate salaries lead to high hours requirements and high rates and no tolerance for a dip in performance.