First to see that the sky is falling

I claim first of this round of comments!

. . . . or not.

my heart goes out to those affected.

Fit's starting to hit the shan now.

they only have around 500 attorneys right? if so, cutting over 30 attorneys is a huge layoff

never heard of the firm, but it has ~450 attorneys, mostly in DC and Atlanta. It also pays $160/year for starters. Where are these guys on the Vault? It's been a while since I looked at the rankings...

What is Sutherland, Asbill, and Brennan?

lulz...econopwn3d.

these guys are V1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, or V10 to the 3210th power.

In other words, they have all the prestige of Harvard.

Any (constructive) advice for the Sutherland summers?

According to NALP, it doesn't look like a shitty firm, but nalps can be deceiving.

3:33, you broke the crappy site and its lack of wordwrap for large words.

My understanding from inside source is only about 6-7 people in the DC office. ATL ##s are only rumors at this point. "Sutherland Slaughter" seems somewhat misguided at this point. Some practice groups are handling better than others.
They're in the 90s on AmLaw, and some very high rankings in certain categories on Vault (diversity, training, etc).

"Any (constructive) advice for the Sutherland summers?"

Find another job?

their houston office only gave 1 out of 4 summers offers. i know texas does it differently, but that still seems bad.

to 3:38:
thanks, I hadn't thought of that

-3:35

Any (destructive) advice for the Sutherland summers?

i don't even think they do that much corporate work so maybe the firm is just crapping out independent of the crappy economy

they get a F for website design

Sutherland is actually a very good firm (but more so in ATL).

I remember that, last summer, about 1 in 5 recruiting calls were looking to staff Sutherland's DC office. Apparently they were going gangbusters. Now that things have slowed down, they must have some fat to trim.

more like "sutherland, asshole and brennan"

What the hell? They are one of the strongest/best run firms in Atlanta, and they have been hiring laterals this calendar year. Any idea what practice groups have been affected?

for every firm that we actually hear lay off news from, there are probably 4 to 5 firms who are doing it stealth and getting away with it.

im sure some firms are just telling people under the table that they have six months to find a job or else they'll be terminated.

KASH -- are you free tonight?

3:42 - hilarious.

3:35, you're not just a number, you're a person!
Big wordzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

Sutherland is top 10 nationally for tax.

agree that website is awful.

just heard rumors of a shooting at Paul Hastings office in Atlanta. apparently two PH employees killed, possibly in a murder-suicide.

news about the shooting just hitting the wires now. shooting was apparently at the Bank of America in the building occupied by Paul Hastings (and Troutman Sanders). At least 2 killed, reportedly PH employees

Any word on other Atlanta lay offs?

4:09,

?!!!

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2008/04/25/shooting_0425.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab

so there are like 30 comments, and not one sheds any light on the situation (31 after this). i guess sutherland attys waste their time on different sites.

lat, how about a maternity leave post? that'll go over well.

Troutman sent a firm-wide e-mail also saying that the two people killed were Paul Hastings employees

What shameless gloating by Troutman.

Definitely not a shifty firm at all, very highly thought of in the Atlanta market.

I believe their profits per partner were at the top of the Atlanta market, or at the very least only below King & Spalding and Alston & Bird.

I know almost every Atlanta firm has scaled back summer classes significantly this summer (K&S, for example, went from ~55 to ~35), but I didn't know things were this bad.

I love how the layoff watch firms are firms I've never heard of. It has been quite the educational series of posts. Sutherland Asbill & Brennan. Who knew?

Sounds like some of the Sutherland employees can try and fill the new openings at PH?

4:23, what an evil post.

Sutherland is renowned for tax.

I was hoping the layoffs would be isolated to NY and CLT too...

Ok, 4.33 is more evil. Eviler (?)

absolutely true.

Layoffs outside NY and Charlotte? Perhaps this is a firm problem more than a market problem? I have not heard of firms being as slow in these markets (or really any other major market other than NY/CLT)

Dear Atlanta,
Congrats on being, without a doubt, the worst legal market in America.
Yours truly,
BigLaw Associate who is too good for TTTK&S or TTTAlston let alone SAB or PH

4:40 is a TOOL!

wow. as a SA starting there in 3-4 weeks, this is not good news. AWESOME!

This is absolutely true. I am a headhunter and have received numerous calls from Sutherland associates. Brutal.

i am guessing tax is not affected by the layoffs, as they seem to be quite busy as a practice.

4:47, can you confirm affected practice areas?

Atlanta is a horrible legal market. You would think that the tradeoff for crappy pay might be job security. Guess not...

Sutherland Asbill is home to Billy Martin, who just got paid a shit load to get Wesley Snipes 3 years in prison and Mike Vick 23 months. If anyone needs to get laid off it's him.

4:40 - you are a sad little man.

32+ people is wrong. i have it from the managing partner himself that it will be under 10, and for people who have routinely missed their hours or show no promise for ever making their hours.

Sutherland seems to be a firm of some dichotomies. Not well-known/high profile overall, but groups like Tax and Energy are among the best in the country. Wonder what groups are cutting?

I heard that by the end of the month K&S is cutting 5% of its lawyers firm-wide. Anyone else hear this?

Are you an insider at SAB 4:55?

Any comments on other firms for those of us about to join the Atlanta job market??

SAB seemed like a really nice firm, I'd imagine this is is wrong, or that other firms are doing the same thing under to he radar....

sutherland is a pathetic place to work. sweatshop assholes.

firms in the ATL are doing it little by little to try to stay under the radar. one this week, 5 next week, etc. SAB is not the only one, but the only one that did it enough to get noticed...so far.

5:06--4:55 here. answer is yes. i am tight with wasserman.

law firms will suck the life out of you
FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I bet the managing partner brothers will cut serious numbers soon.

5:09, bitter much.....did ya get laid off today ;)

Word on the street is they're an awesome place to work, great QOL + market pay.....I know this and I'm not even in DC/atl...

I'm an insider, and the info that 4:55 posted is what I have been told as well.

ATL: Come for the compression; Stay for the layoffs.
Dirty South in da house!

Summer associates should be fine. It's the current associates that have to worry. Fact is, there are a number of firm that will be following suit. Sutherland is making money, but not as much as th elast couple of years, and that has to be rectified some how in this economy.

but what about POGO?????

i didn't realize that pogo was even still around. if they are, that will be some nice class A office space opening up after they die.

4:55 / 5:11.

I know who you are! I knew you when.....

5:21--4:55/5:11 here--expose me to the world, i need to be free!

I'm an associate in Sutherland's Atlanta office. The numbers are totally exaggerated. 4:55 is correct. The people were let go for performance/hours reasons.

Keep in mind that the hours requirement at Sutherland is significantly lower than at most firms this size, so being consistently low on hours means you were really underperforming.

Also, the website does suck, but they are changing it soon.

SAB is a great place to work, if you don't mind working big firm hours for under-market pay. In the last round of salary bumps they added a deferred comp wrinkle to the comp package. Awesome for you patient types.

SABlaw pretends to pay market by offering 1st years 160k. Different sort of comp system up the ladder, which works out to be less than other DC firms. The good thing is that there is a lower billable requirement. But, if I was a partner, I wouldn't go there under ordinary circumstances b/c there PPPs are lower than other firms with "top tax and energy" practices.

Sutherland treats women and diversity employees like crap. And yes they laid off a bunch of employees in the worst possible way.

i got laid off from sutherland. but i just saved a boat-load of money by switching my auto insurance to GEICO.

Paul Hastings is Atlanta Biglaw

5:55,

be clear on what office you're talking about. DC laid off 4-5 people out of 180+ lawyers in office. that's not a "bunch." don't know ## for ATL. Anyone have specifics? 10 or less according to the inside people.

I like it at Sutherland. People are nice and my work is good. In our meeting, the practice head explained that 1 person was let go. At the same time, the group is hiring. It was a positive and open discussion. It is like everywhere else -- you better do good work and lay off the a-hole behavior because there is less patience for people who can't.

Summers, same advice. Being excellent is recession-proof.

Aren't all layoffs for "hours reasons?" If the firm doesn't have enough work, the associates can't bill enough hours.

6:08,

I am an insider at SAB (I'm down with Wasserman).

DC fired 18 associates (0-3 months severance) and de-equitized 4 partners. Atlanta fired 14 associates(all with 2 months severance) and also de-equitized 4 partners. I saw fired associates being escorted out of the office by "private security" (by mid-aged men in black suits). Pretty messed up and TTTish. Also, the firm apparently is considering rescinding up to 1/3 of summer associate positions (this idea isn't going over well with partnership, though) and cutting summer program to 6 wks in each office (this is definitely happening).

SAB Insider.

Sutherland joins the TTT ranks populated by the likes of CWT and OMM. Once the market turns, these TTT firms will be boycotted by all law students who actually have options. Can't wait to see these shitty firms having a hard time recruiting decent law students.

what happened at OMM?

6:17 is a troll.

Can anyone confirm whether Sutherland is considering rescinding summer offers? I am scheduled to start in D.C. in a few weeks and am getting nervous. Does this impact DC / Atlanta / both? Has the firm reached out the the summers who are having their offers rescinded (I've heard nothing but am beginning to worry).

SAB Insider... can you help with this?

Anyone know whether this will affect associates planning to start in the DC office this Fall?

6:34, no, they are not rescinding offers. I just got off the phone with recruiting. the firm hopefully will be responding quickly to the fabricating 6:17 who obviously has a bone to pick.

I can confirm some of what SAB Insider said (for DC):
* Lots of layoffs
* Some de-equitization
* Severance pay

I have not heard about
* Escorts out of bldg (that sounds like a joke)
* Rescinding summer positions (sounds unlikely because our summer program begins in less than a month)

6:36 -- only you.

this is a bunch of bologna-- 6:17 is a troll with a bone to pick with SAB.

where is the list of firms that have cut associates in the past year?

6:17 is a troll, and 4:55/5:11 is head of marketing. The truth lies somewhere in between. Problem is, Sutherland isn't talking to its associates with one voice. True numbers are probably 20-30. Biggest problem is that these cuts weren't done in the normal course of business with associate reviews. The need to act might have been there, but associates are livid about the way they were handled. It wasn't all performance-based, as young associates w/o track records were involved too. Internal damage has been done.

6:17 has abosultely no idea what he is talking about. I know who you are. And if I were you, I'd be careful.

4:55 corrrect, 5:41 correct; 6:34 correct

6:17, incorrect.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi5LESZ7_Kc

Hearsay!!!

7:07. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HEARSAY AND TROLLING. THE COMMENTS ON THIS BOARD ABOUT DL-LAYOFFS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN TROLLING (SOMEONE, PROBABLY AN ASSOCIATE WHO WAS CANNED, TRYING TO STIR UP A CLUSTERF*%K OF COMMENTS AND SOLICIT A RESPONSE FROM SAB MGT.).

6:51 IS DEAD ON. THE TRUTH LIES IN THE MIDDLE. THE "MASS LAYOFFS" IS AN OVERSTATEMENT; INCOMING SUMMERS ARE FINE.

6:51
"I know who you are. And if I were you, I'd be careful."
Are you kidding?! Potential employees are reading this and they will assume you work for the firm in question. Making veiled threats against individuals makes the firm look even worse.
Note to firms. If the economy is terrible and the bottom line is taking a huge hit, just say so. Yes people on these blogs will call you a TTT, but stop ruining the reputations of young associates by pretending every layoff is performance based. The economy is kicking the ass of much stronger businesses than the typical law firm. Just announce your layoffs, pay a generous severance and blame it on the economy. Lying in the age of the internet is not feasible. Even when we discount more vitriolic posts, readers will assume much of what is being said about the firm is true. Therefore issue a statement, preferably a truthful one, after the affected associates have been informed and get in front of the story.

7:12, I couldn't hear you. Could you speak up?

Second 7:15. And as an addendum, it's worth noting that the response on this website has tended to be much more positive where a firm is forthright and honest about the occurrence of and reasons for layoffs. This generation is one that values honesty, and, unfortunately for the secretive types at these firms, you won't be recruiting from a significantly different pool for a good ten years or so.

amen to that, 7:15. many firms need to hire media relations people who are actually media-savvy and introduce some degree of transparency. the usual style of firm media relations is to kill everything that isn't some sort of litigation victory or deal that went down. law firms are not going to lose their ability to recruit strongly if they concede employment shake-ups or losses.

I think 7:15 needs to learn to take a joke.

I'm an ex-saber (left on my own and on good terms well before this fiasco). I can say that it's a good place to work, but that I'm not surprised at this news. it shouldn't have tried to keep up with the pay raises. It just doesn't have the reputation to bill the associates out at rates that can support the raises. Fifth years with subject-matter expertise are billed out at rates that truly Biglaw firms use for first year general litigation associates. So it's gotten itself in an impossible spot. It's losing its ability to be a true "lifestyle" firm, but it can't actually pay market rates unless it continues to have gangbuster years, which stopped happening in 2007.

And I can confirm that firm management has absolutely no clue on how to deliver news (whether good or bad) to the associates. They are just utterly tone-deaf. I am not surprised at all that they've left the associates flapping in the wind wondering what the hell is going on.

For the record, the rumors I heard from employees are that 46 people (30 in Atlanta, 15 DC, in NYC) were getting laid off. Only 4-5 in DC (in random practice groups) had actually been notified. Beyond those relatively eye-popping numbers, worse is that I heard Ex-com made the decision alone, without much input from the partners that actually work with the associates.

These are all rumors, but given the management's skills in communication in the past, I suspect that that's about all there is out there.

Again, it's generally a good place to work, but it just is totally ham-fisted when it comes to associate relations.

Please keep the women who are single, single parents who need this job. Especially the one's who have multiple degrees(making them good assets) and who have served this company for over 2 decades. You the hired guns know what I mean. Don't play dirty male politics, because this is the 21st century if you haven't noticed. Maybe there aren't enough clients to bill because the firm takes on clients(who should be in horror flicks) which is probably ruining the reputation of the firm. Who wants to be associated with a firm who represents monsters of the worst nature.

Please keep the women who are single, single parents who need this job. Especially the one's who have multiple degrees(making them good assets) and who have served this company for over 2 decades. You the hired guns know what I mean. Don't play dirty male politics, because this is the 21st century if you haven't noticed. Maybe there aren't enough clients to bill because the firm takes on clients(who should be in horror flicks) which is probably ruining the reputation of the firm. Who wants to be associated with a firm who represents monsters of the worst nature.

Anyone hear about the possible defections from Cravath to Simpson?

Why is Atlanta even mentioned on this blog? Hotlanta is place people get shot at just for being white and walking funny.

Is an Assbill similar to a platypus?

Here is what I've heard:

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!!!!!!!

On a more serious note, I hope these rumors are untrue. And, I second 7:15 paragraph 2. Don't blame the associates for overstaffing......

Actually, I heard that Sutherland's Happy Valley office at UPenn has de-equitized Donald & Kiefer.

Donald & Kiefer to 190K.

7:41,

If these rumors (to some degree) are true, do you think SAB would no-offer a significant number of summers or should we be set? Either way, I'm busting my tail this summer.

7:41,

let it all out. i love your disingenuous "it's a good place to work" followed by 3 paragraphs of ax-grinding.

so the "gangbuster" years stopped in 2007 (aka "last year")? i can't even remember that far back. you're right, they are doomed.

Why do associates think they are entitled to job security? The law is a business and businesses cut fat.

How come Chicken Little has not made an appearance here?

Oh noes!

Partner to associate billing 50 hours a month and no active assignments: Can you help with an assignment?

Associate: I don't know. Depends.

Partner thinks to self: On what, for christ sakes?

Associate 3 months later: Why am I being let go?

Low billing associate to bleary-eyed partner: Why are you working so hard?

Partner: I have a brief due in a week and it needs a lot of work.

Associate: Well, good luck with that.

SAB is NOTORIOUS in DC for being a bunch of A-holes. 6:08's statement about escorting associates out of the building does not surprise me at all. It is common practice for them to escort out anyone who chooses to leave the firm. The number of other things they've done that would shock the conscience is unbelievable (including, unfounded and baseless allegations of improprieties against departing lawyers--that are magically cleared up after they've damaged reputations, etc.).

You will never make partner.
You will make more at age 30 than at age 40 after adjusted for inflation if you aren't super lucky
You will be paying off loans for years
You have no real job security since you are a fixed cost with variable income generation ability
You do boring work that is not meaningful
You are smarter than you job; or at least you think so
You are getting balder, fatter, more pockmarked by the badly lit hour
YOU ARE BIGLAW

Partner to low billing associate: Hey, I've been looking for you.

Associate: Sorry, I'm not that busy so I slept in.

Partner: Ok. I have a client call at 1:00 and need to get a sense on how long an agency can fail to act before a court is apt to grant a writ of mandamus. Can you check?

Associate. Yes, when I get back from lunch.

9:13: give me a break. Partners at big firms (at least in DC) have become greedy and stupid. Last two years at my BigLaw firm's office, 7 people up for partner in my section--all of whom have been highly profitable for years, and all of whom would make good partners. At LEAST 5 of them should have been guaranteed partnership based on their intelligence, ability, and billings. 2, yes, TWO out of the 7 made it because short-sighted, greedy partners didn't want to give up profits in the short-term to ensure long-term success, not to mention reward associates who have sweated blood and tears for 8 years.

9:39. I call BS, Other than a few tough nuts, the place is very civil. Much better than the other firms that employed me. No yellers. Good balance, friendly, lots of perks like free snacks, breakfast, happy hour, sport tickets. Many attorneys and staff who have been at the firm a long time.

9:10:
7:41 here, I did genuinely love my time at SAB. Anyone who's worked at any firm, even one they loved, can come up with a couple paragraphs of criticism. SAB does a lot of things well, but partner-to-associate communication ain't one of them.

And yes, the gangbuster years stopped in 2007. 2004-2006 were great years for the firm, but from what I hear, last year was pretty bad. Partnerships don't amass tons of reserve cash, so one bad year of revenues can force some pretty drastic responses. This is particularly true when you're paying associates market rates but not billing them out at market rates. Had they held off on the salary increases, they may not be in the position they are today. But then again they'd have major recruiting problems. This catch-22 is going to start hitting the AmLaw 100-200 firms, like SAB, pretty hard over the next year or so.

I heard that even prior to these layoffs, partners weren't getting paid on-time.

These are not problems unique to SAB. Their communication problems are their own making, but their financial problems are more a product of the catch-22 I mentioned above.

As for summers, I wouldn't worry about it. I just can't seem them screw summers over.

This is 9:39.
9:51, you're totally wrong. Yes, there are tickets and lunches and breakfasts and insignificant BS like that but I have personal experience with people at the DC office who have had TERRIBLE experiences, including all of the examples I listed above. As far as Atlanta goes, I can't comment, but in DC, there's no BS in my previous post.

9:47, 9:13 here. I totally agree with your comment and it is a huge problem. In your story, you describe associates who sweated blood and tears. That is not who is being let go. They are not the associates like those in the short colloquies above who should be gone. In fact, I think it is unfair to good associates to keep weak talent because it dilutes the pool of work available for the good ones.

9:57. Still call BS. Don't know what happened with the people you know, but I'd bet there is more to the story that what your side told you. The place is friendly.

9:39: Did you work there yourself or are you supporting a friend?

7:41 again: 9:39, you don't know what you're talking about. I was at SAB DC for many years and never, ever, heard about anyone getting escorted out of the building (at least no attorneys, I have no idea whether any staff were). I have never heard of any of the other allegations you make. SAB has its dysfunctions, like all firms do, but they are minor compared with most big firms.

10:03, there is ABSOLUTELY not more to the story. I know the details intimately and the people were escorted out and baselessly persecuted, only so that SAB could admit month(s) later that they had done nothing wrong.
I can't speak for the entire firm, but there are many bad apples.

My experience is the same as 10:08. 9:39 could not have worked at the firm because the story does not ring true to anyone who does/did. 9:39 sounds like a great and supportive friend to someone that maybe did not have the career they hoped for.

10:08, I don't know when you were there last, but that's the way it is now--at least in parts. Not to mention the ridiculous part (for a big firm) of having regular meetings where associates' hours are ranked for all to see--give me a break---that's small firm BS.

10:16, Nope. Still not sold. You only know one side intimately and it is not unbiased.

10:19, not at any meetings I have attended.

10:23: there's no such thing as an unbiased side. You think details of SAB's underhanded BS are widely disseminated??
10:25: like I said, don't know when you were there last.

10:28, no. But I know the sound of an ax grinding.

I'm sure happy that I decided to become a contract attorney at a V5 firm, rather than work as an associate at a TTT firm like Sutherland!

10:32, I have no ax to grind, but I know a shady firm by its underhanded conduct.

10:32, now there's a goal to strive for. C'mon...

10:37, Still ain't the firm I know.

10:32 contract atty: I would re-consider the contract decision. You run the risk of a career of being stuck in doc review/file clerk responsibilities. Unless you enjoy doc review and filing (which don't get me wrong, I know people who do, and who truly enjoy being contract for its flexibility and reduced levels of responsibility), I'd keep an eye out for partnership-track positions.

10:37, glad to hear that there are people who enjoy the firm and don't know of the experiences that I do. They aren't BS at all but I hope they're the exception rather than the rule, but I'd be surprised.

10:47, I sincerely hope that your experiences weren't as terrible as mine. This firm goes beyond the typical BigLaw BS and I hope all the associates and staff effected manage to land on their feet,

@ 11:16 - affected. period.

whats up with the cravath to simpson rumor?

I concur. Maybe 11:16's terrible experience at SAB was due in part to his/her inability to correctly distinguish between "effect" and "affect."

Kudos on using the correct "their," however.

"Not to mention the ridiculous part (for a big firm) of having regular meetings where associates' hours are ranked for all to see--give me a break---that's small firm BS."

7:41 again. I really think you may have gotten Sutherland mixed up with another firm. Or you're just lying. I can say for certain that no such meetings have ever taken take place at Sutherland. I do remember hearing that the Atlanta office would circulate a chart of associates' hours on a regular basis, but nothing remotely like that ever took place in DC.

Holy shit, that guy used affect instead of effect! That's worse than the holocaust. Lets make a bunch of comments about it.

I'm at SAB, and the numbers on how many have been fired are still unclear. Let's hope next week brings some clarity. In DC, it seems to be 5-7 (my info may be old, so it could be higher). Atlanta is anyone's guess.

Regardless of the numbers, the point is that the executive committee has no idea what it's doing. It would have been more sensible for them to simply announce that economic conditions necessitate a layoff, lay off the number of people needed to be laid off, give them their severance, etc., and be done with it. The intense secrecy of the executive committee is going to do more harm than good, long term. As far as I know, the executive committee is still refusing to respond to the voicemails/emails of the associates committee requesting more information. That in itself is mind-boggling, after four days of this.

In addition, the party line from the top that the associates laid off were all just bad apples is laughable. If the firm finds the need to fire first-years (I know of one confirmed instance of this in D.C., don't know about Atlanta) so soon into their career, then what does that say about the firm's recruiting procedures?

On top of that, many of the partners (some of them very senior) found out about the terminations well after the associates did, and some of them are very angry. It looks like everyone but those at the top have been kept in the dark. There now seems to be a good deal of internal partner strife. Evidence of this is the fact that at least one associate who was laid off has been re-hired, albeit in a different group (you can't even make this stuff up, it's so crazy). Maybe the wrangling between partners will ensure that things proceed more smoothly going forward. Or that could just be wishful thinking. But that's the only positive sign I've seen all week.

No one seems to really know what's going on. The incompetence of the executive committee on how to run a business is really astounding (and surprising, given the generally good opinion people have had of them in the past). In a very Bush-esque move, a couple days into this mess, while the associates committee was frantically trying to get the executive committee to issue a clarifying statement, hold a meeting, or at least have the simple decency to return their phone calls, the managing partner sent a firmwide email (something he only does a few times a year) announcing with great fanfare a new website address (sutherland.com, which isn't even up yet). It was unbelievable.

It would be helpful for other people at SAB to post confirmed info they have, to get beyond many of the useless posts above.

4:18, I am at SAB and posted all night. The people that I know of who got let go were not great employees. No one was surprised by the picks and everyone knew they were coming. So I don't know what all the ruckus is about.

I heard that partners are leaving the Atlanta office as well. Does anyone know about that and what it might mean? Too bad the decision to summer there can't be changed.

I second 4:18, he/she is spot on as I understand the situation.

8:59, your claim that "no one was surprised by the picks and everyone knew they were coming" is simply not true. All of the associates I have spoken with and many of the partners I have spoken with were shocked by the layoffs and had no idea they were coming. As I understand it, the decision was made unilaterally by Ex Com. I have heard that Ex Com told individual practice group leaders how many associates needed to be fired. It was then left to these group leaders to implement the layoffs with no oversight. The result was disastrous. As 4:18 indicated, one associate was fired and a few days later the decision was reversed after outrage from a number of partners and the associate was offered a position in another group. Another associate found out that they had been fired through an email. Total numbers are still unknown but I have heard the term "bloodbath" used to describe the situation in Atlanta.

8:59, the "ruckus" is a result of completely inept way this situation has been handled from the start. It is simply unacceptable that members of Ex Com have refused to return calls from the Associates Committee or issue any statement explaining their actions.

To the incoming DC Summers, it will likely be a rough summer. The firm had likely over hired even before the economy tanked. In previous years, competent, non-asshole summers received offers no questions asked. I doubt that will be the case this year and Sutherland will likely non-offer some good people. To those of you that are splitting I would advise trying to spend your entire summer at other firms if that is an option. In the past, summer associates who opted to split their summer have often received heightened scrutiny and in my opinion that will likely be even more true this year. Of course no one knows for sure. On the upside, at least you incoming summers have 3L year to search for alternative employment. The associates who were laid off are not so lucky.

This is troubling news. A classmate of mine is starting at Sutherland at the end of the summer; he's a very smart and nice guy.

In even more troubling Atlanta law firm news: A Paul Hastings secretary was shot and killed right outside of its building yesterday afternoon (the killer, a temp working in the firm's filing dept, shot himself). Sad stuff.

9:52,

As an incoming DC summer @ SAB, your post is truly depressing.

Hopefully the summer atmosphere doesn't become ultra tense/competitive, but I'm thinking it will.

I have been worried about this since October when I heard they hired 23 summers (rather than 15).

Bad news.

who is sutherland and why is he firing everyone?

Baseless allegations of improprieties by departing partners? Are you saying they make up stories about people to get them to leave the firm?

besides the few sab associates, does anyone here actually KNOW about ANYTHING that they are posting??

As a soon-to-be SAB summer, I'm trying not to sh*t my pants here. Does anyone know which practice groups got hit hardest? I turned down numerous biglaw offers to head to this firm, which I think I'll be regretting soon. Looks like I'll be looking for a clerkship after all...

No self respecting person that was told 2 or 3 months ago that they were on the bubble would tell their fellow associates that. It is easier now to blame the economy then to face the embarrassment of admitting that they had plenty of notice to try to find something else or improve their contribution. It is normal to blame others. Just too bad that people feel the need to trash a place that has been pretty decent to people.

12:09, I wouldn't sweat it. Much of the information on here has been exaggerated, although some posters are clearly insiders and have it right. In DC, there was 1 layoff in Corporate, 1 in Energy, 1 in Litigation, 1 in IP, and 1 very poorly-handled reassignment from IP to Energy. There may have been one or two others, but total # was 5-7. Less clear about Atlanta, but a confirmed firing in Real Estate and rumors about larger numbers in IP and Litigation. At least one associate in NY, and probably one or two others in Houston. Most releases were performance-based, although a couple seem to have been driven more by economics. The rumors about partner de-equitization are just rumors, although no one would be shocked if it is true. The posts about escorts out of the building, ranking associates by hours, etc. are patently false. As others noted, the larger (and legitimately troubling) issues are the lack of communication from firm management and the apparent lack of communication and coordination within the partnership ranks. It was poorly handled, no doubt. But if you do good work and don't have a personality disorder, I would think you have nothing to worry about in terms of getting an offer. The firm runs a great summer program and I wouldn't expect that to change.

11:29, clearly they don't because anyone at the firm can read through most of this and see that the posters that are pissed are the people that are looking for work. At every firm where I have friends, the same thing is happening across the partner and associate ranks. The economy is slow so no one wants to carry the expense of an employee that does not show promise -- including partners. The people who show promise are being protected because everyone also knows that this will not last forever and firms need good employees when the uptick in the economy occurs. So if you don't like the situation, take a good look in the mirror and figure out what you are doing to further or hinder your own career. If you like making $160K a year for showing up at 9 and leaving at 6, then enjoy the ride until the hatchet man comes knocking. But don't then come post on this board as though something unfair happened to you,

12:53 is correct. And I think that the claims about poor communication is group-dependent. The firm is damned if they do and damned if they don't. People would be bitching if the partners convened a meeting and said, well, the economy has slowed so we are going to do some house cleaning of people who aren't pulling their weight. Will the following people step forward -- X, Y and Z. Everyone else, you are safe. X, Y and Z, you're out. The complaint would be like the one directed at posting hours -- harsh and bush league. Instead, they told people one by one, gave them some lead time to look or change, and tried to respect their privacy. And in return, they get killed here. So, while it hurts either way, it had to be done.

And one more thing. It is not the case that people were callous about this. You can't help but to feel bad and you can't help but to wish you did not have to do it. But when no one wants to work with someone because they don't do good work or because they are a complete ass to people and nothing changes after many conversations about the problem, what would you have the firm do? Keep paying them to sit around and do nothing for fear that feelings will be hurt if you let them go?

If you are an associate and you do not know where you stand, then ask. There is almost always a partner or senior associate who will tell you the truth. If you are ok, you will get a crystal clear response. If you are not, you are unlikely to get an answer like, your cooked. But you might get an answer like, people are concerned about your level of commitment, or the amount of supervision you seem to need, or about whether you are happy because you don't seem to get along with people, or whether you are on-track for promotion. You can also catch a clue from whether work is coming your way. If you get any of these kinds of signals, then steel your spine and ask the harder questions more directly. Like, are you saying that I might not make it here? Most decent people will tell you that you may want to explore your options.

I get the sense that there are a few Sutherland plants on this thread shilling for the firm.

I think the last few posters miss the point. It's not about whether you have to make the cuts, but how you CHOOSE to do it. Communication isn't about who, but why and what those staying behind should be worried about, or not, and more important, think about their leadership and the firm. You can get out in front of the problem, or you can cower in the corner and hope it doesn't end up on ATL as the "Sutherland Slaughter". Oops. The characterizations of excom are coming from people in the know - trolls aren't that creative. It HAS been a nice place to work - past tense - not that you didn't have to put in long hours, just that you were generally treated like professionals. This has changed that. It will also shock me if the partners don't string up their own, related to the first year firing/rehiring issue. W/o that, the associates feel markedly different and perhaps they could have pulled off the performance-based explanation. In realtiy, this decision and the timing are due to the economic conditions. Otherwise, there is no reason not to do this in the normal course of reviews (where it would never see the light of day).
To the summers, yeah, sorry - clerkships might be a good idea. If you come, and survive, and there aren't massive departures of disenchanted people, there are still great people to work with and great work to do - that's a few "ifs" though.

Many, perhaps most associates, haven't been in the work force long enough to have experienced a bad economy. A lot of firms took advantage of that lack of experience and told associates all sorts of things, not always truthful. So a lot of associates had unrealistic expectations. Even the absolute best firms at the top of the Amlaw have seen business slow down during the credit crunch, but those firms can handle the slowdown much better than an SAB. Until the economy gets better there are going to be more layoffs. The work just isn't what it was before the bad economy. Associates didn't get markedly worse or lazier. Firms, however, are very vested in their sense of relative prestige and most firm leaders cannot bring themselves to say openly that business is off and they can no longer absorb the cost of associates. It's much easier to tell associates that they can't make the cut rather than admit the firm can't sustain itself in a downturn because the latter suggests the firm is not as prestigious/successful as firm leadership would have their perceived peer groups believe. Basically associates will be told they are inadequate before the firm admits it leveraged themselves out the ass in practices that are no longer viable and the firm can no longer afford to pay salaries. Keep in mind 10 mid levels cost about $2mm a year in cold hard cash. Firms can cook the books to make there PPP high enough to impress the Amlaw editors, but payroll, benefits etc. are a real cost. If the firm can't come up with billable hours for their associates, the partners don't take pay cuts, then they are going to fire people.

2:24

what other way would you have a firm cull the "bottom 10%" in rough economic times?

send a memo?

this is how every company ever handles this. it's not like you call company-wide meetings every time a few people are let go. every other firm is cutting people a few at a time. that never merits its own post here.

should there be an article in the AJC??? it's maybe 20 people in ATL. nobody gives a shit beyond navel-gazing lawyers. Delta is laying off 1,000. that's a big deal.

summers shouldn't give a shit either unless they plan to bill 1400 hrs a yr.

as far as the vaunted power of the blogs, this will be old news once the next maternity leave story is posted.

sorry, but summers are smart enough to see through the ax-grinding of exSABers on this thread. they are replacing you.

if someone uses "navel-gazing" one more time...

3:50,

2:24 here. You don't get it, that's ok. Clearly you haven't talked to an associate at SAB. Come to think of it, do you run the place?

This is not how every law firm handles this. The vast, vast majority of law firms cull out people in the ordinary course of associate reviews to achieve whatever they consider to be the right staffing levels. They quietly tell people that they ought to find someting else to do, and magically those people leave. And, by the way, how does a first year w/o a performance review end up in the "bottom 10%" as you say?

As to you "point" about the the importance of the article on ATL, I agree and I disagree. In some respect, you have to expect it either way, and something will bump this (hopefully for SAB, soon), but ask the summers and 3Ls coming in the fall if its important the firm ended up here, with this tone.

What they should have done... take your pick. Many firms who have been upfront about the need to make an economic cut have taken a much smaller vitriolic hit. Do this months ago, during the review process and nobody knows, or, here's a crazy idea, perhaps maybe even talk to your associates so disinformation and rumor are the ONLY things out there.

Sutherland pushed the fired associates out the door too quickly. I understand that even some of the partnership was displeased by the speed at which this was done That was its major mistake and one that Sutherland likely made because it doesn't have experience with layoffs of this nature. If it gave everyone six months and did this in the course of reviews, I think it would have been much less of a PR nightmare.

If someone knows of someone who was let go who was billing more than 1500 hours, please speak up.

Sutherland has bad people-handling skills sometimes, but there is no more job insecurity for its remaining associates or summers than any other comparable firm.

p.s., I don't frequent blogs like this very much, but do people really think phrases like "BigLaw" or "TTT" sound clever or cool?

No one has talked about what this means for the Atlanta legal market. If a firm as top notch as SAB in Atlanta is having financial troubles, what does that tell you about the firms further down the food chain? What about TTT dumps like POGO? Surely they will have to fire more associates like they did early in 2007. And what of the others? I'm sure Morris Manning is going to trim the fat since they have always followed a take no prisoners approach. This is going to be one helluva Summer. Gird yourself!

I call bullshit on the no one who bills more than 1500 got fired. Or do you mean 1500 pace in 2008? Is that pace because Jimmy leaves a pile of docs on his desk at 5 to play Madden at home or more likely because partners don't have the work for associates?
High billers from the last year or two got canned. that's a fact jack.

5:15 here. I have no idea about the hours of every associate let go. The ones I know about are low billers.

4:45,

the economy was a great excuse to pick off some people who weren't cutting it. i'm sure SAB (like every other firm) sees rough times ahead for firms and clients.

if you've ever been at a firm or company with layoffs, it's the same old crap: "they could have handled this better", "they don't communicate" blah blah blah.

law firms are necessarily loosely-knit mgt structures. they never do it in an ideal way.

i'd feel a lot better as a summer having to wade through this info than being hired and splitting hrs with deadbeat associates.

and any summer who read ATL religiously just thinks there are 30k salary bumps every year. It's magic!

OK, listen up law firms. Here is a step by step giide to letting associates go.

First, have a firm meeting with partners in each office. Admit that you over hired in a few areas and bodies need to go. Ask the heads of the affected groups to determine whom, but tell them how many need to go,

Next, the partners in the affected offices and practice groups have a meeting. It is simple who to get rid off, just decide who are the bottom performers with least chance of becoming [partner and no business or business generating potential. Have all partners united.

Thurd, make deep cuts, and be sure you get rid of enough. You want to HONESTLY be able to say that "baring adverse market conditions" no other associates will go for economic reasons.

Tell the affect associates, and again make it clear it is economic reasons. Give between 3-6 months to get a job (i.e. not exactly severance, as they can use office, email and phone to get a lateral position elsewhere). Offer to give references making clear it is economic reasons.

Finally call meeting in each office and explain that: Economy shit, people had to go, sadly these people have been told they have 4 months to get job, no other cuts anticipated, out of repect to affected associates keep this quiet.

Done.

Agreed, any firm that doesn't follow the above is, regardless of vault ranking or other shit, the definition of TTT.

Everyone makes mistakes. This crunch has hit smarter and bigger firms than yours. Trying to pretend that the decision to let go is performance based is crap. Of course the reason you chose thse people to go now IS performance based, but the FACT that they had to go NOW is economy based.

Give references? If it was pure economics, great idea. But what about with "Of course the reason you chose these people to go now IS performance based, but the FACT that they had to go NOW is economy based." What does the reference say? "The economy has slowed so we had to let people go. We ranked our associates and he/she was at the bottom. But I'm sure you will find he/she to be a great employee." Get real.

News flash -- many of the steps outlined took place.

So glad I declined my offer...I really liked the people, but who knows how many of them would even still be working there when I started.

A message to all the Summers out there reading this, whether you're going to Sutherland or some other law firm (big or small):

Judge for yourself. Approach the summer with an open mind and don't let any of these bitter hacks on this website make your mind up for you. You're too highly educated and intelligent to let a bunch of nasty lawyers color your perspective. Seriously, think about it. Enjoy your summer program -- work hard, learn something about areas of the law you never thought you would encounter, and enjoy the social engagements. I have no doubt no matter what firm you go to, you'll find some awesome people who you really connect with, and you'll hear some stories about layoffs, mishandled communications, or whatever else. But judge for yourself after giving your firm a fair shake. There are still Associates out there in law firms who like practicing law and enjoy the challenges clients present. Watch them and learn from them. And yes, it does take hard work. For $200k+, firms can't afford to have you there from 9-6 every day. If thats what you want, look elsewhere. But if you're willing to put in the effort to be a kick-ass lawyer, you can find a mentor, I guarantee you. Take advantage of that.

8:02, Ditto
9:27, No, they didn't - in fact not a single one of those steps happened

10:48. You don't know what you are talking about.

First, have a firm meeting with partners in each office. Admit that you over hired in a few areas and bodies need to go. Ask the heads of the affected groups to determine whom, but tell them how many need to go, Check.

Next, the partners in the affected offices and practice groups have a meeting. Check .

Thurd, make deep cuts, and be sure you get rid of enough. Check.

Tell the affect associates. Check, and again make it clear it is economic reasons. Not true. Give between 3-6 months to get a job. Check based on prior warnings. Offer to give references making clear it is economic reasons. That would be lying.

Finally call meeting in each office and explain that: Economy shit, people had to go, sadly these people have been told they have 4 months to get job, no other cuts anticipated, out of repect to affected associates keep this quiet.

9.27, it seems obvious that not many if any took place, hence the confusion. If it was just a couple of bitter people let go then there wouldn't be the shit storm there is on here about it. The firing and rehiring would suggest the conslting with partners didn't happen, the mixed messages would suggest the associates were not informed.

9.26, I am assuming that the afected associates will ook in other cities, or other practice groups, or areas not as directly hit. This is a big assumption but if you are a conduit/cmbs lawyer, now aint the time to be going around peddling that load of shit. You want to morph into a normal real estate lawyer, or maybe decide you want to be in labor, or corporate or anything without the letters BS in its title. As such you get a pass, you don't need to tell anone you were let go (that is, after all, the point of telling people they have x amount of months to get a job). You come in as a lateral, not as someone who got canned. Ditto with going to a different city. "Hi Firm X, I decided Atlanta was not for me so I am moving to _______. Hence I am leaving my old firm."

Its not fucking rocket science. Thus the firm that lets people go can say, honestly, that the associate was a good emplyee, coz if they were not good enough to work for them they would have been got rid of at review time. We are sad to see the associate go, she was a hard worker, she will be a good asset to you.

Letting people go does not need to be a slaughter. You don't chuck them out and leave them fend for themselves. Firms should take some responsibility. I am clearly not saying they don't fire anyone, I am saying you respect the fact that you hired them, that they did the job for you, and that when the economy tanked YOU (the Firm) could not provide them with work. Maing finding a new job that bit easier really is the least they can do.

Also, the management people (be it executive partners or worse, PR people) from Sutherland realy should stop posting here as Guests without revealing themselves. Its obvious and a little tacky. You spin it as performance based, and spin it as well handled, then spin it that all partners involved when they clearly weren't.

The problem with spin is that once its shown to be false you look foolish. Also, let me let you in on a secret, the only people who defend a firm blindly and defend every aspect of a firing are the people who did it. You smelt it, you dealt it. Even the most loyal associate gives and takes on what happens. And frankly, most don't give a shit to post defending a firm when their colleagues get canned. We understand you want to save facew and keep summers happy, but maybe email them drectly, rather than through a Blog. Just a thought.

So stop embarressing your firm even more. Moles, trolls and HR people.

Hey, 10.59, if these people deserved to go, why were they not got rid of before. Are you saying that every associate let go was told in January they had 4 months to get a job? That every associate was performance based, even first year associates, there only 3 months at the time?

Stop spinning.

11:04 Well you make an intersting point, but this is where the law of unintended consequences comes into play. First, there is the gentle nudge. People are told that they were vulnerable to give them time to look before there was any scent in the air about a problem. No hard departure date or a clear statement that it is over. Believe me, all firms do this because it is face saving for all involved. For those who take the hint, you never have to say "I was let go." More recently, people got notice that they had a few months to find something else. Now there is a deadline to act. Nobody wanted this to explode so that the associates could find something else discretely. But that compassionate approach was killed when someone decided to out what happened. So all those poor folks who might have been able to slide by with a nice story about wanting a change lost that option because someone else decided to take that option away. The person who leaked is the person to blame.

11.22, I am in a different city with a different firm. I speak only as to what is right. People I have spoken with in Atlanta said that it was a quick decision made without consultation to senior partners.

But, who the fuck knows. I will tkae you at your word, Mr.(or Mrs. or Ms.) Guest. If you are truthfully telling us that all associates fired, even the person only there a few months, were warned in advance, albeit more subtly than I wonder how nice it would be to work at Alston, then you are correct, whoever leaked is a iece of shit who just hurt the chances of those let go to get another job.

HOWEVER, that still doesn't explain mass lay offs. Is that how it rolls in Atlanta? Shit, the cat is out of the bag, oh well just get rid of the dead weight in one push. Associates, forget what we said about having a few months, you got to leave now.

Plus, if you are correct, then why are 2 BSDs in Atlanta fighting over why this was handled so badly? You, as a PR/HR/Partner, know who I mean.

Ok, so your solution is that if someone might have an alternative point of view from yours, that they should not post. What is the value of dialogue if you are preaching to the choir? Is the point of this that the only comments that are welcome are those that say firms suck?

11:31. Dunno anything about what the BSDs are saying. Radio silence and I wouldn't get that frequency anyway. I just know that a person told was given time and now he has none. And that does stink.

(what's a "BSD"?)

big swing dick

I meant swinging

Holy mother, 11:04, I don't think you're a fellow associate at SAB, and I hope that I'm right: you write like a third-grader. If our associate-ship is represented by the likes of you, we may as well all quit now, as we don't have a leg to stand on. Firm management (Wasserman, where the F are you?) handled this terribly, as others have noted. Their actions bring into quetion the very reason many of us joined this firm - the culture. But I'd still much rather be at Sutherland (new name!) than working with most of the posters on here.

***********************************************************
ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION:

Sutherland is a TTT law firm.
Sutherland is a TTT law firm.
Sutherland is a TTT law firm.
Sutherland is a TTT law firm.
Sutherland is a TTT law firm.
Sutherland is a TTT law firm.
Sutherland is a TTT law firm.
Sutherland is a TTT law firm.

ALL SAB PARTNERS & ASSOCIATES ALL HAVE HERPES
***********************************************************

Well that is real mature. The next time we have sex, I'll be sure not to wear a condom so you can have herpes too.

i'm hoping an email is sent to the summers to address this issue. way too much drama going on. that is definitely not going to help morale/excitement about the summer.

i declined offers from some more highly ranked firms because of SAB's "family friendly" culture. all this mess doesn't seem too family friendly.

7:43 Sutherlands "family friendly" culture only applies to people with Chrisitian values. Within a week of me being hired there I lost count of how many people (specifically partners) asked me what church I went too and other such crap. If your not one of the "church people" or at least pretending to be you have NO future at the firm. Wasserman is just a token.

BTW I am sure more layoffs are occuring this week and rumour is a couple of partners are being asked to take early retirement.

Take a broader perspective. It is not clear that those other firms would have put you in any better position.

Many firms have something like a mandatory retirement for partners. You turn 65, you go to non-equity status. You can keep working on a senior status basis, but you stop taking a piece of the firm's profits. Firms do this so that there is room to move younger people into the partnership. Other firms like SAB have retained the old style approach of letting people stay equity until they die. It sounds nice, but some say the antiquated approach hinders promotion for associates. I do not know what the poster means by early retirement. Is it going to non-equity status or leaving before you are ready to be buried? In either case, if you are a young person, I think you should be happy with this decision. I also know that most people who transition to non-equity are happy. The get paid pretty well, have more time flexibility, and don't have to leap cold turkey into the golf and 4:30 dinner circuit.

The token comment is lame. We don't open business with prayer everyday and there are not crucifixes over every door. It is a diverse place and no one gives a crap if you are jewish.

8:04 is full of crap. Yeah, it's Atlanta. There are probably more Christians per capita that NYC, but I have never had anyone ask me where I go to church, and I can think of several Jewish attorneys who have been successful at the firm and are highly regarded by their colleagues.

yipee for clusterf!@ks!!! their back! and to think there were doubters among you. all it takes is (a) carnage or (b) more money, and you are happy.

The new design still stinks

Sutherland's a great place to work. Perhaps the nation's best energy and tax practices. With regard to the layoffs, the scoop is that other practices have been impacted by the economy (just like every other firm) and the firm made an economic decision to let folks go - and thus they fire the weakest performers. Let's be honest, they are not firing any brilliant attorneys who are loved and valued by their clients - those attorneys would be busy.

Which brings up perhaps the most important point. Instead of sitting around grousing and waiting to be handed work, why don't those underperforming associates focus on being excellent lawyers and helping to grow the business.

8:44 No there are not crucifixs on every door but the place is full of religious hypocrits. If you want a bible belt law firm then this is the place. A few jewish or black partners does not make the place suddenly diverse and accepting

As for diversification it is also tokenism what with the "special retreats" for blacks and gays etc. Everyone I know internally just laughs at the crap and carries on putting a show at their local church and charity while holding back the careers of non beleivers.

8:35 the fact is that SAB are so top heavy right now that they have to trim a little fat of the top. Wait and see how the next few weeks play out. Money is very tight.............

9:54, then leave.

9:43 if SAB is such a great place to work why do I know personally 3 women in Atlanta who have all left due to sexual harrasssment over the last 3 years by a partner who still remains. People talk in Atlanta you know.................

All you guys need to know this is going to happen across the board in Atlanta law firms. A few large clients are defaulting on payments and the fallout is going to hurt everyone.

I predict there will be some homeless interior designers in Buckhead by the end of the year!

9:43.
You sound lik you work at SABlaw.
You must have herpes
I love this clusterf&*k, its old school ATL.

Sutherland to 190k !!!

Lack of diversity is complete nonsense. The only thing that matters is how smart you are and can you interact with and advise clients. The rest is all noise and no one cares where or if you got to church.

10:16: You are absolutely correct. Sutherland is incredible when it comes to diversity issues. It is true, if you are a performer at Sutherland - you will have job security.

People have choice. If you hate something so much, get out. If a firm sucks so bad, leave. If you are upset about how you are being treated, do something about it. No one has shackled you to your desk. If people complaining are talented, then what's the worry.

10:16 AM,

I am a former Sutherland associate and the spiritual advisor to Barak Obama. I can attest to the fact that Sutherland fires associates for not attending church.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright

One of the highest paid, well respected, people at the firm is a Jewish woman.

all the SAB summers from my law school are annoying pricks. serves them right for going to a TTT firm.

Whoa, stop the presses: annonying pricks observed at a law school! Before we know it, we'll be hearing of sightings of douchebags and tools at law schools...

9:43
"Which brings up perhaps the most important point. Instead of sitting around grousing and waiting to be handed work, why don't those underperforming associates focus on being excellent lawyers and helping to grow the business."
Because becoming an excellent attorney requires being given good work. And unlike Athena, and perhaps yourself, most attorneys do not spring fully grown from the head of Zeus with all the knowledge needed to be excellent attorneys.
If the partners don't have the work, then that has nothing to do with the associates. Your post implies that there's a ton of work out there even though the economy is in the shitter and if associates would only stop being dumb and lazy they could save their jobs.
If firms were generally such tightly run ships, why are underperforming associates permitted to stay around for years? Are firms charities, or is it the case that there really aren't all these underperforming associates?
Hiring and firing decisions aren't all based on merit. Citigroup didn't review 17,000 performance reviews and carefully analyze who the best finance folks were before firing them. Likewise law firms don't spend nearly the amount of time and resources to determine who the best associates are. Some are clearly brilliant. Some are clearly awful, but there's a lot of discretion for those who fall in between. Bottom line is that Law firms cannot keep everyone on the payroll if there isn't enough billable work for them to pay their salaries. Well run law firms will retain as much subjective talent as they can, but will fire good, and yes even great associates, if the money isn't there to pay them.

LOL @12:22

9:43 -- the notion that SAB has one of the country's top energy practices is a joke.

10:02 -- he is leaving, but like this, it was handled in the worst way possible.

Here is another observation about why things go wrong: fit. Firms hire thinking that they have found someone. They want very badly to achieve a good fit because hiring is a pain, it is expensive and it is risky. It is about marriage, not casual dating. But after a hire comes in, you get to see more about what makes the person tick. So you see someone over a summer and think they are going to be fine. But the summer is not a true proving ground. So you need to see what people can deliver once they are hired and forced to deal with the real pressures of the job (go back and read CWT, OMM, MWE, Mayer posts if you think that the summer is real life). Some summers continue to mature while they are in their 3L year and they come back even better. Other summers start as first years and small issues that were evident during the summer start to show up full bloom. Depending on the problem, you wonder can this be fixed. Most problems can be. Others can't. For example: Can I put them in front of a client? Weak character, jerks, poor work ethic/lack of commitment, lack of judgment are other examples.

Firms are pretty good about understanding the quirks in their own make up too. We all know it can be the partner, not the associate. So if an associate is having a hard time, firms will try to pair them with another supervising attorney to see if that relieves the problem. Usually, firms will try several new pairings. But if it comes back that everyone says not a good fit, then that is a pretty good sign of a problem.

The above can explain why someone junior gets cut. It also can explain why a new lateral doesn't make it. Sometimes it is the firm and the person goes on to do great things. Other times, they just move firm to firm. It is like the chick who has been married 5 times. It probably isn't the guy.

For associates that have been at a firm awhile, the assessment is a little different. The traits that make for a good associate do not always make for a good partner. The ability to make rain, multi-task, supervise, lead, make difficult choices and deal with stress are important to advancement. Some people don't have these skills and don't develop them. So you tend to start looking at people in years 4-7 and try to project where they are headed. As is the case for junior people, you can look at these mid and senior level associates and see that they are not going to make it. This can explain why someone who has been at a firm gets cut.

Finally, you cannot judge how well your colleagues fit. Unless you are the one reviewing and revising someone's work, handing out assignments, sitting in meetings with clients, etc., you have no clue whether the person you think is a great guy can actually do the job. The first time you get a piece of crap work product that does not answer the question, is full of typos, is written in an illogical way, and was submitted after the deadline you set, you will understand. And the first time that someone hands you something like that and reacts to feedback like you are the one that is crazy, you will really understand. And the second time you get work product that repeats the same mistakes with absolutely no sign of progress or commitment to improving, you will completely understand. And then you will become one in a chorus saying, I won't use that guy.

Great news... SUTHERLAND ASBILL & BRENNEN is hiring lateral associates!

http://www.sablaw.com/careers/laterals/positions.aspx

If you have TAX, CORPORATE, ENERGY, or FINANCIAL SERVICES experience, Sutherland is looking for you. Send resume and transcript to a sutherland recruiter near you.

2:09 Big E.

2:55. More evidence that this is not about a struggling firm. Why would it be hiring?

Wow, I'm glad a classmate told me about this posting. I am an upcoming SAB summer in Atlanta and will be splitting with another Atlanta firm. Do people have any thoughts as to whether I should consider withdrawing from SAB and spending the entire summer at the other firm? I would rather not spend half my summer in a bloodbath competing with other summers for offers they might only give to half of us, when I could enjoy life (relatively speaking) somewhere else.

3:05 -- Why would you reduce your chances by going to only one firm?

Read some of the other comments: this is not isolated to one firm. Firms everywhere, including other firms in Altanta, are having trouble, and the summer will feel more competetive at every firm. Better to have a chance at 2 places than putting all your eggs in one basket.

Also, the firm is not going to no offer half the summers; that would be an even bigger PR nightmare than this mess.

3:05: If you have real concerns and questions about the summer program, you should reach out to someone at the firm (either recruiting or an attorney with which you have been in contact) to find out what is really going on. So much of the stuff you are reading here is totally inaccurate. Many of the posts contain little, if any, factual information.

History with splits. First half of the summer usually wins. Second half hard to fit in.

3:13, I see your point. But re: not having all your eggs in one basket, I have also been told that firms might (a) scrutinize splitters more because of their divided loyalties, and (b) be potentially less worried about no-offering a splitter because they assume, accurately or not, that they'll get an offer from another firm.

Re: no offering half the summers, didn't an earlier post mention that SAB dramatically increased their no. of summers this year over last. Given the layoffs described, wouldn't that indicate bad forecasting of needs which, when coupled with increased summer class size could result in many no offers (obviously much less cost/liability to *not* hire someone than to fire someone).

Friday 4:33

Fuck you, you poor excuse for a human being. People in my office DIED on Friday. How dare you make a joke.

3:05. Talk to the other firm and, if you think you would be happy there, ask the other firm if you could just stick with it. Worst case is they say no, and no one at SAB will ever know.

3:43, thanks, good advice.

Listen up summers - its understandable to be concerned at this story, but keep it in perspective and don't make stupid decisions like not following through on your acceptance of a summer offer.

I'm an SAB insider and this is a great place to work, poor communication and execution (no pun intended) on this issue notwithstanding. Face it, the market is rough now, and this is going to happen at all firms, whether or not it makes headlines. The majority of nastiness on this board is either by general twits who know nothing of what they speak and who would post the same nonsense regardless of what firm the story was about. Or, by people who were personally impacted, and their take is understandable, but not generally representative of overall firm environment.

And the comments about being only friendly to Christians? 100% crap. This firm actually stands out in terms of diversity, much more so than lip service. There are lots of Jewish employees, they host events for AIPAC, win ADL awards, and the list goes on. Hell, they even represent GITMO muslims, all pro bono.

Law firms are businesses. Just put your head down and do good work and you'll be fine.

3:05. Beware as that other firm may be in the process of doing the same thing. Try and get more reliable information before making any assumptions based on the things you read here.

Incoming SAB Associate... COULD USE SOME ADVICE.

I am scheduled to start at Sutherland this Fall. After reading through this board and not yet hearing a word yet from the management or recruiting, I am questioning whether I should look for another position. I called a family friend (a seasoned legal recruiter in a major market) who recommended that, given the present situation, I might be better served by taking up a temporary, contract work at another big firm, applying to new jobs--noting on my resume that I received, but turned down, a permanent offer at SAB--, and keeping my fingers crossed. I am inclined to follow this advice, especially because SAB was not my first choice and because the firm has been anything but transparent with its incoming associates. I am real confused. Part of me says that I should stick with it (associate position seems more prestigous than contract work--but maybe less stable at SAB), another part of me says that it is probably better for me to start at another firm as an associate, after contracting for a few months. Thoughts?

3:53: You are absolutely right!

3:55.

Go to another firm as a contract atty. SAB attorneys all have herpes (see, eg, Saturday @ 11:54 PM), and there is no job that is worth catching an STD for.

4:01... Your post raises serious questions.

Is herpes airborne? If so, is Sutherland management aware of its offices' herpes epidemic? Does the firm's medical insurance cover herpes treatment? If not, does the partnership pay for its associates to receive Valtrex injections (my firm, a mid-sized Chicago shop, offers free flu shots, Tylenol, and antacid).

3:55.

go to another firm! make room for us incoming SAB summers!

but seriously, good luck in your decision.

It's disturbing that SAB hired summer associates and incoming associates who are willing and ready to make decisions about their future on a BLOG. It just shows that some people have NO common sense. Why don't you contact someone at the firm and get information based on FACTS and not on a RUMOR MILL that is getting completely out of control.

what ever recruiter told you that a contract job is better than a real associate job is a moron.

This is exhausting.

Seriously kids? People are thinking about turning down job offers in this economy? Don't burn bridges now by revoking acceptances, summer or otherwise. The economy is rough and other firms are doing the same thing. Although Sutherland handled the PR on this poorly (apparently both internally and externally), I don't think that job security there is any worse than at other firms.

In this economy, you may be a contact attorney longer than a few months...

ATTENTION 3:05, 3:55 and all incoming or prospective Sutherland summers or first years!!!

Unless you were born yesterday, why would you ever follow advice such as that dispensed by 3:16 (or any other Sutherland shill lurking this site - eg 3:13, 3:53, etc). 3:43 provides good advice

3:55 you are just foolish - why would you ever choose to be a contract attorney over being an official Sutherland associate? Can't you always fall back on being a contract attorney once Sutherland axes you in December for "performance" reasons (er, I mean, for reasons relating to you being a jerk, being of poor character, having poor judgment or other "fit" problems - shout out to you 2:52 for that clever partner shmoryl!!)

You don't have to be a "SAB insider" to recognize this. I have had friends go in and come out of Sutherland over the years, and I consistently hear that the partners are extremely poor at managing and communicating with associates. I also understand that the firm is unusually political (I can see it now: 15 partners huddled in Atlanta or DC conference rooms strategizing on how to best respond to any potentially-negative comment posted here.) Word to the wise: know what you are dealing with before making any decisions. Ask someone at your school (but recognize that Sutherland has already contacted them to give them the "true story")

Sutherland is a good firm, but the whispers in the air have been that it is hurting financially. It is a simple fact that the firm has not diversified itself as well as its Atlanta bretheren. It does not have the base to compete against the megafirms. This recent management action may very well be to Sutherland what August 2007 was to the financing markets.

all good points. but can anyone validate the herpes comments?

should have accepted the offer from POGO

Word to all. 4:41 is the bestest, most brilliant person ever and we should all make decisions based on his advice. Perhaps Mr. Ed. All the other advice is just people talking out of their asses and clearly they have nothing to say that might shed some light on things. There is no way that there is one attorney out of 500 that might be happy or who could think that there is more to the story than meets 4:41's eye.

The recent comments on this board can be separated into two topics: 1) the "Sutherland Slaughter" and 2) "SAB & STDs." Because only one of these issues is a serious one that impacts the lives and livelihoods of Atlanta's associates, I will limit my comments accordingly.

Herpes is an infection that is caused by a herpes simplex virus (HSV). Oral herpes causes cold sores around the mouth or face. Genital herpes affects the genitals, buttocks or anal area. Genital herpes is a sexually transmitted disease (STD). You can get it from having sex, even oral sex. The virus can spread even when sores are not present. Mothers can also infect their babies during childbirth. For more information about herpes, please see http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/herpessimplex.html

5:00 --- Huh?

5:03, It's an inside joke.

I agree. Listen to 4:41 and turn down a high paying job at an established law firm with a Fortune 500 client base and a fair amount of high end work. Excellent advice. Rumor has it the number of layoffs is around 15 nationwide. About on par with other firms whether they did it quitely or otherwise.

5:06, thanks for the clarification. are the STD comments "inside jokes" too?

Sutherland is starting to sound more and more like Testa.....

testa?

So young!

The "Testa" references are to Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault -- a Boston firm that died with its founder.

Actually, there is no comparison. Testa was bleeding partners.

6:05,

The testa comments are to TESTAcles--- as in SAB's herpes epidemic!

Formula for a gazillion comments:

1. Post something.
2. Wait for every law student in the country to start procrastinating over papers and exams.
3. Sit back and read the comments.

It's automatic.

ATL to 300

*** 5:44 / 6:05 / 6:07... Sutherland is a strong firm, especially in specific practice areas (tax, energy, etc.). There is no reason to believe that its going belly up!

*** 4:01 / 4:10 / 5:46 / 4:02... What is this nonesense about Herpes? What do diseases have to do with a firm's financial health or laying off associates (I think I'm getting old)!

Sutherland to Safe Sex

It goes hand in hand with the ninja/pirate debates

"5:44 / 6:05 / 6:07... Sutherland is a strong firm, especially in specific practice areas (tax, energy, etc.). There is no reason to believe that its going belly up!" AGREED. NO SAB INSIDER POSTING ON ATL WOULD SERIOUSLY SUGGEST THAT THE FIRM IS FINANCIALLY UNHEALTHY. IT FIRED UNDERPERFORMING ASSOCIATES--NOTHING MORE; NOTHING LESS. OTHER FIRMS HAVE DONE IT, ARE DOING IT, AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO IT-- OTHER FIRMS ARE JUST MORE QUIET ABOUT LAYOFFS.

"4:01 / 4:10 / 5:46 / 4:02... What is this nonesense about Herpes? What do diseases have to do with a firm's financial health or laying off associates (I think I'm getting old)!" I'M WONDERING THE SAME THING. THE "HERPES" COMMENTS ARE COMING EITHER FROM AN ANGRY (FORMER) INSIDER, AN UNINFORMED (STUPID) OUTSIDER, OR SOMEONE WITH TOO MUCH INFORMATION FOR ME.

6:25, What are the "ninja/pirate debates" and what do they have to do with Herpes?

The herpes comments are just goofing. It is an irritant like the ninja pirate guy. Just laugh and ignore it.

OH GEEZ! Don't you read this board? There is always some idiot that goes off on a tangent. Some write poems/lymrics. The ninja pirate guy writes ditties. It pisses people off but it is also funny, like the 5:02 post. Consider it an injection of juvenile levity to an otherwise serious discussion.

Guys at my high school who had herpes used to get laid off from TTTs for "performance" reasons all the time. It was no big deal.

-FRAT STUD

Actually, 6:34 has no idea what he is talking about. SAB to STD!

So is the Herpes thing true or not? 5:02 makes some interesting points:
----------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by guest | Permalink
Sunday, April 27, 2008 5:02 PM

The recent comments on this board can be separated into two topics: 1) the "Sutherland Slaughter" and 2) "SAB & STDs." Because only one of these issues is a serious one that impacts the lives and livelihoods of Atlanta's associates, I will limit my comments accordingly.

Herpes is an infection that is caused by a herpes simplex virus (HSV). Oral herpes causes cold sores around the mouth or face. Genital herpes affects the genitals, buttocks or anal area. Genital herpes is a sexually transmitted disease (STD). You can get it from having sex, even oral sex. The virus can spread even when sores are not present. Mothers can also infect their babies during childbirth. For more information about herpes, please see http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/herpessimplex.html

6:40's wife passed him herpes all the time. it was no big deal.

Its all coming together now:

Some guy named "Wasserman" laid off all of Sutherland's associates because the associates didn't go to church or temple. These secular progressives chose to rebel and gave all the partners at Sutherland an STD. The STD of choice was Herpes, and it originally was passed into the firm by a ninja named Frat Stud. Frat Stud, who once worked at Testa, left that firm when a pirate died and the firm went belly up.

And for those of you that don't read the board, 6:52 is the cliff notes humorist.

SAB-DC here. Rumors from the inside is that the firm is planning to announce a raise of 1st year salaries.

SAB-DC to $190,000 ~~~

Gee whiz.
This "Sutherland Slaughter" / "Sutherland STD" post has generated more comments than any other board on the new ATL. Its crazy associates are gettign laid off for not going to church and passing along herpes simplex virus to their colleagues.

What's going on with A&B? I heard that they're moving all the Nokia work to the new office in Dallas. What does that mean for the Atlanta office? Is there enough work to go around or is A&B spread too thin?

Oracle here.

7:21 better send his resume to a real firm, like Sutherland, because A&B associates are screwed!

I've spent the past hour skimming the post and am confident that my future firm... Sutherland Asbill, is TTTerrible.

8:16, if that is how you go into it, then that is how it will play out.

can SAB afford to keep the summers that are scheduled to start in a few weeks? is the firm ok? is SAB plannign to declare bankruptcy or merge or somehow recover from this mess?

8:16 = TTTool.

8:16 = HR or PR or partner on damage control

Don't worry 8:16, 8:21 and 8:26 have Kool Aid in their offices that they will share with you when you start

8:23 = 4 different questions.
(1) can SAB afford summers: yes.
(2) is SAB ok: your guess is as good as anyone's
(3) is SAB declaring bankruptcy: is that a joke?
(4) is SAB merging: is that a joke (would it matter to you)?

8:30 (both 1st & 2nd) are on target !!!

8:35, the 8:30s are inconsistent so they cannot both be on target.

Note that Atlanta summers are getting paid about $300 below market (2500 instead of 2800 at K&S, A&B, etc.)...

SAB associates should take positions as contract attys, fast-food workers, or street walkers.

atlanta summers are getting no-offered.

Yeah, now is the time to be complaining about $300. Get a clue

Every firm will no offer some summers.

$300 will buy you a month's supply of Herpes vaccine.

the joke posters are at least funny.

4:41 seems like SHE has lost her mind over being pushed out the door.

eg: "Ask someone at your school (but recognize that Sutherland has already contacted them to give them the "true story")"

yeah, now SAB is the Stasi. the truth is out there.

Friday, Saturday, Sunday - doesn't matter when you check it. This thread is a gift that keeps on giving.

that is because there was so much BS on this story.

I wasn't complaining about the 300: just pointing out that it was an early signal about the potential financial problems.

Is there anyone else out there who is aware of people being let go at other firms?

All SAB summers will get an offer of a hot, poz load.

I think associates let go at other firms were able to keep their secrets because the firm did not tell anyone other than a small number of partners involved in breaking the news.

9:28 says "This thread is a gift that keeps on giving."
Sounds like Herpes-- the airborne disease that multiplies in all SAB offices.

8:30(2),

Don't mislead 8:16. I was an '07 SA at SAB, and I was never offered any Kool-Aid. Mostly Red Bull and vodka.

I also never got the sense that the firm was all John 3:16. The only legit problem I've heard mentioned here is a lack of 411 from MGT. 1950 hours is high-ish but not unreasonable, the asshole quotient is well below 1:50, and as mentioned repeatedly above, the tax and energy practices are 1337. That being said, there are big differences between the 202 and 404 offices, so YMMV.

3:55, relax. It's not a 911. The firm's just in the same post-9/11 economy as everyone else. Why take a chance on worse work and a worse culture? Better to trust the 666 you know.

that is not a sign of financial problems. 300 a week won't break any firm.

8:55, 9:05 is absolutely correct - Sutherland is barely hanging on and the partners have already stated that they pay "market" (Friday 5:13 already made this point), so no more talking please.

And while we're on it, no talking about the deferred compensation arrangement given to higher level associates. That does too constitute "market". And one more thing, the average Sutherland bonus was not that much below the last year's average $113k NYC bonus, I'm pretty sure.

I don't understand why all of you associates are complaining all the time !!!

9:38,

good use of numbers to make your point. now go 69 with a sutherland attorney, catch 1 case of herpes, take 1000 mg of valtrex, and you can 86 your chances of spreading the virus.

9:39 is correct, it merely is a sign of how much the firm values you

Underlying message of 9:06 - if you are Unitarian you are getting no-offered

9:44. Sutherland does not pay market to its sr. associates.

9:45 to 9:38. LMAO !!!

Sunday 10:34 am: care to state which office "one of this highest paid, well respected" Jewish women works in or perhaps which group?

fans,

i tuned in because i noticed over 300 comments about layoffs at some unknown, non-new york firm. in a few days, people will once again say "sutherland who"?

goodnight, and good luck,
edward r. murrow

Hey, I think we should get together and use our resources for good.

You know, if everyone who commented on this board would chip in a $1 for SAB they wouldn't have to lay anyone off. Plus, it would impress Kash.

Sutherland definitely doesn't pay market to senior associates. And the salary they tout includes a significant percentage held back based on hours.

9:43 -- totally agreed as to sexual harassment issues. I have heard about at least three women who have been blatantly harassed this year apparently with Sutherland's blessing. The women usually end up leaving or are constantly trash-talked by Sutherland's partners. All of this is on top of Sutherland's failure to promote women even to the counsel position on the grounds that the position is "disfavored" and its distaste for part-time arrangements in the few instances that Sutherland actually approves such an arrangement. Even non-raise promotions such as to counsel are withheld from part-timers due to their supposed "lack of profitability" even though part-time associates consistently bill more than many associates who are paid as full-time employees.

all of these comments can be summarized as follows: sutherland is a TTT law firm that all law students should boycott during OCI.

Sutherland to Safe Sex!

TO CLARIFY A FEW ISSUES

(1) SAB is financially secure;
(2) yes, SAB laid off underperformers but this does not impact the summer associates;
(3) some practice area are very strong--especially energy/tax;
(4) you can bet there will be an internal announcement before close of business (to associates);
(5) there is no "Herpes epidemic" at SAB and, if there was, SAB's healthcare would cover it (plug to Sunday, 4:10 PM);
(6) SAB has lots of associates and partners of various religions/sexes/minorities;
(7) SAB does not hold mass;
(8) 3:55 PM Sunday -- is your "contract attorney v. SAB Associate" comment a joke;
(9) SAB pays market in all relevant markets (better than mkt for top performers);
(10) only sub-par associates should worry (this is universal, not only SAB)

(1) SAB is financially secure?[I guess you mean despite many layoffs last week]
(2) Summer associates will not be impacted [but remember that you will be an associate when your summer is over if Sutherland gives meaningful offers]
(3) Some areas have very strong reputations [like the few lawyers who practice in Sutherland's tax department, which as far as I can tell is definitely not growing]
(4) A day late and a dollar short [as usual with Sutherland]
(5) The epidemic is much more pervasive and damaging than herpes
(6) Sutherland manages to recruit diverse associates [only to mistreat them once they arrive -- ask the hard questions about this one if you have doubts]
(7) Sutherland does hold daily partner backbiting sessions in the Peachtree Club where nasty gossip is spread about associates.
(8) Probably not -- the toxic Sutherland environment should be avoided if at all possible
(9) Not true. Talk to associates about this one
(10) Is Sutherland hiring a lot of sub-par associates these days? If so, perhaps a firm with higher standards is the better choice.

8:34: Do you work for a PR Firm or are you internal? Either way, noone buys your spin. I'll respond to each point.

1. (financials) -- Are you suggesting that the firm is positioned for an economic downturn? Right, and that's why all af the associates happened to be laid off for "performance" reasons on the same day!
2. (summer associates) -- OK, but the firm has set the stage for what is destined to be a very competative summer.
3. (energy) -- Really?
4. (internal announcement) -- Looking forward to it.
5. (herpes) -- I can't believe that you believe that this nonsense deserves a response. But, since you opened the door... I have never heard a SAB attorney talk about an internal "herpes epidemic" but am sure that there will be many herpes jokes today!
6. (diversity) -- Diversity is OK.
7. (mass) -- Lots of religious people in the South, but you'll find that in all offices. Not NYC, DC, etc.
8. (contract atty) -- Probably a joke. Contract work is not a path to associateship.
9. (pay) -- Bull shit. SAB does not pay "market" other than to its junior associates. And even with its junior associates, SAB does not pay "market" bonuses. And "deferred comp" is not market.
10. (job security) -- Agree.

I'm behind on firm gossip. But since billable work is scant, I'll catch up this morning.

TO ALL INCOMING ASSOCIATES AND SUMMERS: 8:52 & 8:54 are more on the mark than the Atlanta Spin Machine (8:34). Tough to be a woman here, but probably not much harder than at any firm. I'm not sure about the Herpes comments (I'll poll the office and follow up later), but am interested in when the disease first pervaded our office.

I don't know where it started but I can certainly see why it became an epidemic so quickly.

I didn't even realize that Sutherland had an Energy practice -- and I'm an Energy lawyer!

Also, I can't help but echo what others have said here. It's easy to say that people who were let go were "underperformers," but the follow up questions to that is -- how do you bill more hours if there is no work?

I left SAB last Spring for another large Atlanta law firm. I feel like the environment at my new firm is much better for women. I don't really understand why SAB is this way, but male partners frequently undermine and criticize female partners and make mysogynistic remarks about them -- Female Partner A is only succeeding because she slept her way to the top and Female Partner B was sleeping with so and so which is why she is succeeding or Female Partner C is a jealous bitch that can't be trusted. That stuff got really depressing and it just doesn't go on at my new firm -- at least not that I can tell.

I didn't even realize that Sutherland had a Herpes practice -- and I'm an infected lawyer!

Can the law students please go back to studying for finals and away from here? You are all unwanted here...

Seriously, what about Powell Goldstein? Any layoffs?

But 9:21, it is true -- Female Partners A, B, and C are sluts. Female Partner D and E made it on the merits.

9:11 The energy practice is imploding, their rainmaker got railroaded and the vultures are picking over the remains. FInance also has big internal issues with a partner who can't control his lust.

It sounds like there are a number of partners who can't control their lust. How does that affect employee morale? Is that part of the "sexual harassment issues" mentioned earlier?

9:21 sounds like all the women at SAB are sleeping with senior people they work with. That's a sure way to earn respect.

I can confirm that Sutherland does not pay market rate. At least in DC, that is. You need to bill at least 2000 hours before you can even get considered for a bonus, and even then it's only a few thousand dollars (which works out to a situation where you're paid significantly less per hour for that extra effort to get the bonus than you are for just getting 1950).

And the deferred comp arrangement can in no way be described as "market". You don't get paid the deferred comp portion until January following the calender year you billed 1950 (thus losing the time-value of the money). And even then, the "full" salary is below the "market" at most AmLaw 100 firms.

And that's all assuming they don't try to bring back the enforcement of the 2400 total hour requirement (which exists no where else).

Sutherland should give up trying to compete with market salaries. I imagine most Sutherland associates would be happy to pull back to the $145k salary structure with a lower minimum hour requirement. It just can't generate the billable work for the associates or charge high enough rates for it to keep up.

9:21 -- I am not saying that the women actually did it (the supposed "sleeping the way to the top" would have been long before my time) -- just that many of the male partners say these things. It seems pretty unfair for the female partners to have their success attributed to sex rather than to the fact that they are excellent lawyers.

10:18 -- I agree. I just don't think SAB can compete with the likes of A&B and K&S and the NYC firms.

All the women aren't sleeping around, but I have heard of terrible cases of sexual harassment and gender discrimination. It has gotten to the point, in certain departments, that any female associate actually making her hours is said to be sleeping with someone regardless of whether its true. That is how reputations are ruined and the firm has done very little about this problem.

9:21 There are partners right now at the firm who slept their way up. All the real SAB people here know that is true pretty much across the practices..........

Wow. This is almost more depressing than the layoffs.

8.34, if you don't reread your post and see that this sentance is disgusting you have big problems: "yes, SAB laid off underperformers but this does not impact the summer associates."

I do not see why this firm is going out of its way to paint those let go as underperformers, or the bottom 10% or whatever degrading term has been used by people who are openly SAB insiders or are obviously SAB insiders even if they do not admit it. Wise up, this approach does nobody any favors.

Ask yourself (the firm, the partners, the PR people) a simple question - If you were as busy now as you were in early 2007 would you let these people go NOW? Of course 1 or 2 people don't work out, don't make partner, are not a right fit, but NO FIRM lets go a large number of people in one time due to performance. For the exact reasons laid out on this blog and by this blog.

If SAB is too petty to acknoledge it can't supply work, then it deserves crap heaped on them. How hard would it be to say these people work in areas directly affected by the slow down. It was a hard decision but we had to let people go.

Can your brittle pride not even take that much of a blow, that you would have to admit that the firm is not all powerful. CWT is a shit place to work, but has more prestige, whatever the fuck that is worth. And even in a sweatshop like that they had the decency to say it was economy.

Deep down, everyone knows you don't let the superstars go, but you can't say EVERYONE let go was an underperformer. Show some class and stop trying to paint those who left as idiots, morons or any other put down.

I am in different office, different city, but I hope that other firms recognize and learn a leson from firms like this and Sonneshit. Don't lie about why people are being let go, and have the balls to trim associates not summer positions (i.e. students in debt who relied on your word for their first job).

SAB never admits weakness. Never. They will lie to you first.

"Being excellent is recession-proof."

Do you suffer from Down's Syndrome?

11.19, exactly, those are types of backhanded comments that pissed me off. I also like this one:

"Instead of sitting around grousing and waiting to be handed work, why don't those underperforming associates focus on being excellent lawyers and helping to grow the business." First, associates can only do the work they are given, second, do you want associates working or going out rainmaking?

SAB insiders, are you trying to tell the world that SAB is so hard up that it needs its associates out pimping for it? What a messed up message, yeah we don't have any work for you guys, yeah we think we are a big firm, but could you go through your address book and see if there is anyone who needs a good tax lawyer (psst, or Energy, don't forget Energy).

If I am a Partner in Charge at SAB I send firm wide email NOW saying all SAB insiders stop posting, you are making this firm look stupid and petty.

He speaks and therefore it must be true.

11:00, TAKE BACK THE NIGHT!

11.30, WTF?

11.00

Did SAB really send an email telling the "insiders" to stop posting?? Please please please let this email be posted in its entirety today .

No, 11:26 just wants them to. Right.

11:42, reread 11:26.

I would like to respond to all persons who think these lay-offs were for performance reasons. This is simply not true. At least not for all of us. I personally know one of the SAB's laid off billed over the 1950/2400 minimum in FY07 (thus receiving a substantial bonus). This year the same attorney has been on track for potentially a similar result, possibly lower, but certainly not below the 1950/2400 minimum. Additionally, each year the same attorney's reviews have been good to great. Given this, I think it would be impossible to say that this attorney's contribution to the firm was sub-par.

There are a lot of reasons this is (or could be) happening, none of which are necessarily appropriate for discussion in this forum (no offense, but there are real people with real lives and families to support that are affected by this situation). I just would like to appeal to everyone's better senses - please do not post things about performance-based lay offs unless you are the person in question. It is unreasonable to malign the reputation of people you do not know.

This thread to 400!

(comments, that is)

11.26, I think your wish was granted....

THE "HERPES EPIDEMIC" TALK IS ALL TRUE.

For my bonus (I exceeded the 1,950 / 2,400 mark), SAB gave me $22,000 and herpes simplex virus.

That is exactly what my bonus was. The past two years they have given much bigger bonuses than in prior years. Some years they didn't give bonuses at all and, in others, bonuses were around $5000.

1:54. It is. I have an outbreak right now.

1:54. It is. I have an outbreak right now.

sorry to be raunchy, but can anyone validate the sutherland herpes comments?

You only really miss the SAB insider idiots when they're gone. No one want to come on and say we are missing point, that SAB has a great energy practice and they got rid of all losers?

2:48. your comment is nonesense. you must have herpes.

WHAT IS IT WITH SUTHERLAND AND HERPES? IS THIS ALL REALLY TRUE? WHY WOULD ATL REPORT ON HERPES AND FIRINGS IN THE SAME BOARD?

2:56, my comment lacked essense? 2:57, welcome to ATL, Bitch.

So now dust has settled, were people fired or were they not? Any firm wide emails?

10:32, I was a male associate in ATL for a couple of years about three years ago, and I saw terrible harassment and discrimination as well. A woman on my floor made a sexual harassment complaint of some kind and basically was treated like a leper by the whole group after she complained. It was pretty sad to watch.

SAB & HERPES...

I can't believe so many people at one firm have an STD. It really is disgusting.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

I'm prepared to be slammed for this comment from certain ATL readers, but I was laid off by my firm recently (not SAB, but I don't feel comfortable outing the firm because of the severance/outplacement benefits they are giving me). I was previously a high billing, very well-liked and highly utlilized associate at my previous firm. I lateraled to the new firm/new geographic market a couple of years ago for family reasons (no, I am not a female associate with kids -- not that it should be relevant). I won't be so arrogant as to say that I was on a straight track to making partner, but for the first couple of years at my firm, everything was going well, good reviews (even as recently as 3 months ago), lots of people who wanted to work with me, etc. Then, a couple of things about my group/situation changed, suddenly there wasn't enough work to go around, and I was told that I was being let go for "performance reasons," without the firm or anyone I work with (including people who previously said that I was a "star associate") even acknowledging that the firm's business has slowed down. I realize that firms generally get rid of "the weakest link," but the level of spin that some firms will put on layoffs is disgusting, as if people who were functioning members of the firm just weeks and months before are now walking malpractice cases and/or completely lazy. For the record, I received a bonus for my 2007 hours and billed 200 hours just in December.

I hope that the people who think that they are all too perfect to ever be laid off end up being right, because this is a terrible position for anyone to be in, even arrogant jerks who may deserve it. Best wishes to my fellow "poor performers" at SAB and other firms.

First, SAB does not start first years at $160k. SAB, like most large firms in ATL start at $145k. PH starts at $160k.

Next, SAB, despite its reputation in the ATL legal market, is no different from K&S, PH or any other large ATL firm. For the most part, it is run by white men with enormous chips on their shoulders that hold themselves out to be fair and even-handed in their treatment of all associates. I honestly think they believe their own hype, but that is all it is....HYPE! If it wasn't hype they would have handled this better internally and current associates wouldn't be look to this blog for answers, and believe me they are! The lay offs are not all performance/hours-based although firm leadership is spinning it that way to save face externally.

Finally, best of luck to those layed off.

David Gevertz (678-406-8716) & Ed Novotny (678-406-0704) have represented and are currently representing women associates at SAB who were victims of its' misogynist atmosphere. If you are a current or former associate - and willing to help these women - please call these guys and share any experiences you may have witnessed.

this firm seems to judge people based on their STD status. lawsuit waiting to happen!!!

SUTHERLAND TO HERPES

I attend a top 10 law school and a few weeks ago one of my classmates, a 3L, had his offer from SAB revoked due to the layoff situation. They are NOT paying for that studen'ts bar fees or anything. My heart goes out to all 3Ls and associates in that predicament. My advice to SAB summers is to apply for state and federal clerkships as a backup b/c chances are SAB will do the same to you or never give you an offer in the first place.

7:55, my heart goes out to you. I too was a previous superstar at my old firm and lateraled to a different legal market. My experience both at my old firm and currently is that laterals just aren't as secure as people who have been with the firm all along. This has me pretty freaked, because now just isn't a good time to be looking for a job. I definitely feel like I'm one slip away from being right with you, and I'm just hoping I can ride this market out.

wow. return from out of town wedding to this??? based on weekend comments, SAB mgmt clearly had people on blog patrol. too many bones to pick and too late to even bother, but i particularly loved the following:

"But that compassionate approach was killed when someone decided to out what happened. So all those poor folks who might have been able to slide by with a nice story about wanting a change lost that option because someone else decided to take that option away. The person who leaked is the person to blame."

that's right, blame the person for disclosing the firm's "compassionate" approach. at least "those poor folks" now know that there are more of them than they probably realized.

sutherland outsider here.

layoffs are happening at other firms as well, at least in d.c.. associates at my firm were let go in a much more humane way. we are allowing associates to stay for a few months (paid) and, as far as i've heard, are allowing them to say that they are leaving on their own. its makes business sense for the firm to do it this way (public relations perspective), does not leave the associates in as crappy positions as those in the "sutherland slaughter," and accurately reflects that associates are not recession-proof.

has sutherland issued an internal statement? if so, someone really should post it.

2:15 -

You are exactly right.

What is going to last in the minds of Atlanta attorneys on this site, even more so even than the layoffs, is the Partner/PR plant Sutherland Asbill & Brennan sent to this board to ravage what was left of the reputations of these young people.

I cannot imagine a firm with a more spotless regional reputation doing so much so quickly to embarrass itself and the legal community as a whole.

My hope, for the rest of the associates here in Atlanta, is that the other reputable firms use this Sutherland Asbill and Brennan situation as a cautionary tale and proceed through this briefly-stalled economy in a more prudent manner.

8:03. Good point. I feel for the people here, at Sutherland, and elsewhere who have lost their jobs. It seems so much worse the way that Sutherland went about it--smearing the good names of the very good attorneys who the firm laid off due to poor financial planning. It would have been much better had the firm done what your firm did (say to the impacted associates "Times are tough-- we have to let you go. You can stay on payroll, keep office, etc. until [May 30] and we will provide you with a good reference. We're sorry.") No one would have faulted Sutherland for that (or at least not as much and certainly not so publically). Last week was a very sad week in the history of an otherwise very good firm.

8:06. I agree with you and am coming at this from your perspective. Great Atlanta firm doing something that is completely outside of the realm of reason-- mad as we may all be at Sutherland, its multiplied because people simply would not have expected this from the firm. AND SUTHERLAND PARTNERS / PR / HR -- THERE IS NO NEED TO RESPOND TO MY POST. Everyone recognizes that there are internal Sutherland "counter-commenters" who are actively monitoring this site and rebutting anything negative (even the justifiably negative comments. MAKE YOURSELVES USEFUL AND KEEP YOUR REBUTTALS TO THE STUPID CRAP LIKE "HERPES EPIDEMIC" AND "SAB IS GOING BANKRUPT." Thanks!

SUTHERLAND TO 190K !!!

SUTHERLAND TO "HERPES EPIDEMIC" AND "SAB IS GOING BANKRUPT" !!!

8:03-

"has sutherland issued an internal statement? if so, someone really should post it."

-Not yet (or, if it has circulated, not to associates in all offices).
-I can not imagine a circumstance under which the firm would not do official damage control (mtg., memo, etc.) and, when it does, it will immediately be posted on ATL.

9:11 what do you mean when you say energy's rainmaker got railroaded?

8:08. My friends tell me that SAB is doing exactly that: "to stay for a few months (paid) and, as far as i've heard, are allowing them to say that they are leaving on their own."

But who now will hire them? The Sutherland operatives in this blog have already labeled them underperformers or persons that are simply lazy. Whomever it was at Sutherland that decided getting out in front of this by fighting back via the blog should be hung out by the Sutherland management team. Then again, maybe it was Sutherland management.

I'm at SAB. Associates are being given until the end of June (paid, with benefits, use of their office, etc.), which is a shorter period than we would normally give when counseling someone to move on, but this has come about in response to an economic slow down in the economy (and therefore the firm), not just an arbitrary effort to cut the workforce. I've been really disappointed with how it has been handled, but I think some of the problem is that SAB has no real experience in laying people off. We usually grow and shrink relatively slowly. I've been here for years and have never seen anything like it. Its unfortunate the bad news has spread because the associates leaving could have possibly made their plans and kept the reason of their departure to themselves.

The trash talk about the summer program changing in any way or offers to incoming associates being rescinded is ridiculous. I've asked around to people connected to our hiring program and they know nothing about it and in fact said everything related to summer and fall will stay the same as planned. To people potentially affected by "facts" you're learning here, I suggest you reach out to someone at the firm to ask any questions you have.

Good luck to anyone who got downsized.

12:28 - Good to see Management got the memo.

Thank you. The 12:28 post assures me that people of wisdom still populate the halls that I once called home. It also reflects a wisdom that takes years to develop and which should not be allowed to be overcome merely by the hubris of a few. Finally, it reflects a practical consideration - those with whom you work in firm settings often become your clients in later years. Because of 12:28, I may still find it in myself to call on Sutherland for advice should I have such a need in the future.

So is Sutherland the Thomas A. Cooley of law firms?

12:59 -- "Wisdom". You're kidding me. Great idea to have the last day for fired associates be during the summer program. Nice message to all.

My post wasn't a normative statement regarding Sutherland's selected course of action.

"My post wasn't a normative statement regarding Sutherland's selected course of action."

NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE NORMATIVE

There is so much crap, (politicking, affairs, back stabbing) going on at SAB, in the long run people will be relieved to be out of there.

12:28 here -- if 12:47 thinks I'm Management they're way off base. As I said, I think Management has handled the entire situation horribly. There are a hundred ways they could have done better. I can only hope that they'll still make an effort to communicate with everyone to help improve the current situation and repair some of the damage done.

I'm disturbed by a lot of the other comments about SAB on ATL that have nothing to do with layoffs. I can only say that if the stories, allegations, complaints, etc. have any truth to them its not like that in all departments. I've talked to several female associates in my department about these topics over the last few days and none of us have ever experienced the type of uncomfortable environment that has been described. Not saying it isn't possible - I'm aware of one partner that just left with a bad track record, but I can only hope that these situations are isolated and being dealt with.

I keep in touch with at least of dozen former SABers that have gone in-house and they all miss SAB (except for the billable hours). Most of us generally agree that we would not be interested in leaving to go to another firm (unless we were moving to another city). For a lot of us, this has been a really good firm to be a part of.

As a former SAB-AO associate, saddened by apparent major fumble by ExCom but can't say that I'm completely surprised. For the most part, my experiences at SAB were very positive, even if I disagree somewhat with the QOL mentioned in early comment (but then again, I never expected it). I had heard that a situation was handled rather badly in SAB-NYO but figured that it was due to the unusual circumstances and people involved. But to have something like this come out of AO is truly damaging, given that the firm markets itself as a collegial place where people work hard and play hard together. I'm sure that the firm will eventually survive this, but short term, it's a tough blow to the firm's image. Imagine that Wasserman had a few choice words to say over the weekend.

8:51 I mean the following: A kindly frog befriends a scorpion. The scorpion is the frogs best friend and they work together for years, even a little romance maybe.......... The frog mentors the scorpion. One day the scorpion knows all the frog knows. The scorpion doesn't need the frog anymore. The scorpion stings the frog after all it was in their nature all along...........

5:51 again - Just for the record, absolutely herpes free so epidemic must have hit after I left. Whew, that was close!

The partner that left was worse then Denny Crane.

God, I loved a Sunday comment (so obviously a spinner for Sutherland) which compared law firm hiring to marriage - as opposed to casual dating! First, poster actually noted internal recruiting deficiencies in assessing candidates (. Second, analogy to marriage is incorrect because that presupposes partnership. Summering at firm = casual dating. Associate working at firm = living together. And those who live together without a marriage certificate run risk of getting f*cked and then dumped, without much recourse.

And then there's "[w]e all know it can be the partner, not the associate." Yeah, but we all know that 99.99% of the time, it's the associate (and probably some staff, depending on severity) who ends up leaving, not the a-hole partner.

Anybody know who one of the current highest paid female partners at SAB slept with on her way up the ladder? Rumor has it, it was the highest paid married male lawyer who was her mentor.
Fine example of how to succeed at the firm.

Has anybody actually seen or met the people who work for SAB? They have to sleep with each other, no one else will.

Bitter, bitter people

5:52, what are you talking about. all the frogs are happy with their scorpions.

8:11. The analogy works, with a long engagement and the hope of no cold feet.

HERPES

*** What do frogs and scorpions have to do with the SAB Herpes Epidemic? ***

HERPES

*** What does "long engagement and the hope of no cold feet" have to do with SAB associates and partners passing along Herpes? ***

HERPES

*** What does "SAB's deferred compensation" system have to do with HERPES? ***

HERPES

*** What do "normative statement[s] regarding Sutherland's selected course of action" have to do with treating Herpes? ***

HERPES

PEOPLE HAVE CAUGHT HERPES AND LOST THEIR JOBS, LET'S STAY ON TOPIC !

Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes
Herpes

I'm afraid SAB's biggest problem is the "frog".

Frogs & Herpes ???

COMMENT # 400 !!!

12:59 Wow! You are full of yourself!

Rainmaker, Railroaded, Vultures, Frogs and Scorpions? What the hell is this? Harry Potter, John Greisham, or one sick motherf*****.

Listen children enough with the herpes crap. I've had sex with 3 SAB associates over the years including one in a corner office on the 23rd floor who nearly screamed the building down and last time I looked I was still clean.

If you want to know about the frog and scorpion you should read the story and then follow it with "The Prisoners Dilemna", an essay about ethics. Seems there could even be more doom and gloom for SAB or either someone has illusions of granduer, or perhaps just delusions.

May god strike down all those who have fornicated and direspected the sanctity of marraige.

From today's Daily Report:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1209459937650&pos=ataglance

The legal tabloid AbovetheLaw.com sparked a firestorm of rumors when it reported Friday that Sutherland Asbill & Brennan was laying off 30 to 40 associates firmwide.

Sutherland's managing partner, Mark D. Wasserman, acknowledged that the 480-lawyer firm has cut its associate ranks. But he said the firm has asked fewer than 15 associates to leave, with about eight associates affected in the Atlanta office.

"As every business does, and as every law firm needs to do, we've looked at staffing and asked if we are at the right levels to be serving clients effectively," he said.

Wasserman said the cuts were across experience levels and groups. "We're looking at how we're best staffed in every practice area and location to make sure we have the right folks," he said.

The cuts were based on several factors, he said, including the slowing economy, plus associate and practice group performance. "We looked at our client base and the work people are doing to determine at all levels and groups across all offices who we need to have to provide the level of service that we want to provide to clients," he said.

The layoffs were an outgrowth of Sutherland's mid-year associate review, he said. March 31 is the midpoint of the firm's associate review year.

All associates affected by the cuts will receive outplacement assistance, said Wasserman.

He said the firm's summer associate class is "absolutely not" affected by the cuts, nor are next fall's incoming associates. "We will have the same summer and fall associates," he said, adding that the firm is not shortening the summer program.

The firm will add 31 first-year associates in 2008 and expects to add about the same next year, he said. But he added, "I do think firms are being more conservative -- and we are too -- on the hiring front."

Sutherland received some criticism from posters on the Above the Law blog for not communicating the news of layoffs to its staff and members.

Wasserman said the firm has been telling employees and partners about the cuts -- but not with a firmwide e-mail. "E-mail is difficult," he observed, noting the propensity of such e-mails to get forwarded to legal gossip blogs.

"Practice group leaders and partners are out there talking to associates," he said, adding that the firm's leadership started holding "small group and individual conversations" last week. "We started that process before the blog hit Friday. That probably added to the blog situation," he said.

Legal recruiter Melba Hughes said law firms are generally reticent about layoffs.

"In the business world, there is a perception that this happens and is standard operating procedure and someone talented could have been laid off. In law firms, they haven't fleshed that out yet," she said. "Some of their silence has to do with wanting to protect the interests of the people being laid off."

Hughes said other law firms are feeling the same pressures in the current economy. Last year's pay hikes, which pushed starting salaries at many Atlanta big firms to $145,000, have compounded the difficulties, said Hughes, since higher billing rates can further soften demand for legal services.

"I think we're going to see law firms tighten their belt throughout the region. It's a natural course of events given the period we've just gone through," she said.

That could mean law firms reduce head count through layoffs, attrition, more cautious hiring and "by looking for new and creative ways to manage their workloads," said Hughes, which could mean using more contract and staff attorneys instead of partnership-track associates.

Associate pay is even higher in Sutherland's offices outside of Atlanta; starting salaries in Washington, New York and Texas, where the firm has Houston and Austin offices, rose to $160,000 last year.

Wasserman acknowledged that high associate salaries make the slowdown tougher for big law firms, but said Sutherland did not consider cutting associate salaries in response to the softer market for legal services. "I think you won't see any increases -- and more and more firms have gone to backend loaded compensation systems -- but you're not likely to see decreases. It's a competitive marketplace for legal talent and it would be hard to compete with a reduction in compensation," he said.

"We're seeing more pushback from GCs across the country on rates and what they should be paying and increases in those rates," he added. "We have to be responsive to our clients and provide the service they demand at rates they think are fair and reasonable. It's a constant discussion and not one that's going to get any easier."

ATLANTA INSIDER ... SOME THOUGHTS

I'm an ATL insider trying to wade thru this mixture of fact and fiction. I wish I had started reading this post 5 days ago and apologize for stating what may have already been stated.

* The firm is getting the bad press it deserves for handling the layoffs so poorly and for tarnishing the good names of some fantastic associates. Shame!
* I am not religious and have never been asked by a colleague whether or where I attend church.
* I have never been sexually harrassed by a partner or associate (I'm a guy, though).
* I do not believe that I am underpaid relative to our low billable requirement. But SAB-Atl does not pay the same that some of the bigger, more prestigous NYC firms pay. Similar pay to other bigger Atl shops like A&B and K&S.
* I can care less about the trival comments about frogs. and scorpions and The Prisoners Dilemna Game.
* I have heard rumors of office sex, summer associate relationships, and women secretaries, associates and partners transmitting various STDs to their male colleagues. I have never heard people single out "herpes" as the disease these women pass around or of the spread of any particular disease being "epidemic." However, these comments make perfect sense and I am not sexist but am not at all suprised to hear that my promiscuous female colleagues are passing this virus to the men they lure.

A little romance? What the hell does that mean? Is the frog gay? Or is this more evidence of the sexual harassment attitude towards women?

Dear 8:25,

I am NOT a SAB insider, but think you have so much to learn. You managed to make one of the most ignorant statements in the history of ignorant ATL statements: "I am not sexist but am not at all suprised to hear that my promiscuous female colleagues are passing this virus to the men they lure."

Are you kidding? Do you seriously think that "promiscuous" females are able--without the assistance of equally "promiscuous" males--to spread an STD. GET A CLUE !!!

RESPONSE TO ATL-INSIDER (8:25 AM)

* The firm is getting the bad press it deserves for handling the layoffs so poorly and for tarnishing the good names of some fantastic associates. Shame! [AGREED.]
* I am not religious and have never been asked by a colleague whether or where I attend church. [I AM RELIGIOUS AND HAVE ATTENDED CHURCH WITH COLLEAGUES]
* I have never been sexually harrassed by a partner or associate (I'm a guy, though). [THE PROBLEM OF MALE-MALE SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS NOT WHAT WAS COMPLAINED OF ABOVE--IT WAS SPECIFIC ACTIONS OF A SPECIFIC PARTNER (MALE) TO SPECIFIC ASSOCIATES (FEMALE)]
* I do not believe that I am underpaid relative to our low billable requirement. But SAB-Atl does not pay the same that some of the bigger, more prestigous NYC firms pay. Similar pay to other bigger Atl shops like A&B and K&S. [YOU MAY NOT BE UNDERPAID, BUT I AM. WHY SHOULD SAB-Atl MAKE LESS MONEY THAN SAB-Houston?]
* I can care less about the trival comments about frogs. and scorpions and The Prisoners Dilemna Game. [OK]
* I have heard rumors of office sex, summer associate relationships, and women secretaries, associates and partners transmitting various STDs to their male colleagues. I have never heard people single out "herpes" as the disease these women pass around or of the spread of any particular disease being "epidemic." However, these comments make perfect sense and I am not sexist but am not at all suprised to hear that my promiscuous female colleagues are passing this virus to the men they lure. [SOME OF THE COMMENTS ABOUT HERPES ARE FALSE / SOME OF THE COMMENTS MAY BE TRUE. I AGREE (BASED ON RUMOR MILL) THAT MANY ROFESSIONAL WOMEN, PARTICULARLY YOUNGER PROFESSIONAL WOMEN, MAY NOT BE AS PURE AS PROFESSIONAL WOMEN FROM A GENERATION AGO. THIS, THOUGH, IS NOT ONLY AT SAB]

WOMEN HATER!!

Let's be frank about the casual dialogue concerning sexual harassment at SAB -- it happens. We're all talking about the same partner, and we all know that neither mgmnt nor excom stepped in to stop him. I'm heartened to hear that someone (more than one?) are blowing the whistle on this BS. It sucks to work in a place where you have to put up with the regular stress of being an assoc without also fending off sexist partners!

Sutherland; terrible place to work; all about the partners income

11:09 It's not just one partner. I can think of two others besides the one that finally got in trouble. HR and EX com know and choose to do nothing but slap on the wrist.

We are NOT talking about 1 partner here! This problem is NOT just in litigation and has been going on for years!

Frog? More like Horny Backed Toad!

Glad to see this story is dying out. There was a meeting earlier today and while not much new was said, the information from the daily report was verified. Total of 15 associates, 8 in Atlanta. Summers and fall starters are fine. The program is not shortened. For summer program folks, clearly it will be more important than ever to not be a tool, and to do good work, but that's never not been the case, so don't sweat it. Its not a competition, and good candidates will get offers, up to 100%, at least in theory.

Now everyone go post about something else. I hear Mayer Brown stopped paying its partners on time!

Women partners have acted just as bad as male ones. Neither gender is blameless.

Horny + Frog = Herpes

SAB to STD !!!

12:51 not true more layoffs in the next week!

Holy smokes, Batman! Talk about airing dirty laundry - repeat sexual harassment by male partner, female associates sleeping way to partnership, and females of all ranks within SAB who can't keep off their male colleagues. How does this firm get any work done?

All this is smoke and mirrors. The real dirty story is the frog. Trust me on this one.

2:55... your source of such speculation is what exactly? - 12:51

4/29@8:48: The original post sought to explain "fit" from perspective of firm/partner. However, you somewhat conceded 8:11's point by stating that marriage "analogy works, with a long engagement and the hope of no cold feet."

Problem is that unlike in the past, most firms and new associates don't think marriage (or even long engagement) from the get-go. Also, around 75-80% of associates leave their large law firms within 5 years, whether voluntarily or otherwise. So while "marriage" is a nice thought, everyone knows that the structure of large firms argue against it for most associates.

Just as firms know that some/most associates will move on, associates need to realize that they could be cut loose. And as with personal relationships, some breakups are mutual and/or amicable; others occur suddenly and/or cause resentment. Problem for most posters on this board is not that Sutherland is laying off associates. It's the manner in which the firm (mis)handled the situation.

12:51 you will see a few more empty spaces in the parking lot next week.......................

The comment about the partner who was railroaded was either made by;

a. the partner who was "railroaded "
or
b. some pathetic woman who was lured by his web of deceit and hasn't caught on yet.

Either way, it's a TRAIN WRECK.

5:45 - we dont' have a lot, but thanks for confirming you're one of the many on this board who speak of what they do not know.

herpes.

Wusserman.

Is the litigation partner gone?

Is an Asbill Atlanta's version of the Swedish Fish?

6:43 Feel happier if I said garage? Feel even happier if I said high up in the garage?

Gillgamesh

LAST!

7:25, You wish!

Elvis has left the building.

Herpes.