Can we hear more about attorney layoffs instead....i'm just asking.

9:20: if you spell "elitism" with a random capital "E" and further incorrectly add an extra "e," I strongly suspect that you too lack the credentials and skills to be hired at a law firm.

Gosh, my law firm is boring even when it comes to layoffs ... wait, maybe that's a good thing.

I thought Kaye Scholer was a cosmetics company.

A Cleary Gottlieb partner fired his kids goldfish last night. He cited performance reasons. On a related note, a Cleary Gottlieb partner found out he had a child when he actually went home from work last night.

Cravath doesn't have to fire people. You are either Cravath material or you are not. Cravath trumps all. The only firm that can best Cravath is Cravath.

PATHETIC post.

Lat, did you post that comment just so that you could quote it?

No news is good news.

What's less newsworthy, a blog post about five secretaries getting fired, or a blog post about a blog post about five secretaries getting fired? Good work, scoop.

Any truth to the rumors that Cleary is laying off 10 associates in NYC?

C'mon, this is bullshit - stop trying to pull a story out of thin air.

I'm surprised that no one is more deeply concerned about the welfare of these recently fired secretaries. How many of you shamelessly shill for higher raises and bonuses? Yet when one of your colleagues is fired, you have no compassion.

If Cravath is some full of great-ness, then how come the people I deal with there come off as complete idiots? I'm just askin..

When Cravath goes swimming in the ocean, Cravath does not get wet; the ocean gets Cravath.

If they're going to announce single digit staff layoffs why not start posting on every minor business decision that a law firm makes.

Hey I heard a rumor that some NY firm increased its mail room staff by 6 people this year! OMGWTFBBQ!!

OMGWTFBBQ - not bad!

This just in:

Straight Caucasian Male BigLaw Associate-reject-cum-blogger from TTT Notre Dame Scoops Gay Asian Male BigLaw Associate-reject-cum-blogger from Elite Yale Again -- Harold Koh to Reconsider Affirmative-Action in Admissions for Class of 2012.

So, have any of your clients realized yet that fewer secretaries due to technological improvements means that they're paying hourly attorney rates for typing and other things that used to be done by support staff?

Cravath doesn't need secretaries. Cravath's menial tasks just get done. Cravath phones answer themselves. Cravath associates can simply will something to happen and it gets done, Cravath style.

Wonder if any of you Cravath-whores are the ones that seem to come across as idiots? Ha! (as I stare at a letter that my 3yo could have written better)

Maybe they just sent these jobs to India? Word on the street is that Kaye Scholer digs using Indians to do their work. MUMBAI to 5K!

Maybe they just sent these jobs to India? Word on the street is that Kaye Scholer digs using Indians to do their work. MUMBAI to 5K!

12:44 -- I type my own letters and briefs as I write them. Most associates used laptops in college and law school. We don't need someone to type up dictated memos. Requiring us to dictate or handwrite a brief to then give to a secretary to transcribe would take several times longer and interrupt our thought process (as we're now accustomed to drafting by computer). Moreover, to be honest, cutting deadwood (if in fact these roles were unnecessary or underperforming) is a way to increase PPP or cover costs without raising billing rates, which I think most clients would consider a good thing.

This is not to say I think staff roles are unimportant -- they are vital. But I think BigLaw is horribly behind when it comes to defining what support roles are needed and what skill sets are necessary to fill those roles. If staff are unnecessary or underperforming, they should be let go. (And no, I'm not being classist or elitist here. After all, we've seen the waves of associate layoffs and partner deequitizations on these pages for sometime now. It is a joke to think or say that staff will somehow be the one safe/protected group -- that's just not the way a business works.)

Cravath associates just think about what they want to write and a printer immediately prints it out in perfect form. Cravath associates do not even need to talk to each other, they just read each others minds and agree that they are in agreement.

Honestly, Lat, stop pretending like you don't post tons of unnecessary b.s. to fill your blog's pages. You're blog has degenerated into ^%&*%( also.

Most people who visit this site only do so to find out what firms are doing layoffs/giving such and such bonuses/raising salaries. Everything else is extraneous crap that we tolerate so that we can get that information.

1:30, your point in Para1 is valid for docs generated by you, but 12:44's point is just as valid re: docs generated by other side. I remember partner at previous firm (with whom I shared a secy) telling me that (1) secy "too busy" to input my handwritten markups to various docs, and (2) really, making my own edits was beneficial to my overall growth as transactional atty. WTF???? How hard is it to blackline and what do I learn from my own comments? When I'm cranking through the latest drafts of 30 or so docs for single matter, the last thing I want to do is stop after each one and input own revisions (or go back when done with entire stack), run blacklines and proof. Quickly realized that (1) secy not so busy (advent of voicemail apparently meant no further need to actually pick up calls), and (2) my "learning process" simply meant more billable associate time. But who was I to argue? Billables are billables - partner can deal with the client after receipt of monthly charges.

10:59, our secretaries are not our colleagues.

Cravath doesn't have to worry billables. Clients just pay Cravath because they are Cravath. I have heard that Cravath gets by parties who aren't even clients. They just pay because they are Cravath.

@2:03 -- I think we agree that staff support roles are necessary. But, as you pointed out, not all staff are actually working/busy. Some can't be trusted to enter edits properly. Some just don't want to work, so will take so long and make so many mistakes that you end up deciding never to trust them again. Sometimes partners don't want certain things to be delegated to staff. Some staff, however, are exceptional and will do your work in a timely and terrific fashion.

However, in the first three of those categories, it would not make a difference if the firm let go of a secretary that wasn't entering your edits in the first place (either because s/he wasn't competent to do so, wasn't willing to work, or because the partner didn't want that work delegated to someone in that role). That's really my only point: that certain roles are no longer necessary or certain people just aren't appropriate to fill those roles. I have no idea what the situation at KS was, but in my experience, it is no longer sufficient for a BigLaw secretary to merely be able to type dictation and answer phones. We have computers and voicemail for those tasks. Sure, we have some tasks -- billing, expense reports -- that may be a holdover from the old days. However, now a successful BigLaw assistant also needs to be pretty skilled as to formatting documents, adept at e-filings, detailed enough to be trusted to enter edits, competent enough to quickly run blacklines, etc.

To the poster continually commenting on Cravath, please stop. Cravath is a 1st class establishment that does not deserve to be shat on by some lowly blogger. In short, Cravath is better than you. Always has been. Always will be.

2:21, 2:03 here. I hear you and completely agree. Aside from prior experience, I've been fortunate to have great assistants (unsurprisingly, true "career" legal secretaries) who make it possible for me to handle workload quickly and efficiently - and workload of associate who recently left. WIth the right people and used the right way, tech advances permit both assistants and associates be more valuable/productive.

This is a miscarriage of justice. I also heard Cravath hired L2L and some 1Ls from Penn State law (or was it UPenn?).

JT was pissed at those hirings and at all the mother f*cking snakes on his mother f*ucking private jet but his buddy frat stud assured him it was no big deal.

Don't tase me bro.

Take a breath you Cravath lovers. Wouldn't want you to choke.

5 secys would support minimum 15 associates and a couple of partners. Why is everyone assuming KS just reallocated the work- probably means they have, or intend to have, at least 15 fewer attys to be supported in the first place.

I'm surprised, only because its easier to just hire less in the turnover cycle. That's what my (big)law firm is doing this year, all 4 paralegals int he group are leaving and they're only hiring 3 to replace them.