what's the difference between a 'stealth layoff' and a normal, performance-related layoff? Isn't it expected that a certain number of associates will be asked to leave/find alternate employment each year, or do people just expect that until year 7 or 8 it is their choice about whether or not to continue on in BigLaw? I don't mean this to be flip--I'm serious. In the other professional services industries I'm familiar with (consulting, ibanking), a certain portion of a class doesn't make it--some don't make it before, say, 2 years; others are told they won't be promoted after two years; and some choose other paths. What level of attrition is considered enough to be a 'stealth layoff' vs. traditional performance-based actions?

3:14 raises a good question.

iPhones = TTT

"Isn't it expected that a certain number of associates will be asked to leave/find alternate employment each year, or do people just expect that until year 7 or 8 it is their choice about whether or not to continue on in BigLaw?"

Pretty much the latter. Before this year it was definitely the latter, and even now I think most people feel that way.

3:14- What you say is true. But, the fact is, people just don't get "canned" that often unless there is extreme malfeasance or a serious misstep. Might one or two people get let go this way in any normal year...sure, depending on the size of the org.

BUT, when you start to see 4,5,6 people getting let go, something is generally up. Firing someone is just not fun (for most people), so when things are going well, most employers just hang on to the underperformers instead of risk a frivolous lawsuit.

The performance reviews just serve as an avenue to cover ones ass when it comes time to let someone go (e.g. when the economy turns). In my opinion, firms that disguise these layoffs are gutless and spineless. Not only is the person now without a job, but it appears that they were let go for performance reasons. These firms should just call it what it is...an economy driven layoff.

Good thing ATL is here to expose the coniving weasels.

Stealth layoffs are an issue of transparency. Usually the associates that are affected have received good performance reviews for the past few years and are suddenly let go for performance reasons. This is pretty shitty because the associate isn't on notice of his supposed performance issues and has no real chance to improve.

Obviously, a firm lets go of its bottom associates every year. If a firm usually cuts its 3 or 4 worst associates due to performance reasons, and is cuts its 15 worst associates - focusing on underperforming practice groups - then it is a stealth layoff.

Firms don't choose to lay off their best associates, but that doesn't make the layoff performance related either. Look at Cadwalader and Clifford Chance for example...they slashed from very specific groups where they knew the work wouldn't return. Are you really going to call that performance related?

Of course its survival of the fittest in terms of who gets canned and who doesn't, but the difference with stealth layoffs is that all the associates may be doing good work. So in bad economic times, when there isn't enough work to go around, the firm gets rid of the weakest link, but the weakest link may not have done anything wrong and may be producing work that meets expectations. This is different than someone being truly fired because their work was bad.

No 3:27, iPhones = ATT !

Of course its survival of the fittest in terms of who gets canned and who doesn't, but the difference with stealth layoffs is that all the associates may be doing good work. So in bad economic times, when there isn't enough work to go around, the firm gets rid of the weakest link, but the weakest link may not have done anything wrong and may be producing work that meets expectations. This is different than someone being truly fired because their work was bad.

I think the main difference between what people call "stealth layoffs" and the normal performance-related bootings is that associates subject to the latter usually get plenty of advance warning, often a chance to try to turn things around, and aren't blindsided. There's a performance element in almost any layoff but when economics forces firms' hands they wind up targeting people who thought they were doing okay and maybe were even told so before.

Whether a firm stating that its layoffs were strictly economic makes any difference with other employes is anybody's guess. I think most other employers do assume firms use layoffs to get rid of underperformers.

will the iPhone software allow users to connect to document management software like iManage/WorkSite?

Guys at my high school got iPhones and layoff notices all the time, it was no big deal.

Guys at my high school = TTT. It was no big deal.

TTT = TTT

Mwuhuh = TTT

Weda = TTT

Obviously, whether its 1-2 or 10-12 in a given year, firms will generally push out its worst performers. In that respect, if you get fired, then its probably warranted that other employers see you as someone who was below-average at his/her old job. That's life and it sucks, but capitalism is a tough world.

Now if all of the people fired came from a specifically slow practice group, then its a different story. The firm should have the decency to acknowledge the truth of the situation rather than try to paint it as performance-related. Those that do deserve to be relegated to hiring from only fourth tier law schools.

The Final Word

They can use their handy iphones to look up new jobs!

3:34 is on target. If someone's performance is truly bad, they get plenty of notice of it. There are meetings with the subject associate, close supervision, quarterly (maybe monthly) reviews, sometimes a shift to a different partner or even practice group. Most firms give the associate a plenty of chances to get back in good graces. And this is most frequently done at the junior level.

On the other hand, calling a 3-6 year into a meeting and telling that person that his or her work is suddenly deficient is very suspect. For the most part, anyone going into their fourth year with the same firm is a pretty proven and known commodity. And firms don't keep a person around that long if he or she doesn't know what he or she is doing and/or fails to exhibit normal progress. So, at worst, that associate is meeting expectations. The only thing that has changed is the amount work produced. Characterizing a layoff of this nature as "performance based" is very specious.

the whole "performance reviews were exagerated in the past" is such bs. Look, you want to fire someone for sucking, at least give them heads up. Even in my former layoff happy world of engineering, you were LAID OFF (ie, not merit based) or fired (merit based). if you were fired, you got upwards of 3-6 months in which you both knew you were slacking and at least given a chance to redeem yourself.

Lawyers, dont want to layoff because that would be unprestigious. So instead, they ruin the lives of many ok to good associates (even some great ones) by "firing them" becasue they are to cowardly to just admit that the persons practice group is slow. Hell, if you were handled securitization issues, you could be a great lawyer and still be let go.

As much as I dispised my (non-engineering) bosses in my previous life, at least most were managers. When times were good, they tried to reward people (i had 2 really good bosses). When times were bad, they did what they could to avoid laying people off. And they managed. Partners (a lot of times) just want to make money and couldn't actually manage subordinates if their life depended on it.

Managing isnt just about handing out assignments and making money. Its about really establishing professional relationships with subordinates (not just getting trashed at the same party as them). Its buying breakfast tacos out of your own salary when money is tighter to keep morale up. Its about really allocating work to avoid laying off one more person. Its about having foresight and growing your group properly.

Its not about saying people did well and then firing them for cause so they cant work again in this tight market. Its not about buying new phones for everyone while certain groups get axed. Its all perception. You'd think lawyers would know that. But not just about your clients perception. About your own employees perception. It will get to the point where more and more lawyers are going to refuse severance and spill the beans on the inner workings of these firms (non client stuff). I mean, if you are never going to find good work again, you might as well trash your old firm.

Keep the employees happy. I know I work harder when my partners at least pretend to acknowledge me and say my work was good.

Anyway, in the end, the pretenders will drown out and the real firms will float to the top. There will be true tiers of firms as a result of this. No more will the entire amlaw 100 match Cravath.

multi-paragraph posts = TTT

So...Pillsbury doughboys out there--would you rather have iPhones and stealth layoffs or blackberry's and no stealth layoffs?

single-paragraph posts = TTT

there is no such thing as a "performance related layoff" to a structured finance associate. There is no performance right now in this practice area to be measured so how can a layoff be "performance related".

All the memo says is, if YOU choose to buy an iphone then it will work with PW's system. They most certainly are not buying the iphones. At PW, you have to buy your own blackberry too.

People who use the phrase "TTT" = do I really need to say?

Dammit, you had to make me use it too...

that was a freaking law review article

The Supreme Court = TTT

Santa = TTT

What is TTT?

seriously - firms would get so much respect if they were just honest that the economy is the reason they are letting people go. you would think that saving their reputation/advertising costs is worth the couple extra months they would pay in severance to the handful of associates they let go for non-performance reasons.

Questioning TTT = TTT

Guys in my high school used the term TTT all the time...it was do big deal....because they were douchebags.

Guys in my high school used the term TTT all the time...it was no big deal....because they were douchebags.

Lat can't you do something about the high school kids. Give them remedial reading help, or maybe something to keep their attention during the posts with big words and more than one sentence. A lot of these comments are cries for help.

this new stealth severance paradigm is just plain poor form. I suggest simply not showing up for the remaining 2 months to meet them at their game. Or else hire some guy from the mailroom to answer your phones.

3:11 = PW HR

I also came from the layoff-happy world of engineering. I totally agree with the comment above that nearly all biglaw partners can't manage their subordinates. There are no incentives in the system for senior associates to develop management skills and the firms run on fear and intimidation.

Now that layoffs have come to the world of law, I want my damn money back on my law degree. At least in engineering we had a company culture of collegiality and teamwork that would be undermined during layoff season but in the end helped us get through. Most big law firms have a culture of cutthroat capitalism and back-stabbing. You all have no power against the partnership, and your only route to salvation would be to band together and demand fair performance based separations and severance. Unfortunately, young lawyers are worse than five year olds at working together. You are all doomed.

"I suggest simply not showing up for the remaining 2 months to meet them at their game."

You show up so your resume emails and phone inquiries come from a company address rather than a personal one. You do zero work. Clients don't want disgruntled severed associates working their files.

douchebags = TTT

If it weren't for AIPAC there wouldn't have been layoffs.

Guys in my high school got laid off from Pillsbury. It was no big deal.

Hezbollah = TTT

"You show up so your resume emails and phone inquiries come from a company address rather than a personal one. "

Not sure about you, but we have the capability to log on off site. Plus there are those blackberry thingies that are all the rage with the kids these days.

"Clients don't want disgruntled severed associates working their files."

I'm sorry, but do you work at BIGLAW? Everyone here is disgruntled.

Do you even want your resume emails to come from a company address? Is that even a good practice? Wouldn't that mean that you are obviously out the door?

Wait, you have to *buy* your own blackberry from PWSP? They force associates to come out of pocket to buy the device that keeps them chained to work 24/7? Cheapy McFrugalford.

6:02: You get a free Blackberry from PWSP -- no purchase involved. It's on a T Mobile plan. If, however, you want a fancier Blackberry, an iPhone, or anything else outside the T Mobile network, you pay for it and get reimbursed. Your free Blackberry is technically only free for data and minimal phone use (I don't use mine as a phone), but if you've got your own personal cell phone, it's not something you have to worry about.

6:02: You get a free Blackberry from PWSP -- no purchase involved. It's on a T Mobile plan. If, however, you want a fancier Blackberry, an iPhone, or anything else outside the T Mobile network, you pay for it and get reimbursed. Your free Blackberry is technically only free for data and minimal phone use (I don't use mine as a phone), but if you've got your own personal cell phone, it's not something you have to worry about.

Above the law = TTT

I'm at PW. I had to pay for my damn blackberry.

6:17 = liar.

Lat, seems like you are trying to substantiate the layoff rumor by placing it with the official iPhone memo. Unless the same tipster that submitted the memo also reported the layoffs, there is no proof that the layoff rumor even came from credible sources.

How convenient that "[t]he exact number is not known -- and may never be known -- since the dismissals appear to be 'stealth layoffs.'"

7:39: is this your first time on ATL? Doesn't the description of being a "legal tabloid" suggest something to you?

Just come clean, we all know you're a Pillsbury partner... and figure out a better way to do some damage control.

Skadden never has these problems therefore Skadden is better than you, unless you work for Cravath or went to UVA.

Pillsbury

RIP Martin Macy

Look at these losers keeping up on the latest news about which firms give out iPhones and Blackberries.......is there a particular reason why people are interested in these stories?

Just to add to the "sticking around so your emails and phone calls come from the office" idea, you are clueless. No one looks for a job while gainfully employed by shooting off recruiter and other job seeking emails from the office, unless they want to get fired. So if you are doing this, everyone will know you have been canned. If your firm is happy with you and you are looking for a job, you send emails from a personal account. Can we filter out posts from law school students?

9:46 -- agreed. filtering posts from law school students would greatly improve the quality of this site.

love how both posts concerning the "layoffs" have been couched in so much qualifying language that they are hardly readable. "The exact number is not known," "This may explain why some PWSP associates aren't aware of what's going on," and my personal favorite: "Caveat: this report could be erroneous, in whole or in part."

Now, I don't come to ATL for hard-hitting investigative reporting, but I certainly expect something a little more than blatant guesswork. If you are basically admitting that you have no clue whether any of this is happening or not, why even bother putting it on the site? As long as we're guessing, my guess is that a couple of underperformers got let go and are "tipping" everyone else that it wasn't just them. But I have to include a caveat: "I could be talking out of my ass just as much as Lat."

You absolutely do not have to pay for your Blackberry at Pillsbury. You can get one of the firm issued ones that are on the T-Mobile network, or you can buy your own and get reimbursed up to, at the time I did mine, $225. If you get the T-Mobile, the firm automatically pays for the data service and if you go with another company, they reimburse you (up to $44 a month) for the data charges directly into your paycheck each month.

It is absurd the mis-information that people spread on here....

11:18 - this site is very often just guesswork and gossip. anyone sends an email to ATL tips email address and it is report from a source. if you say you are at a firm or know a person, it is called inside source. send similar emails from multiple addresses and it is many sources and a story is borne. the "source" can be sitting in India with no knowledge of anything or anyone about which she is "reporting" and it becomes news.

Generally, there is a little truth to every rumor...at least by making the rumor public, you may actually force out the truth from the people who actually know.

I come to this board for gossip. If only half of what I read here is true, then I'm satisfied. Keep digging Lat. Anyone trying to discount the information you post likely has an ulterior motive (i.e. I work for the firm whose dirtly little secret you just exposed)

TTT-mobile

Yep, 9:03's bitter because TPW got housed on ATL and now he's unemployed.

Aren't these lay-offs an effort to "get lean" to atttract another firm to acquire Pillsbury? seems like we can connect the dots from the potential Nixon Peabody deal....?

They are definitely laying people off.

1:47, are you an insider?

I am, and I don't personally know of any attorneys laid off in any offices.

first rule of TTT is you don't talk about TTT.

Is Pillsbury really slow?

4:09 i think that you are slow

4:11,

I am glad that you can be a tough guy on the Internet, unlike in real life.

PWSP needs to examine how they are spending their money - it might prevent layoffs. Speaking as an ex employee (left on my own), I witnessed hundreds of thousands of dollars a month - no exaggeration - being spent on frivolous technology. None of which has been used even to this day.

This iphone issue is a perfect example. What do you expect when your CIO uses a MAC while the rest of the firm is mandated to Lenovo/IBM? Lead by example- and ever since the merger, there is no clear leader.

Like every other big firm, some groups at Pillsbury are slow and others are busy. Overall, Pillsbury is not meeting its projected financial numbers. Layoffs -- maybe? However, there have been some attorneys leave because they had nothing to do and saw the writing on the wall. Some were performance related (but then again if things are busy there is no such thing as an underachiever). There is huge wastes of money at Pillsbury via management, technology, marketing, etc. and there have been some cut backs. I have to agree with 9:32 pm -- there is no clear leader and no clear voice for Pillsbury (for anything from management, from technology, from administration or from marketing)

1:10 No offense to Nixo Peabody, but it is not in Pillsbury's league.

PWSP in Silicon Valley just sliced off a few more 2nd year associates yesterday (Jan 14). They simply disappeared. Word is out that the top corporate rainmaker there has no work in the pipeline. If he topples, then so does that office. Nobody is safe.