Add RSS RSS

When Layoffs Cost Money

associate layoffs cost money.jpgThis weekend, the New York Times explored the cascade of sadness left behind after massive layoffs. Aside from fear, the Times noted that there can be a productivity downgrade that shows up in real economic terms.

Too often, their anxious and overworked remaining employees become risk-averse and unproductive, or leave for other jobs. As companies hire new workers or turn to outside vendors to compensate, the short-term savings from layoffs can evaporate.

The National Law Journal also has some stern advice for layoff-happy firms. According to Bruce McEwen of Adam Smith Esq., "law firms that slash associate numbers in hopes of keeping profits-per-partner high may be headed for trouble."

What else law firms can try, beyond going to $190K, after the jump.

Gauging associate demand for firm jobs is "somewhere on the spectrum between astrology and numerology," according to Morrison & Foerster Chairman Keith Wetmore. Sometimes layoffs are used as a method of course correction.

But are law firms sufficiently taking associate morale into account in their business models? Or are they just creating a corps of dispirited employees who will leave as soon as a happier opportunity comes their way?

There are no easy answers, but USC professor Warren Bennis said that it comes down to one word: respect.

[Bennis] decried bureaucracies that "lay down edicts" about cutbacks and treat employees as if they were invisible or indistinguishable -- the opposite, he said, of respecting them, which in essence means seeing them clearly and individually.

How much does respect cost nowadays?

After a Downsizing, How to Motivate? [New York Times]
Fast cuts could lead to regrets [National Law Journal]

Comments
avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:01 PM

FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRRR

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:01 PM

SSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:01 PM

Oh yeah, it feels good!

avatar
4 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:08 PM

What's that, your "Learned Hand?"

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:13 PM

Guys in my high school used to auto-eroticize while posting first all the time. It was no big deal.

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:15 PM

What is ATL's obsession with cats. Seriously, the pics are retarded beyond belief.

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:18 PM

nice frat stud usage

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:18 PM

I second # 6; the cat things is super lame and dorky

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:19 PM

MORE LOLCATS!

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:27 PM

huge faux pas in the LOLCAT by spelling you're correctly

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:32 PM

I third #6, and #8, the only thing worse than the pictures of cats on ATL are the persistent "surveys" by Lateral Link. Both need to be gone. As of yesterday.

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:33 PM

That's one hairy p-ssy.

avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:42 PM

Can't view the link - not a premium law.com subscriber.

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:50 PM

you mean we aren't fungible tools?

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:52 PM

Yay, more LOL cats! (This one is hilarious.)

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 3:59 PM

Love the LOLcats, though agree with 10, should at least be "youz" or something instead of "you're"

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 4:01 PM

It should be yur.

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 4:01 PM

What's on that poor kitteh's head? I hope that's just his own hair and not ... ew.

avatar
19 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 4:06 PM

love the lolcats...donno why lifeless douches are so bothered by pictures on a website

avatar
20 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 4:09 PM

I usually like the lolcats, but this one's stupid -- the last person I want to think about is Donald Trump; he makes me gag.

Since I also can't view the link, this entire post is useless.

avatar
22 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 4:50 PM

neither link works. crappy post

avatar
23 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 4:52 PM

this makes a lot of sense

layoffs actually cost money....right...and hiring people when there is no work for them makes money...i see it now

douchetards

avatar
24 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 5:08 PM

#22, click on #21's link.

#21, thank you.

that said, neither article was very good -- we already know lay-offs = TTT and that current associates tend to get scared, demoralized, and tempted to leave (but aren't they already?).

I would have liked to see more analysis of whether lay-offs really do cause a shortage of mid-level associates down the road that will have to be filled with laterals, i.e. some hard numbers that layoffs ultimately don't save much money, as well as a discussion of whether this gap in mid-levels leads to problems in training new associates.

since there's not much to talk about in these half-a$$ articles, Elie, you need to add your own talking points

avatar
25 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, August 25, 2008 6:00 PM

"layoffs actually cost money....right...and hiring people when there is no work for them makes money...i see it now"

Reading is hard, isn't it 23?

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, August 26, 2008 3:05 AM

10, don't you mean faux "paw"?

avatar
27 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, August 26, 2008 1:48 PM

"cascade of sadness"?

Post Your Comment