Hiring Freeze at Chadbourne & Parke
Adventures In Burying The Lead
A firm-wide memo from Charlie O’Neil, managing partner of Chadbourne & Parke, announced that the firm was instituting a legal and non-legal hiring freeze in response to the economic downturn.
The lengths O’Neil went to try and bury this important piece of firm information are slightly amazing. The firm-wide email was entitled “How Are We Doing?” and the first 4 paragraphs read like the “Yay Us” emails we’ve seen from firms like DPW and STB.
However, in the sixth paragraph, O’Neil gets to the part where he talks about keeping control over firm expenses:
That said, expenses have been under constant review and we have taken a number of steps to better position us for the remainder of this year and next. Among the more significant is the decision to delay much of the planned technology upgrade. We recognize the need to improve technology and certain of the more important upgrades will continue. Others, including the upgrade to new desktop computers and software, will be postponed. We will review this decision in 2009 as the economic picture becomes clearer. Should conditions improve we will begin the upgrade sometime in 2009; otherwise it will be delayed until 2010. We will be issuing new guidelines pertaining to controls over Firm business expenses, including travel. We will also more closely monitor and limit certain other expenses which in a more robust economy might otherwise be acceptable We have also instituted a freeze on hiring legal and non-legal personnel. To the extent a practice area has need of additional legal personnel, we will seek to temporarily shift lawyers from a less-busy practice area to assist, rather than hiring laterally. We will take the same approach with non-legal personnel and departments. We welcome your thoughts on other cost saving measures.
Catch that? I bet O’Neil hopes you didn’t.
More after the jump, including the full Chadbourne memo and the firm’s response.
You might remember that back in September we incorrectly reported that Chadbourne canceled their Harvard Law School OCI interviews. The firm quickly corrected us and we posted that correction. In September, the firm told us:
In an item on Abovethelaw.com today headlined “Open Thread: How is the Fall Recruiting Season Shaping Up?” you say that Chadbourne & Parke has canceled “their whole Harvard OCI.” This is wrong. We are continuing to recruit for our summer program at Harvard Law School. In fact, Chadbourne recruiters are at the Harvard OCI taking place today
In light of this hiring freeze, what does that mean for students who interviewed with Chadbourne? Are they de-facto canceling their 2009 summer program? If so, it seems like an awful waste of resources to send recruiters around the country for jobs that are no longer available.
Even if their 2009 summer program goes ahead as scheduled, a hiring freeze cannot inspire confidence among prospective 2009 summers.
And, of course, we have no idea how this will affect 2008 summers associates. We assume that any of them who received and accepted offers for full time employment next fall still have those offers.
Chadbourne & Parke and Charlie O’Neil did not respond to a request for comment about this story.
If the firm decides to comment and clear up some of these questions, we will update this post.
Update (1:20): A firm spokesperson assures us that the 2009 summer program has not been canceled:
The hiring freeze will last until it becomes clear that the economic picture is improving. This will not have any impact on our 2009 summer associate class.
Check out the full memo below.
CHADBOURNE & PARKE — MEMO — HOW ARE WE DOING? — CHARLIE O’NEIL
How are we Doing?
More than ever in the last month, people have approached me with the question, “How are we doing?” The questioners are more earnest than they were a few months ago and seek more than my usual “Just fine.” There is no question that we are in uncertain times. Some of you have never experienced a downturn, much less a recession. Many of us have seen both, more than once. Perhaps the most severe in the last 20 years was the 1991 recession. Back then, by carefully husbanding our resources and taking advantage of the business opportunities presented by the recession, the Firm weathered the storm better than many and in 1992 had its then best year ever. In the wake of the fiscal crisis in Russia in the summer of 1998, many firms closed their Moscow offices. Unlike them, we saw the opportunities in restructuring, litigation and other work and in that process established our Moscow office as a significant “go to” player in the market. In 1999 that office had its best year ever up until that time. We similarly weathered the downturn in 2001 and the aftereffects of 9/11 and the Firm had a very successful year in 2002.
All indications are that we are in for a recession which could be longer than that experienced in the early 90’s. The obvious question is what does that mean for all of us at Chadbourne? We are fortunate that the Firm is not dependent on any one market segment or geographic region and our practices are balanced. Typically in a downturn or recession, law firms see a decided uptick in bankruptcy/restructuring and litigation. While this recession is different in that law firms did not see this uptick happening as quickly as it occurred in prior downturns, we are now seeing an increase in activity in these practice areas and expect that increase to continue. We are also fortunate that our transactional practices have not seen a decline to the extent that many other firms’ transactional practices have experienced. We have been particularly fortunate in that our renewables and alternative energy practice has been very strong through the first three quarters although, with the continuing pressure on corporate profits and the continuing credit crunch, we do expect some slowdown in that area as well. A slowdown in transactions is typical in a recession but it will be balanced by an increase in bankruptcy, restructuring and commercial litigation perhaps even more than proportionally. Lastly we also have some practices which tend not to be as affected by economic swings as some others. Our activity in insurance reinsurance disputes continues at a strong level as does our work in product liability.
The geographic spread of our offices has been very beneficial. The current slowdown began in the United States and has taken time for its effects to be felt in other regions, typical of past slowdowns. Despite the turmoil in stock markets worldwide, we are experiencing significant activity in the CIS, the Middle East and other parts of the world. While we may see some slowing of transactional work in the coming months in these regions, we can expect a corresponding increase in restructuring and litigation here also. Lastly, just as our geographic spread helps us at the beginning of the recession, it helps us at the end of one also. Typically global recessions end first in the United States. Thus, as the recession works its way through the world economy, we can expect that when and if work slows appreciably internationally it will soon be followed by increased activity in the United States.
You should take some comfort in the fact that we are doing better than a number of our peers. That, in part, is due to the fact that we are not overly dependent on any one practice area, such as capital markets. Nor were we a firm with a significant practice involving the various financial instruments which have now become “toxic” as were a number of other firms.
Nevertheless, we face a challenging time. However, such times do present opportunities for us, and practice groups have been working on initiatives to better service clients in these challenging times. One such initiative is the newly formed Financial Crisis Task Force, a cross-disciplinary group focusing its efforts on assisting clients work through the thicket of problems associated with the current economic conditions. Another is being undertaken by an interdisciplinary team to deal with insurance company related issues, including the multi-trillion dollar credit default swap market. Our second Green Business Summit held on October 17 focused on renewable energy initiatives in light of the financial crisis, was attended by over 500 people and received widespread media coverage. Other initiatives are in formation and we are in frequent contact with our clients in order to understand and meet their developing needs.
In addition to increased attention to client relations and business development, we as a firm, just as we do individually, must live within our means and watch expenses. Fortunately, we have always operated on a “lean and mean” basis. That said, expenses have been under constant review and we have taken a number of steps to better position us for the remainder of this year and next. Among the more significant is the decision to delay much of the planned technology upgrade. We recognize the need to improve technology and certain of the more important upgrades will continue. Others, including the upgrade to new desktop computers and software, will be postponed. We will review this decision in 2009 as the economic picture becomes clearer. Should conditions improve we will begin the upgrade sometime in 2009; otherwise it will be delayed until 2010. We will be issuing new guidelines pertaining to controls over Firm business expenses, including travel. We will also more closely monitor and limit certain other expenses which in a more robust economy might otherwise be acceptable We have also instituted a freeze on hiring legal and non-legal personnel. To the extent a practice area has need of additional legal personnel, we will seek to temporarily shift lawyers from a less-busy practice area to assist, rather than hiring laterally. We will take the same approach with non-legal personnel and departments. We welcome your thoughts on other cost saving measures.
Working together and focusing on what is important to our business we will manage through the uncertainty and emerge as a stronger firm, just as we have done in past downturns. We all must recognize, however, that we cannot proceed as if it is business as usual. It clearly is not. All must go the extra mile to ensure continued success.
Earlier: Open Thread: How is the Fall Recruiting Season Shaping Up?
(96) 
Comments
last
First
It's not you. It's me.
I had a smashing interview there, but was ultimately rejected. Now I know why.
Please, just edit your work. Please.
"What is slightly amazing was the lengths O'Neil went trying burying..."
You mean "to try and bury" or some such logical alternative? Why is it so hard to proof your writing? Please!
burying the LEDE. jesus.
"What is slightly amazing was the lengths O'Neil went trying burying this important piece of firm information. " ???? what does this mean.....LAT!!!
What's the problem, Elie? Do you need a keyboard with larger keys?
Good thing you aren't responsible for the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant.
ELIE. Think about the memo's audience. PEOPLE WHO ALREADY WORK AT C&P. Telling them that they're going to reduce spending is NOT THE LEAD. It is of limited importance to the people at C&P and is only truly important to people on the outside, looking in.
Stop trying to kiss up to Law School crowd.
Lede is "more correct" but lead is also accepted.
Wish I could say that I didn't see this coming. Chadbourne gave a friend of mine her walking papers earlier this year. Certainly wasn't performance related as there wasn't enough work going around to base a performance review on.
"The hiring freeze will last until it becomes clear that the economic picture is improving. This will not have any impact on our 2009 summer associate class. "
And if the economy does not rebound by next summer?
Every major bank on Wall Street is either laying people off in droves, going bankrupt, or selling itself in a fire sale. We're in the most serious economic crisis since the great depression.
Chadbourne won't be hiring any more lateral associates this year? Who gives a f*ck. Seriously, is this news? People should be grateful they have a job, and stupid blogs should find real news to report on.
"The lengths O'Neil went to try and bury this important piece of firm information are slightly amazing."
He fixed it and it still is broken.
I left Chadbourne early last year, and other than project finance, there was not a lot of work for associates at that point. I can't imagine how slow things must be now.
Glen Auletta is a d'bag and has short-man syndrome.
"The lengths O'Neil went to try and bury this important piece of firm information are slightly amazing"....this is ur attempt at fixing it...are you kidding me...u went to Harvard law school?????....they are soon going to ban you from saying that publicly...
"The lengths O'Neil went to try and bury this important piece of firm information are slightly amazing"....this is ur attempt at fixing it...are you kidding me...u went to Harvard law school?????....they are soon going to ban you from saying that publicly...
Elie,
In your post, you raise the point regarding the '08 summer class. It is somewhat surprising the firm provided information regarding the '09 summer class but nothing regarding the '09 first year class. Of course it could just be another fine example of your journalistic acumen.
13: I suppose it depends on how literally you read the letter. If there really is a hiring freeze, what does that say about the upcoming summer program? Last year's program?
"The lengths O'Neil went to try and bury this important piece of firm information are slightly amazing."
is better, but not as well written as
"The lengths to which O'Neil went in his attempt to bury this important piece of information are amazing."
"slightly amazing" is quite a weird turn of phrase. I am AMAZED, but only slightly....
Buddy of mine jumped ship some time ago. He noticed all of the farewell emails going around this year and knew that it wasn't possible that all of these six-figure junkies wanted to up and make a career change or be at home with family.
13--While a hiring freeze is not the end of the world, I do think it is interesting and relevant information that biglaw firm X is undertaking cost-cutting measures Y and Z. In fact, learning concrete info like this is the the main reason I read this blog. And 9, even for the intended audience, the writer did go out of the way to bury the cost-cutting measures.
Elie....your posts are generally interesting..but just take a little time to read them over before you post them...
"The lengths O'Neil went to try and bury this important piece of firm information are slightly amazing"....this is ur attempt at fixing it...are you kidding me...u went to Harvard law school?????....they are soon going to ban you from saying that publicly...
"The lengths O'Neil went to try and bury this important piece of firm information are slightly amazing"....this is ur attempt at fixing it...are you kidding me...u went to Harvard law school?????....they are soon going to ban you from saying that publicly...
"The lengths O'Neil went to try and bury this important piece of firm information are slightly amazing"....this is ur attempt at fixing it...are you kidding me...u went to Harvard law school?????....they are soon going to ban you from saying that publicly...
now I know why I got dinged at chadbourne and offered at 5 V10s
Chadwho? & Parkwhat?
I've never heard of them.
Elie is proof that going to HLS doesn't necessarily make you any better or smarter than students from other law schools. If he had these types of constant grammatical and numerical errors in his pleadings or deal docs he'd be fired well before the UVA, Penn, GULC, etc. grads in his office.
boring
28, why dont u go makes statements that make u feel better about yourelf somewhere else
"The lengths to which O'Neil went in his attempt to bury this important piece of information are amazing"
Best (without totally rewriting the piece, which would be preferable I know):
"The length to which O'Neil went in his attempt to bury this important piece of information is amazing"
29 - You are not funny. SUCK IT
29 - You are not funny. SUCK IT
29 - You are not funny. SUCK IT
29 - You are not funny. SUCK IT
29 - You are not funny. SUCK IT
29 - You are not funny. SUCK IT
29 - You are not funny. SUCK IT
Could someone please clarify whether 29 is funny and, in the event he is not, what he should proceed to do? Thanks.
Elie: It would be nice if, going forward, you own up to your original mistakes and show later edits. Yes, I mean use strikeouts (in case you didn't understand). Typos are one thing, but incorrect grammar and/or poor sentence structure - just too painful to read.
Ah . . . the beginning of the end of Big Law as we knew it (and loved it??).
R.I.P. 2008
Good point, 23. Plus what Elie understands perfectly is that a large percentage (if not a supermajority) of the readership of this blog consists of law students, for whom this type of information is particularly desirable. Some may even be considering Chadbourne offers, and absent having friends or family working there, might have accepted a summer position there but for this post.
not interesting
Not really news.
Especially since it is not affecting the summers of 2009. To all of you rationalizing your shitty interview with, "oh, this is why I didn't get an offer here," no, it's because others at your school were better than you.
*deletes just one more firm from his massive January coverletter spreadsheet*
- Nervous T-10 1L
Where did these damned grammar nazis come from? They are ruining a decent site.
It's the end of BIGLAW as we know it, it's the end of BIGLAW as we know it, it's the end of BIGLAW as we know it, and I FEEL FINE!
Ellie- the SF Chronicle has an article today about Thelen's demise, saying that it might dissolve as early at this week. I don't know why we need to tell you when breaking news happens (isn't that your job?), but I think you should post about this. There also is an all partner meeting at Thelen today apparently.
Actually, 46, the events covered in this post may very well affect the 2009 summer class. Assuming arguendo that the firm still intends to hire the same number of summers it initially set out to hire (which is unlikely), based on this information, I would be very worried that some (if not many) 2009 summers would be no-offered. And assuming further that will most receive full-time offers, I imagine most law students with multiple summer offers, worried about the firm's future, would cross Chadbourne off their lists after seeing this. Thus this is news, at least to those holding or hoping for Chadbourne offers, if not for all law students seeking to determine how badly BigLaw is getting hit generally.
I will agree with you, however, that those seeking to rationalize their Chadbourne rejections are not being totally honest with themselves.
50-
There IS a post about it already, scroll down to the end of yesterday.
50-
There IS a post about it already, scroll down to the end of yesterday.
30, correction: Elie is proof that going to HLS with an LSAT of 155 due to affirmative action doesn't necessarily make you any better or smarter than students from other law schools where the LSAT average is around 155.
You can put Harvard-brand lipstick on a pig and you still have a pig.
48: don't worry about the grammarians. They're just trying to compensate for something.
*laughs at the fake nervous T-10 1L (47) for failing to copy the subtleties of my posts*
-nervous T-10 1L
L-E-D-E
Jesus Tapdancing Christ
Witness the fruits of AA at Harvard.
51 - fair enough; if I had Chadbourne among my offers, I'd cross them off the list as well.
-46
Wow, what's with all the anger toward Ellie? I don't know the guy and don't really check this site out very often, but it seems that there is some serious resentment of the guy. Also, always great to read the requisite affirmative action attack. I take it Ellie is black?
The "requisite affirmative action attack" is merely to clarify that Elie does not represent HLS quality in any way.
Imagine if an NBA team admitted a short white guy named "Elie" for "diversity" reasons, and people watching Elie's appalling lack of basketball skills state that the NBA athletes apparently are only as good as the neighborhood youth league.
*continues to post to stoke the hysteria among T-50 1Ls*
- Nervous T-10 1L
Okay, I have imagined what you have asked me to imagine. And I'm not sure I see your point. A short white guy with an appalling lack of basketball skills would broadcast his inability to perform to all, out in the open. However, you base your rascist view of Ellie and his education based on one poorly structured sentence? From that you deduce his LSAT score? From that you determine he is where he is because he took the spot of some poor, hardworking white person? It seems to me that it is known that Ellie is black and that this has caused some resentment among many white readers of this blog. In turn, many of those white readers take it upon themselves to decide this person's entire educational history. Its pretty silly actually.
*doesn't know what "subtleties" 56 is talking about, figures he is probably an evening student*
- Nervous T-10 1L
lede: (noun)
the introductory section of a story; "it was an amusing lead-in to a very serious matter" [syn: lead]
Now could you stupid grammar a-holes STFU?!
It was a good article, and made a very good point. Yes, more editing should be done. But stop harping on it.
That being said: daaaamn, I'd hate to get that email, think everything is going to be okay, and then have someone ask me "did you read the ENTIRE email?" Ouch.
I don't need you're suggested edits to make my blog more better. But if I had it to do it over again, I would have written it like this:
The lengths O'Neil had went to, to try and bury this piece of imformation, which were importnat to the firm, are amazing, to a slight extent.
-Elie
What is that picture?
lede: (noun)
the introductory section of a story; "it was an amusing lead-in to a very serious matter" [syn: lead]
Now could you stupid grammar a-holes STFU?!
It was a good article, and made a very good point. Yes, more editing should be done. But stop harping on it.
That being said: daaaamn, I'd hate to get that email, think everything is going to be okay, and then have someone ask me "did you read the ENTIRE email?" Ouch.
Agree with 62. Elie's writing needs work, but there are a lot of racist pencil-dicks reading this blog who have more serious problems. Fortunately, the economy is rapidly putting them on the street (where their LSAT scores should be a big help).
62, if you had been reading this blog longer, you would be well aware that Elie has been broadcasting his inability to spell, or to do any logical reasoning, or to do any actual journalistic research, to all, out in the open. It's not just "one poorly structured sentence". Please don't talk about things you know nothing about.
Here's a pop quiz. Which option would reduce an employee's commuting costs:
a) letting employees commute to work only four days a week, albeit with longer work hours each day.
b) giving the employees a half day a week, so they would still drive to work but would work only a few hours there.
Guess which option Elie idiotically advocated for, and which option he lambasted as useless.
Is that iceworld-demon-by-the-fire image a Diablo graphic? Which one is it from?
62-
See 69. If you had been paying any kind of attention whatsoever, you'd know that this is not about "one poorly structured sentence." Mystal has shown in entry after entry, in the face of repeated readership pleas to improve, that he is simply not up to the task. He can't write. He can't edit. He can't analyze.
please, everyone who has suggested revisions for elie's work, revise your own edits. you can't "try AND" do anything. you "try TO" do something. i suppose you COULD "try and" do something, but it would have no logical grammatical connection to the thing you were TRYING to do.
71, but we all know that any criticism of any black person must be motivated by racism.
Also that any anonymous person who criticizes a black person must be a white racist.
Yes We Can
73, nice try, but very weak. Criticize his writing all you want. But how, unless you stereotype, can you attribute certain things to someone that you know nothing about? To criticize someone based on their race is racism. To criticize someone of a different race is not racism. There is a difference. Learn it, live by it and be smarter, dumb ass!
2L here.
I interviewed with Chadbourne. Actually with Mr. O'Neil himself. After what I thought to be very good callback, I did not hear back from them for over six weeks. Finally an HR person called and told me they were waiting to 'gauge the internal situation' with the market. I accepted elsewhere, but it all makes sense now.
By the way, 73, that little reference to Obama isn't racist is it? A discussion about a blogger on ATL that is black naturally leads you to Obama, right? The sad thing is that all you little piece of shit, socially awkward lawyers have so much fear and loathing inside you with no way of really expressing it. Except by way of anonymous postings on the web.
2L here.
I interviewed with Chadbourne. Actually with Mr. O'Neil himself. After what I thought to be very good callback, I did not hear back from them for over six weeks. Finally an HR person called and told me they were waiting to 'gauge the internal situation' based on the market. I accepted elsewhere, but it all makes sense now.
74, nobody has criticized Elie because he's black. Some have criticized him because he belongs to a member of a class that benefits from affirmative action, and there is a presumption that he benefited. That presumption has not been rebutted by any showing of actual competence. It's like people criticizing Bush's intelligence because we presume he benefited from legacy admisions due to his father being at Yale. Nobody criticizes him for actually being at Yale.
As you so eloquently stated: try to learn the difference between criticism based on X, and criticism based on unmerited benefits given to someone because of his X, dumbass.
2L here.
I interviewed with Chadbourne. Actually with Mr. O'Neil himself. After what I thought to be very good callback, I did not hear back from them for over six weeks. Finally an HR person called and told me they were waiting to 'gauge the internal situation' based on the market. I accepted elsewhere, but it all makes sense now.
76, for the statement that criticism of any black person is considered racist, I cite to another instance where criticism of the black person is sometimes automatically presumed racist. See, for example, this article stating that calling Obama "socialist" is considered racist.
http://voices.kansascity.com/node/2493
So now, making an analogy between two people of the same race is considered racist too? Wow, go liberal logic.
I guess you shouldn't analogize McCain to Bush, since they're both, you know, white, and it would be racist to analogize between two white people.
Guys at my high school used to spend their time being overtly racist douchebags all the time. It was no big deal.
2L here.
I interviewed with Chadbourne. Actually with Mr. O'Neil himself. After what I thought to be very good callback, I did not hear back from them for over six weeks. Finally an HR person called and told me they were waiting to 'gauge the internal situation' based on the market. I accepted elsewhere, but it all makes sense now.
78, actually you are wrong. Implicit in an attack that begins by attributing a made up (low) LSAT score and implying that Ellie did not deserve to go to HLS based on very little besides some blogs and his skin color, is an attack based on race. Your second sentence does not hold water. What is the presumption based on if it is not his race? Your final formulation sounds great. But like so much that comes from overrated, self-affriming lawyers it is far from correct. Again, you are unable to prove how his "benefits" are unmerited, except to say he has had some poor blogs and he is black. I can point to a NY Times or Wash Post editorial page on any given day and point out numerous wholes in logic, reasoning and analysis by a whole slew of white writers. But when are there academic credentials ever criticized? The truth is, we all know people of all races at schools we have went to that we know are idiots. Somehow, its only when a black person errs that it is all of a suddent to have a mini-referendum on affirmative action. I will refrain from further name calling and regret my error in my previous comment.
Guys at my high school used to refer to anyone who criticizes race-based affirmative action as "overtly racist douchebags" all the time, it was no big deal.
80, either you are simple minded and cannot entertain nuance or you are an ideologue that cares nothing for the truth, let alone the history of this country.
83, show me a white NY Times or Wash Post editorial writer who has obvious typos and malformed sentences in more than half of his posts.
86, I didn't mention typos and malformed sentences. There are editors that take care of those sorts of issues. I would quess that drafts by many writers have typos etc. What I said had to do with break downs in reasoning and analysis - which are probably much better guages of intelligence than spelling. Maybe you should go back to grade school and brush up on your reading comprehension.
87, a major criticism of Elie is his typos and malformed sentences. You say that is not a big deal and should not justify criticizing his academic credentials, because (white) newpaper writers make the same mistakes. That's nice except for the fact that you ignore the typo mistakes and focus only on the alleged logic and reasoning mistakes made by the white writers.
It's like saying that we shouldn't question the credentials of a man who can't add or do calculus, because you know plenty of people who can't do calculus. And calculus is probably a much better gauge of math intelligence than adding.
Maybe you should spend less time insulting people and more time learning what everyone is talking about. It is better to be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
If you seriously think newspaper writers can submit drafts to their editors with obvious typos without getting fired, please think again.
I like the fact that this firm is putting people in slow practice groups into busy ones. It shows that they have confidence in their lawyers as lawyers, and not just as doc monkeys. More firms should do that.
ATL is neither the NY Times nor the Washington Post. There are occasional typos. There are also occasional stylistic choices with which some posters disagree. My choice to end the previous sentence without a preposition is fucking pompous. Use of terms like "slightly amazing" is perfectly acceptable.
When AA comes up in the comments to a post about a Chadbourne hiring freeze it seems the dislike (by some) for Elie goes deeper than his spelling. When comments about Elie become racial that is fucked up. If he opens the door by posting about AA, then have at it, but these ad hominem attacks are crass, and in this case, unwarranted.
This is scary stuff. Be prepared to see more of this with large firms...
This is scary stuff. Be prepared to see more of this with large firms...
Affirmative Action is a n***er of a topic for commenters on ATL.
89: journalists/writers are notoriously bad editors of their own work! Just ask any editor!
It's "lede." If you're going to make journalism references, get them right. Jesus.