???

"mnay tips"?

Solid post, MysTTTal.

KAYE SCHOTTTER

GULC students are immune to the ebbs and flows of the economy.

First to say MysTTTal.

many tips? i think it was the same two people posting over and over and over again

Kaye Scholer is a complete shithole - I have a couple of buddies there who told me last week that work has completely dried up and layoffs are inevitable. So really Barry TTT Willner is just another lying scumbag.

Can you get laid off and fired at the same time?

They can't be doing to bad if they're still throwing that extravagant holiday party..
unless they're reckless

When did M...M..MMMystal t...tt...turn into Verbal Kint?

"What is happening is that firms are replacing expensive mid-level and senior associates with relatively low cost juniors."

Does this make sense? The difference in salary between a junior associate and an upper level associate approaches perhaps $100K. But what is the difference between a junior and a mid-level with respect to revenue brought in? At my firm, a 6th-year bills out at more than twice the rate as a 1st-year. This equals $800K billed to clients for an upper-level, as opposed to $400K billed to clients for a junior - this more than makes up for the salary difference. I would think that it would make more sense to fire juniors than seniors. Any thoughts?

A top notch law firm like WILDMAN HARROLD never fires its associates!

News Flash:

Kaye Scholer changes name to Kay Jewelers in time for holiday shopping season.

Mystal watches 2 Girls 1 Cup and gets hungry.

13 - this presupposes that in these economic times that clients would be willing to pay the billable rates for those mid-levels.

"it's real estate assocaites"

Nice. At this point, dude has to be doing this just to rile up the commenters.

any associates know how big their summer class will be this year?

Thanks 16, there goes my craving for chocolate frozen yogurt and porn.

13 - good question, I'd like to a hear a response because that makes sense to me as well.

You should look up the meaning of the term "pyramid scheme"

Mystal - DIG IN TO WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH A&B!!! ASSOCIATES ARE SCARED!!!

Mystal - DIG IN TO WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH A&B!!! ASSOCIATES ARE SCARED!!!

Can't believe Millner says this with a straight face. KS is obviously chopping people because of the economy's impact at the firm, then blames the poor slobs terminated for poor performance! Nice.

17 -- your retort presupposes that: (a) the same client who would not pay for the expensive work of a senior associate would pay for the expensive work of several junior associates: or (b) one junior associate could do the work of the senior associate, i.e., that associates are fungible. I think that both of these presuppositions are untrue.

16 is the winner, close the comments down.

Unless it's to bitch about that douche Barry Willner, in which case go nuts.

16 = winner

2 Mystals, 1 Barrel

Barry Willner's statement is not true: "As a result of our review process, those associates whose performance is found to be below our standards are asked to leave the firm"

I know for a fact that an associate who was laid off was told that it was due to market conditions and in no way was based on performance.

Could this be grounds for defamation?

13 - During a downturn firms tend to lower their pricing. The fact that a mid-level associate costs twice as much for clients than a junior associate is not necessarily a good thing when your clients are trying to minimize expenses. While the bottom line at firms remains profits generally, that doesn't mean keeping your more expensive lawyers around is a good business model.

26, the client saves money as long as the senior who is billed out at twice the rate is not twice as productive. If one senior's work can be done by 1.5 juniors, the client saves money by using juniors.
Since billing rate obviously does not increase linearly with productivity, the client almost always saves money.

"What is happening is that firms are replacing expensive mid-level and senior associates with relatively low cost juniors. "

The logical extension of this trend is to replace "expensive" junior associates with cheaper staff attorneys.

I was at Kaye and left before the $hit$storm hit. He is lying the number of associates in RE is not the same as it was this fall and I can give you a list of names of people that were asked to leave or were given poor reviews (unfounded) and left before they would be asked to leave

"What is happening is that firms are replacing expensive mid-level and senior associates with relatively low cost juniors. "

The logical extension of this trend is to replace "expensive" junior associates with cheaper staff attorneys.

GULC gives its students and alumni free PEANUTS and CHEESE! Thus, we are in position to remain happy and well-fed, even in a poor economy! The rest of you can suck it! PEANUTS and CHEESE, bee-otches!

but are RE groups at any firms doing particularly well right now?

I always love how the say "those associates . . . are asked to leave the firm." As if they had a choice.

Partner to "bad" associate - "We are asking you to please leave our firm."

"Bad" associate - "No thanks, I think I'll stay."

I am CONFIDENT that when the class of 2010 starts getting laid off (sometime around 2012), I will be one of the few to still have a job.

-Confident T14 2L

37 -- Any thoughts on the comments presented by 36?

39, this is 31 here, I will be gunning for you you cocky little shit. Partners can smell you a mile away and we dislike you as much as the general population does. A little modesty goes a long way.

nalp says they had 27 associates for 8 partners in the RE group...that seems a little too leveraged for a small RE group in this economy i suppose

People Who PosTTT On This Blog (other than me)

KS has always been a pretender, imaging that it was a first tier firm rather than the middling second tier firm that it is. Hence its efforts to disguise economic layoffs as performance based trimming. Management will be shown to be liars shortly, however, as KS will soon be forced layoff more associates than can be plausibly justified as "perfomance based" terminations, and at times other than the regular review season. KS to layoff as many as 35 associates by year-end.

If Mystal is the Cup, then Lat and Kash are the 2 Girls.

So is it better to be at a least leveraged firm in this economy. Some Texas firms such as V&E aren't very leveraged. something like1.3 associates per partner.

Orrick lays of associates!

41-

I am CONFIDENT that my acting skills are so incredible that no one will suspect my supreme CONFIDENCE.

- Confident T14 2L

*Continues inflating ego with bicycle pump*

Orrick Layoffs - http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/11/13/orrick-to-trim-40-lawyers-35-staff-unrelated-to-performance/

KS did the exact same thing in the early 90s. During that downturn they purged about one third of their associates and put the word out that the associates were let go based on the merits, not because of the bad economy. I should know. I was one of them.

"Every kiss-off begins with Kay."

i'm nervous mystal will make me play 2 Girls 1 Cup in order to get a job

-nervous T-10 1L
please email jobs to nervoust101l@yahoo.com

someone explain the PEANUTS CHEESE PRETZELS meme again?

Orrick Layoffs - http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/11/13/orrick-to-trim-40-lawyers-35-staff-unrelated-to-performance/

Kaye Scholer? That's a real firm? You made that up, right?

KS did the exact same thing in the early 90s. During that downturn they purged about one third of their associates and put the word out that the associates were let go based on the merits, not because of the bad economy. I should know. I was one of them.

At least Orrick has the balls to admit the real reason for the layoffs.

Orrick doesn't have a Chicago office, so I doubt Elie will report on the layoffs.

44: You don't know jack $hit.

All this means for KS associates is that the days of playing roller derby all night and sleeping til noon are over.

ELIE, YOU FAT DONUT-EATING FUCK! When will you post on all the SkaddenDC layoffs? Stop drinking the Skadden water (and eating all the Skadden cookies) and report on this, tubby!

I just sucked myself off. No way am I getting let go.

Excellent post Elie! You're really starting to step up as it becomes ever more necessary for you to do so. We can only hope that your reporting on firms’ shady behavior leads them to either rethink letting people go for what it will do to their reputation, or at least do it in a more humane way that won’t leave as big of a blemish on an associate’s resume.

53 -- What is it about PEANUTS and CHEESE you don't get? Not trying to be a jerk -- I just can't see what's unclear.

53 - The pretzels one is for those cool breezes who like to say what number their post is (i.e., These pretzels are making me thirdsty). I've been wondering about the peanuts and cheese thing myself.

35 a/k/a 13 - You obviously don't know how law firms work, so its time to quit your job as an associate and start driving cabs.

>>The law firm business model is not unlike a pyramid scheme. <<

Not unlike?? Where did you get this brilliant insight? You should have said that law firms are a pyramid scheme. A giant effing pyramid scheme, to be exact.

These firms reap the necessary inputs by working their associates to death, and then push them out into the streets without a second thought. They do the same thing to their staff members.

Most of these firms are horrible places to work, and they treat their employees worse than dirt. This economy is forcing these places to show their true colors.

peanuts and cheese is what Mystal likes the 2 Girls to eat before the 1 Cup.

Elie -- How 'bout a post explaining PEANUTS and CHEESE to the apparently large number of readers who somehow don't get it?

To 38, I know someone who was asked to leave his firm. He declined. He saddled up to a partner in another practice group, worked hard, and eventually developed his own business. Fast forward 16 years and he's now the highest billing partner in his office (of more than 200 attorneys) and all because he declined the firm's invitation to leave.

Elie: I think your posts are getting better every day. Keep up the good work.

To 38, I know someone who was asked to leave his firm. He declined. He saddled up to a partner in another practice group, worked hard, and eventually developed his own business. Fast forward 16 years and he's now the highest billing partner in his office (of more than 200 attorneys) and all because he declined the firm's invitation to leave.

peanuts and cheese is what Mystal likes the 2 Girls to eat before the 1 Cup.

To 38, I know someone who was asked to leave his firm. He declined. He saddled up to a partner in another practice group, worked hard, and eventually developed his own business. Fast forward 16 years and he's now the highest billing partner in his office (of more than 200 attorneys) and all because he declined the firm's invitation to leave.

Word to the associates. If you are asked to leave say no, not before you bring me the head of one turd laying partner.

Wow big deal. KS cut 10 or so associates from a practice group that is struggling across all firms. What they are not doing is engaging in mass layoffs like we've seen from other firms. This is all about the attrition rate; people aren't leaving so cuts need to be made.

Wow big deal. KS cut 10 or so associates from a practice group that is struggling across all firms. What they are not doing is engaging in mass layoffs like we've seen from other firms. This is all about the attrition rate; people aren't leaving so cuts need to be made.

Wow big deal. KS cut 10 or so associates from a practice group that is struggling across all firms. What they are not doing is engaging in mass layoffs like we've seen from other firms. This is all about the attrition rate; people aren't leaving so cuts need to be made.

why would a firm hire an associate and after two months call her in and say you are not intergrating into the team but yet was only given very little billable work.

"Forced attrition"

That is actually a great way to describe what will be going on at the V20 firms, but the less financially stable firms will not be replacing anyone so the term layoff is more accurate.

Why are there always posts about Wildman Harrold? I'm guessing that it's some kind of inside joke that is going over my head.

Is it gay to have sex with your conjoined twin?

Kaye Scholer blows. It'll follow the path set by all the other firms that collapsed.

I had a similar question: Is it gay to have sex with your Kuato.

I had a similar question: Is it gay to have sex with your Kuato?

Start the machine, Quade. Save Kaye Scholer.

GIVE THEM AYER!

81 - I think it would fall into the category of freakish incest. I'm sure Jerry Springer has already done an episode or two about the topic.

See you at the party, Richter.

QUAAADE!!!!!

why is the dickhead partner lying? everyone knows that these associates are being "asked" to leave because of market conditions. he still doesn't get it. we all see right through the bs, it just makes his firm look shittier. other firms are taking the, heaven forbid, high road and are admitting the real reason for the layoffs. it's hard enough to lose one's job, why would he blatantly lie and crush the associate's confidence in the process. there's a place reserved for assholes like him. such a tool, just like palin.

Do you get severance is you fired as part of a stealth layoff program?

Do you get severance if you are fired as part of a stealth layoff program?

Yes you get severence as part of the stealth layoff program... cause you are laid off... not fired.

93, isn't the whole point of a stealth layoff is that the firm couches it as performance-based firings? why would they pay severance?

Except in this case... when we got laid off we were told it was not performance based and that it was purely economic... Which is why I don't understand why Barry would make a baltant comment about it being performance based when it most certainly was not. But then again he has been known to make statements that are frequently not true.

I think Kaye is trying to be stealth to keep up appearances... just like why their are holding a lavish Xmas party when it seems like all companies (and not just law firms, Conde Nast, Marc Jacobs, Citigroup, American Express) are cancelling them. http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/03/news/economy/canceled_holiday_parties/index.htm
Especially in light of the "alleged" multiple layoffs, it seems like Kaye Scholer not only lacks tack, but class.

Kaye Scholer to 90k !!!!

KS isn't going anywhere. This isn't anything unlike what it and other firms have done in the past.

On the other hand, having a holiday party, especially a lavish one, is tactless in the current environment. Use that money to save a job or two.

Mr. Willner is being dishonest. This should not come as a surprise from a Firm that made an unpublicized retroactive change to its bonus policy last year, which cost its associates, collectively, hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Mr. Willner is being dishonest. This should not come as a surprise from a Firm that made an unpublicized retroactive change to its bonus policy last year, which cost its associates, collectively, hundreds of thousands of dollars.

That firm will just have a bunch of Indians in Mumbai do the work the associates used to. No biggie to them.

That firm will just have a bunch of Indians in Mumbai do the work the associates used to. No biggie to them.

Yeah using "the performance review process" more heavily than normal instead of admitting you are making layoffs is truly an asshole move. MAKES ME NOT WANT TO WORK FOR THOSE FIRMS in case any HR people are trolling here.

If you are getting rid of someone, there is no reason to insult them in the process. And maybe hurt their future prospects.

Anyone heard anything about Jones DAy and layoffs? I have not, just interested.

Oh, and I will save someone the trouble: Jones Day to TTT! Blah blah cleveland..

I am deeply troubled by Mr. Willner's comments. While I am sure a certain percentage of associates were (as all years) let go for performanced-based reasons, that is not the case for all attorneys, and to make such a sweeping public statement is beyond the pale. As with most firms, there are many excellent partners that generate new business and revenue for the firm; however, there are also practice groups at KS that: (1) have not brought in business at the 2006/2007 levels (and, no, these are not limited to corporate/financial work groups), (2) are top-heavy with too many attorneys that were promoted to partner/counsel in the past that do not generate business (and most likely never will) and (3) with the economic downturn, have given work to those service partners/counsel that normally would be assigned to mid-level and sr. associates. As a result, there are talented associates that are not receiving billable work at the same level as the past few years and/or simply can not be promoted without causing financial strain to the partnership, and therefore have been asked to find other work for the good of KS as well as their own career. That the firm has chosen to characterize these requests for departure as "performance based" is dishonest, underhanded, insulting, short-sighted and detrimental to those individuals' future prospects. While I understand that the firm wants to protect its image (or what is left of it) to secure its own future, throwing otherwise good associates under the bus in the process (particularly in this market) is completely uncalled for and a disgrace.

105- what are the other groups that haven't brought in business?

Mr. Wilner's comments are irresponsible, damaging and cowardly. Now that most of us are no longer in a position to challenge these accusations, the firm releases this statement to add insult to injury.

Well played Mr. Wilner and co-horts. Well played. Hope your pockets are lined with those greenbacks on your way down to hell (you'll need the extra cushion).

I'm not shocked at all about people being let go in the real estate practice. Also, if the number of people in the practice is the same as last year, I don't see why KS needs to take the hit for letting a few people go, when they don't leave on their own...

If KS was willing to take the hit, they would let a lot more people go I guess...

As for now, they're choosing to suck it up... and do some trimming...

The non-NY office I was in was very leanly staffed, so I don't know if mass lay offs would become necessary...

In this climate, no one is leaving... attrition is zero... more associates are coming in yet work is not increasing...

I bet every single firm in the vault 50 (with the possible exception of Wachtell, and NOT the other top 2, which are not really in the same league) will be tougher on associates and will can some associates who would otherwise skate in a good economy...

I don't see anything particularly different about KS, other than their expanded Christmas party this year... which honestly, is mostly for the staff... but if KS can weather this better than many of the firms higher in the vault rankings who will take more of a hit from the death of big corporate, I think they are trying to make a push to move up in the rankings... As a current employee, I, for one, wish them luck in that endeavor.

108- You missed the point: no one is shocked that Kaye would have to lay people off if the attrition rate drops.

What is despicable is the fact that they are not honest about the fact that the layoffs are due to economic conditions rather than the competency of the attorneys.

When they tell the associate that they are aware that he/she has only received positive performance reviews, and the layoff is due solely to market conditions AND THEN release a statement informing the entire legal community that he/she was laid off because his/her "performance [was] found to be below our standards".......

How can you or anyone defend that?

#8 Really is that what you think? Oh you're so clever! More baseless accusations...I am no longer surprised. I was recently made aware of this thread and I was immediately sickened and saddened by the "official" firm statement. At the same time, I do believe that the "tipster" should have expected this response from the firm once the editors of the blog became aware of his/her posting. I am not in any way blaming the tipster and I believe that the firm could have been more forthcoming in its response. At the end of the day this is a blog and self-proclaimed "legal tabloid" so if (a)disgruntled associate(s) wanted to use it as a forum to publicize what was going on at Kaye, then that is their choice. Perhaps the firm/department should have had us sign a confidentiality statement along with our "severance", huh?

I don't care to change public opinion about the reason I was given when I was laid off. I KNOW what I was told and what wasn't said.

And #8, I don't care to change your opinion about who or how many people were posting, but I will tell you this: if you'd like to keep hurling these accusations you know how to reach me.

What a shitty way to do business.

So - I'm a KS associate....and I think everything is fine here. I have plenty of work, KS has told us that we're well positioned to weather this economic storm....and folks here just aren't that concerned. I don't blame the tipsters, I just think they might be wrong on this one.

As for the Christmas party - my thought (and this is ONLY my opinion) is that KS probably got a good deal on the place after some other firm had to cancel?

112- The tipsters were wrong about what?

That when they were laid off, they were told that it had nothing to do with performance and that it was due to market conditions, and then the firm released a statement saying the exact opposite?

Please tell me which part of that statement you think is inaccurate.

112 here - First, I question whether there have been any layoffs (stealth or otherwise). No one here has heard anything about that.

Also, I just don't think KS will (in the future) have a round of layoffs of the kind we've seen from W&C, et al. I'm not saying we're immune...I'm grateful to have a job. I'm just not terrified when I get called into a partner's office.

112 - What department are you in?

112- hows KS's IP lit and products liability doing?

116 - (incredibly) busy. I really have no idea what these tipsters are talking about because I've been absolutely swamped the last couple of months. It looks like the RE practice group has taken a hit (same with just about every other firm in the country) but KS's other practice groups seem pretty stable.

Absolutely swamped? Really??? Know anyone in the Patent Group?

118; nope. But general lit and products liability are busy. Corporate is slow but certainly isn't as desperate as RE.

109, 108 here... maybe I wasn't explicit enough. I mean KS doesn't want to take the "hit" of fessing up to economic based lay-offs when we're talking about a handful of associates... With all apologies to those who were asked to leave, I'm sure they didn't lay off what they perceived as super-stars... now maybe in this market you didn't have a chance to shine... but the point being that "performance below our standards" could be reasonably interpretted as "didn't get enough hours"... or even that their "standards" are higher in this market if they have gotten way more associates...

So, to summarize, yeah, I wouldn't expect them to fess up. That would be a major hit to their rep. (more than stealth lay-offs that are unfortunately normal to deal with less attrition and will be EVERYWHERE) and if they were willing to take that hit, they would get rid of a LOT more associates in depts other than real estate...

that said, I understand how it would really suck for the individuals involved... in the future, if you say you were in RE and laid off because there was not enough work, who will not believe you? but hope you got decent severance....

120 is DEAD on. The associates that don't find work in this market are not the superstars; they are the ones that the partners avoid. The (remotely) talented associates manage the work during down times. Now, there are obvious exceptions with firms (W&C, CWT, etc.) that engage in massive layoffs, but in this instance, KS is merely trimming the fat. Good associates find or make work (even if it's pro bono) during difficult times. Stop complaining and enjoy your severance package. You weren't competent to begin with.

120 & 121 appear to still be missing the point. While it is possible that Kaye is healthy firm-wide, their RE department obviously is not, and they had to let many people go (% wise) due to market conditions in the past year.

And to think that an associate in a dying practice group can somehow create his/her own work is naive. It sounds just like the partners who blame layoffs on the associates' inability to get enough hours, when in fact it is the partners' responsibility for assigning work to the associates in the first place

122; agreed. But I think 121's point is that during difficult times, there are associates that partners clearly avoid. When those individuals get laid off, it's no surprise and the writing is on the wall for some time beforehand. Sometimes there's nothing that can be done; that being said, with a low attrition rate, firms have to make cuts.

how can you call it a dying practice group if the # of associates is the same after 1 year? it's just not an expanding practice group that can accomodate reduced attrition....

117-Nice try, and I appreciate your attempt at saving face and bolstering the firm; however, IP litigation as a whole is not "(incredibly) busy" compared to the last several years or other IP groups at reputable firms this year. While a sub-team (or two) within IP may be busy, that is not indicative of the *whole* group, who individually billed 2200+ hours easily in past years and will not be close to that this year; many clearly understand that they *will* have jobs at the end of the year, but will not have met the minimal target hours nor the minimum for hour-dependent bonuses of years past. This year most will be lucky to hit 1800, which, while clearly avoiding collapse of the business, is far from "(incredibly) busy." Also many jr. associates that were assigned to IP Lit cases last year have been assigned to non-IP cases. Can't speak to PL.

117 here. I was referring to products liability (which is busy) and as far as I can tell (given the matters I've been assigned), IP seems stable. The market is slow, nothing can be done. That being said, KS is far from collapsing (and from laying off 35+ lit associates) as some on this thread have suggested...

125- while IP lit might not get the 2200+ this year and more around 1800, I was wondering if since around the end of summer, or in recent weeks, you've seen the amount of work pick up at all- making 09 look more optimistic?

127-unfortunately not, but things normally slow down at the end of the year (Nov./Dec.) and pick up at the new year....normally, so who knows.

Everyone take a deep breath. One slow year isn't going to send KS under. The "layoffs" have been within the RE practice group; there haven't been any large scale layoffs in PL, general lit or patent. The firm is stable and will weather the storm.

PANIC!!! AHHHH oh no, KS laid off 8 associates in a struggling practice group with an abnormally low attrition rate!! Everyone run!!! The whole firm is going to collapse in 1 week!!!!!

Relax. This is normal during a downturn. KS is fine.

I know KS lets associates get unlimited pro bono hours that count towards their billables (although not towards special bonuses I've heard). Is it possible to use pro bono hours this past year to make up the difference and get to 2000?

KS associate here...yes, work is slow but there isn't a sense of panic like I'm reading about on this thread. I agree with 129/130; KS is well positioned to weather the economic storm. Is everyone going to bill 2000+ hours this year? Probably not. Does the firm seem stable? Yes.

good to hear.
go KS

120/121 - reasonable people know and expect that certain departments/practice areas (i.e. real estate, structured finance, etc.) will be harder hit in this market than some others. I don't think the firm would be risking a PR hit by simply stating that reductions had to be made in those areas as a result. There is something called the high road and obviously near-sighted Kaye partners/associates don't get it - seems like you'll be taking a bigger PR hit as far as those departments are concerned.

KS to $190K by Q3 of 2009.

Sounds like a classy place. No doubt some of those posters now lambasting those associates who were "asked to leave" are partners and associates who foolishly think they are helping their PR cause.

To those who were laid off, you are better off. Though it may take a while in this market, your careers will be more promising than those "cloning" documents and scrambling for pro-bono hours in RE. Good luck to you.

"foolishly think they are helping their PR cause"? -- If KS did mass lay-offs, believe me we would be the first (after the actual laid off people of course) to complain... In my heart of hearts I really suspect that this kind of crap is going on at a lot of firms. I think there's no reason to add KS to the (currently short) hall of shame based on what has been documented here... during the last downturn I had consecutive 1700 and 1500 billable years and no one ever complained... think I could get away with that at Wachtell? Anyway, 136... if you're looking for a "classy" place, try Skadden DC, b!atch.

137- what downturn was that, 01 or so? You a partner by now?

01 was just the beginning... things were pretty crappy for the ensuing few years in corporate... I'm no partner, nor do I have partnership dreams... not yet.

gotcha. i take it you're in the corporate dept. (still)?

Yeah. No more personal questions, though. I value relative anonymity.

The layoffs are all because of the slowdown and any "performance basis" is complete bullshit. Barry is a spineless rat and should just speak the truth. Its not like the credit crunch is a freaking secret or people don't know that one of his top five rainmakers for the past few years is now basicly a service partner. Let's get real Barry. You are all looking out for your own pocket book, which is respectable if you say that. Don't blame your lack of forsight and risk management on "poor performance" of associates. You were blinded by the cash coming in from the banking sector and didn't balance your risk. Now your credit market division is on thin ice and you say the layoffs are performance based? If we were still booming, those associates would be there, have been given raises and bonuses and you'd have added 30% more to their ranks. What about the group of service partners that are drawing big $$ and working for the former rainmaker? Are you going to say it is permance based when you are forced to cut them? They were one of the best teams in the business (and the associates in the group were stars, not poor performers). Get real and check the bull*&%$. Nobody believes you when it is so obvious that you are full of *&%$. You will seem more so when you have to start laying off the service partners in the top heavy capital markets department. Additionally, are you still throwing segregated Holiday parties with all the partners in one room (only ackowleging each other) and the support staff and associates in a separate room? A Kaye holiday partner is totally ridiculous. The press should attend and see that it is quite clear that the partners wipe their ass of everyone else at this place. It is not this way at most firms. Segregated parties, segregated blame. I hope the associates revolt and turn the of the management of this place on its ass.

To #137 - no thanks, I already have a great job that I love, working for myself. And I wasn't attacking the firm as a whole, there are good people and great lawyers at Kaye. My comment was reserved for those anonymous posters shitting on the laid off associates - regardless of the circumstances surrounding their departure. This market is tough enough without the nasty character assaults on these young attorneys who may have to reinvent themselves given the fact that their skills are useless in this marketplace.

That was all,
~136

142: You need to relax...you have some serious anger issues. You were incompetent (we all knew this); it's ok. I'm sure you will find another job soon. Best of luck to you!!

Someone a little bitter 142? You should take 120's comments to heart. There are no such things as purely economic layoffs and if you got picked out a whole department, chances are other people were doing a better job than you. Instead of blaming everyone else why don't you think about what you could have done to improve yourself and work on those issues.

144/145 - wrong again. There you go with your presumptions, letting them get the best of you.

I'm just trying to determine who is writing these posts - like 144. I really hope that is not a partner - cause that is just really, really sad......

145: Yes, there are "purely economic layoffs" when firms hired associates nilly willy during uptick, kept (and even bonused) allegedly "lesser" associates during boom times, and then let these associates go as boom went to bust. Someone will always be better than another - that's just a fact of life. But if certain associates were good enough to stay and work at a firm during the boom, then the partners look like idiots for saying now that they weren't. So clients didn't really get a particular firm's best but paid for it?

KS will pay full regular bonus this year + special to those that met 2200 hours.

149 - funny... thats assuming that 2200 will be met, in fact I bet the firm is willing to pay full regular bonus because it knows that the number of us that are going to make it to 2000 hours are going to be historically low and therefore they can afford to pay the handful of people that actually make bonus, whatever "full bonus" means. I don't know anyone that is going to hit that number. Anyone care to admit if they are going to hit 2000 hours ? Its already mid November and I'm far from it.

144 and 145 - you should sit in at a few executive committee meetings before making uninformed comments like those. Its all about the benjamins. Always will be at firms like Kaye. Keep pushing and we can talk about the way some of the partners in that group were promoted to partner bc of thier keen ability to engage in extra curricular activities. But I guess your view would be that only the best associates are ever promoted, just like only non-performers are fired. Very innacurate world view.

144 and 145 - you should sit in at a few executive committee meetings before making uninformed comments like those. Its all about the benjamins. Always will be at firms like Kaye. Keep pushing and we can talk about the way some of the partners in that group were promoted to partner bc of thier keen ability to engage in extra curricular activities. But I guess your view would be that only the best associates are ever promoted, just like only non-performers are fired. Very innacurate world view.

152 haha. You did not just go there...

150-152,

Have you considered that these anonymous posters may be pushing your buttons in order to keep this going and see how far you will go? It is entirely possible that they are not writing on behalf of the department.....

154 - Way to put a halt on my at work entertainment.

I thought the RE department at KS was entirely based on extra curricular activities? They actually do real estate work? I stand corrected.

152 - If anyone actually thought you were "laid-off" for purely economic reasons you've now gone and proved them wrong with the bad personality, poor disposition, lack of professionalism, lack of self-responsibility and full-on selfishness you've demonstrated over the last few days. Not to mention being a tad disingenuous by making wide-sweeping claims about the Executive Committee that I'm pretty sure you were never on or sat in with (really helped build your credibility with that one - I didn't realize KS put Associates on the EC). I don't know who I feel worse for. You and your self-pity and anger, or your laid-off KS colleagues who you've now gone and completely screwed-over as they look for jobs in the market. Please do everyone a favor and get out of the big-law market because you're not the kind of colleague anyone wants.

There is clearly some pent-up hostility among the KS associates. Seems like you guys have been waiting for an ATL post to vent for a while....hope you all got it out of your system. Your firm seems fine (not W&C, CWT, Heller, Thelen, etc.). These are routine stealth layoffs that most of the V50 are engaged in as well. Now, back to work.

157...is that a threat to the careers of those not actively involved in all of this?

I have to say, as a former member of the KS real estate dept. I at first this thread with a little curiosity, which has know turned to complete and utter disgust. Stealth lay-offs are happening all over the country in RE depts, so Mr. Wilner's comments could have been better crafted to protect those that did work hard during the boom years but then found themselves out of a job (for whatever reason). The associates were right to vent on this thread about those comments - what is the big deal with that? I would hope KS management would take a step back and not engage in what seems to be up till now, a staggering lack of maturity.

I have to say, as a former member of the KS real estate dept. I at first this thread with a little curiosity, which has know turned to complete and utter disgust. Stealth lay-offs are happening all over the country in RE depts, so Mr. Wilner's comments could have been better crafted to protect those that did work hard during the boom years but then found themselves out of a job (for whatever reason). The associates were right to vent on this thread about those comments - what is the big deal with that? I would hope KS management would take a step back and not engage in what seems to be up till now, a staggering lack of maturity.

159 - I don't even work in Real Estate, let alone at KS. But I do work at another "big firm" that has "laid-off" people, and I've seen how certain people's reactions after they get "laid-off" has detrimentaly impacted their immediate careers and job searches, especially within their specific practice area. We're called Professionals because we're supposed to act like them, and while the initial "tipster" may have had a legitimate tip and insight, the way some people have acted on this board is downright immature and doesn't benefit anyone.

What exactly does this mean for Summer Associates that have offers to begin employment at KS in the fall of 2009? Should they be worried?

161- As a KS laid off RE associate: Thank you for saying what I was thinking and feeling, and in a tactful, mature and respectful way. I am saddened that Barry has made a statement that is a direct contradiction for the reason I was told (and that was reiterated to me many times) I was being let go. Despite parting ways, I still have respect for the people that I worked with and I was able to vent any frustrations directly to people within the firm before I left. The firm does not owe us anything at this point, but at the very least they should provide us with enough respect to state the real reason that we were all let go. And if it really was performance based, I see no reason why it wouldn't have been disclosed at the time I was let go.

101/102 - I hear your point, as many firms/companies are looking for the most cost effective labor options, but realize that you sound like a biggot. Threatened much?

P.S. - KS does care about their work product and does not sacrifice quality of work for cost.

What's that? Layoffs?!? Don't talk about layoffs! You kidding me? Layoffs?

163: it means you will have your offer revoked immediately.

161/164 - Thank you and ditto, coming from another laid off Kaye associate. (Yes, RE).

162 - I would agree with this comment but you omitted something I believe is key to your observation - professionals would not make the assumption that those who have acted so "downright immature" on this site are in fact the associates who have been laid off. That would be irresponsible, unfair and unprofessional. Just as it would be if the laid off associates acted upon the assumption that Kaye management/partners were behind the "downright immature" postings.

154 - I agree, and it goes for both "sides"

152 - not cool at all. I have to reiterate the question, did you think about your colleagues (if in fact you worked at Kaye with us)? I still have what is hopefully a long career ahead of me...

While it is hard to believe what is what here on this blog, it is more difficult to accept the "official statement" and to read some of the comments posted. I'm not going to continute to entertain the true reasons as to why I was let go (especially over others), thats a management decision that I could respect a lot more had I been told it was performance-based at the time. I will, however, continue to use this as a learning experience (and a skin-thickening exercise). Goodbye Kaye and goodbye ATL...

Enough of this sentimental layoff-related BS; is KS matching Skadden or Cravath?

Anyone who Kaye laid off has a right to bitch and be innapropriate on this blog, so long as it doesn't come through on thier interviews, all the better for them. This is like therapy for the scorned. Anyone who still works at Kaye that is wasting there time reading these posts and responding clearly needs more work on their plate. Defending angry blog posts is laughable.

Any word on bonuses? And please don't respond with complaints (e.g. "We don't have enough work to bill 2000 hours blah blah blah...). Skadden or Cravath?

KS attorneys = a bunch of whining, complaining little b$tches. It never ends with this firm; either quit your job or shut it. ATL could have a post about KS increasing salaries to 190K and up, and there would be 50 comments about how the firm doesn't validate parking...

hows things been at kaye scholer lately

Will this comment board welcome support staff members' comments?

sure why not. hows things going for you there and how do things seem for the associates you work with? busy?

btw- nice new website

Honestly, it's very quiet here. Most attorneys are not busy. It's actually scary.

What about the IP lit group?

Hilarious. I've been at KS for a lot of years. They cut dead weight this year just like they do every year. They had the same Christmas party they always have. They did not give out bonuses, that was their response to the economy, but they did give out 401K contributions, so all is well. Have you seen their new multi-million dollar DC offices? They're not struggling to survive.
The grass isn't greener, folks. You have to work for a living.

Hilarious. I've been at KS for a lot of years. They cut dead weight this year just like they do every year. They had the same Christmas party they always have. They did not give out bonuses, that was their response to the economy, but they did give out 401K contributions, so all is well. Have you seen their new multi-million dollar DC offices? They're not struggling to survive.
The grass isn't greener, folks. You have to work for a living.

179: the firm deferred incoming associates to January 2010. What do you think the chances are that they'll be starting then?

If the grass is green on the KS side of the fence, then someone painted it with green paint, because the grass is a dead as the firm and many of its practice areas. KS is still laying off attorneys, even as I type.