Captain STUB WITH NO BONUS!

Does this mean they are no longer first tier in Boston?

We're also not raising the rate at which we bill your services to our clients... NOT!

Goodwin.. more like Goodwill

Latham caused all of this.

M*****f***ers.

does this mean Ropes is now paying more than Goodwin?

does this mean they will be eating less LOBSTER?!?!?!

7 - did you figure that out all on your own?

pretenders

3 - they never were

7 - yes

What does this mean for Israel?

What are "professional track attorneys?"

Brrrrr. It's cold in Chicago. Especially at Sidley.

sigh. i'll finally admit it.

Ropes > Quinn

This would never happen in Dallas. They have classy stuff.

It looks like the incessant salary wars are finally starting to create some separation among firms.

Kaye Scholer did not freeze salaries.

Its cold in NYC today. I kicked a foreigner a few times in Time Square though and that made me feel better.

17

The men are being separated out from the boys.

There are a lot more boys with tiny pink dicks than men with huge swinging dicks in today's economy.

This should be a lesson to law students studying those silly Vault guides.

Ropes>Quinn? Did Quinn freeze?

There will always be a market for CWT NY 05 female associates. Meat market.

Gentlemen at my preparatory academy not infrequently supped upon clawed crustaceans lodged in the excretory canal of comely lasses. Though this practice disturbed certain denizens of our environs, it was not a conspicuous event.

Fraternity Lothario

why have you stopped referring to this as half-skadden????????

Great, now I'll have the image of dining on a crustacean with oiled butter on a comely woman's ass all weekend.

Does anyone know if the following firms have frozen salaries: Dewey Lebouef , Shearman, Wilmer Hale, Arnold & Porter, Gibson Dunn?

Thanks 24. Funniest post evere.

Asslobster is a hell of a drug.

I guess this ends the discussion...

Ropes>>>>Goodwin.

14,

Do you have any new info on Sidley? I'm an outsider looking in, but it seems like, since their "holding pattern" announcment, things have only gotten better for them--having settled the Zyprexa suit and landed a few BK gigs on top of the Tribune BK (though they did lose General Growth). There are also signs that the NRG shareholders will tender their shares to Exelon's (who Sidley represents) unsolicited offer, which would mean work for Sidley.

22 -- Quinn just sucks generally with its 2100 billable requirement. But hey -- they can walk around in blue jeans instead of slacks.

You people that post in these forums are so stupid. Are you really lawyers?
If so then no wonder your industry is collapsing.

31: All that may be well and good -- for the partners! Don't expect that type of thing to be the deciding factor as to whether Sidley goes all out FREEZE.

31

Work for Sidley does not mean that associates will get plum increases.

Sidley =/= associates

34 and 35,

Fair enough.

quinn is opening a new floor

Elie -

Please further investigate the salary freeze for each firm that makes this decision. For instance, I would like to know if the firms that are freezing salaries because "the economy will continue to pose a challenge both to us and to our clients through 2009" are passing the savings from the freeze to their clients. Will billing rates be similarly frozen due to the hit taken by the associates? Are partners sharing the associates' pain or is this another move to pad PPP?

Let's get some transparency into this situation.

34/35/everyone else:

And sticking with prior raise schedule (i.e., no freeze) does not mean all is well. Can well be prelude to "enhanced review techniques" a/k/a "stealth layoffs".

With so many firms freezing, and I would argue that Goodwin was totally predictable, why didn't Ropes freeze? Can anyone at Ropes comment on how stuff is looking? Are you relatively busy? What are partners saying about 2009?

" walk around in blue jeans instead of slacks"

WTF? Who says "slacks"?

And, at least in the LA office, they can walk around in banana hammocks if they want. Quinn spends most of his time dressed like an International Male underwear model.

I am not sure if I am the FIRST to post this on ATL, but it worth a link (safe for work):

http://graphjam.com/2008/10/28/song-chart-memes-first-in-the-comments/

41- wow, what a perk. Have you seen any of the people at Quinn? I would ask for combat pay if I saw those mongoloids walking around in banana hammocks.

Can you update the list of firms freezing salaries - both solid freeze and slurpee freeze?

Oh Fraternity Lothario, how I have missed you.

26: Not "on". "In".

Did Gibson push back start dates this past year? Otherwise pointing to their "short tenure" is just a distraction from the real reason for treating them differently this year.

Did Goodwin raise its billing rates? The memo suggests they did not.

So is GP a lifestyle firm now or what?

People like 34 don't seem to understand the fundamental economics...
There will be a lot fewer hours billed in 2009, and clients will be slower to pay their bills. So no, the idea is not necessarily to pass the "savings" of a freeze to clients - the idea is to try to stay afloat and keep the rainmakers and other equity as well. If, due to the economic crisis, revenue is epected to fall, the firms are being prudent by freezing rather than increasing a huge component of their fixed costs - i.e., associate salaries. And if you believe in laws of supply and demand, there is no reason to worry about losing associates to other firms because of such a freeze. And really, associates are getting paid plenty already and are lucky to have their positions in this economy. People need to stop thinking about their highly-paid positions as entitlements.

Did Goodwin raise its billing rates? The memo suggests they did not.

Billing rates and salaries aren't necessarily related. Every firm will charge the highest billing rates it thinks it can earn, regardless of the decision it makes on salaries. Every firm will pay associates a salary that is based on some combination of their own financial expectations, what other firms are doing, and how they think relations with associates will be affected by different decisions. It's as easy to imagine a firm deciding it needs to reduce rates charged relative to law school seniority but does need to advance salaries as per prior year schedule, as it is to imagine a firm deciding it can push a rate raise through but wants to freeze salaries.

My guess is no firms will "freeze" rates charged just because they're freezing salaries. If they did, it would be because the market moves in that direction, and it would mean a more long-term change in the fortune of large law firms (which would likely lead to a more long term and significant change in the level of associate and partner compensation as well).

Goodwin's salary freeze and stealth layoffs are justified because the partners need to be able to continue to pay the mortgages on their second and third homes in Vermont and Cape Cod.

I (49) meant to respond to 38 rather than 34.

I (49) meant to respond to 38 rather than 34.

So, what you're saying, 49, 53, 54, is yes, it is to prevent partner profits from falling.

52 - don't forget Maine.

What about the associates in ISRAEL

56:

Remember the Maine!

55, what else could it be? There are plenty of forces that determine associate salaries beyond partner profits, but the only force that pushes salaries down is partner profitability. Firms get more loyal associates who work harder, better recruiting, and generally likely feel they're more fairly compensating associates for hard work, the more they pay associates. A $20k increase relative to last year would increase morale, likely work levels, and improve recruiting. It would hurt only one thing: profitability. A decrease in salaries hurts morale, likely work levels, and may hurt recruiting depending on what other firms in a market do (based on the variability that has emerged, it will likely affect recruiting). It helps one thing: profitability.

Not much of an insight. And that doesn't mean it's a surprise. A decision to freeze salaries this year is not more of a profit-based decision than a decision not to raise them. Partner profit is the only force that exerts downward pressure (either actually downard, or preventing upward) on associate compensation.

58, nice Spanish-American War reference.

-56

can we get a salary freeze list of shame?

51 - Agree that billing rates and salaries are not necessarily related, but I think 38's idea is that what's good for the goose is good for the gander, especially if the firm is doing so in the name of the client facing hard times. Although viewed in another way, associates should hope that billing rates continue to go up, because it will be good for the firm. Partners and assocates are on the same boat after all.

But if partners are so set on padding their bottom line, why not do the simpler thing and just fire associates instead of freezing salaries? Are they just hedging their bets in case the market picks up?

BITCH SPREAD THE BUTT CHEEKS SO I CAN SMELL THE JUICY INSIDES!

62, I read the Goodwin reference to client pain as being an indication that this could then cause Goodwin pain. That's the concern many firms have -- that 2009 is going to be a very bad year, much worse than 2008, in part because client struggles will in various ways harm law firm economics.

I don't know about every firm, but for sure at most firms, partners expect 2009 profitability to be down relative to 2008 by an amount per partner that is a significant multiple of the per partner savings from a salary freeze. Having a great bankruptcy practice and getting 3 or 4 big deals is better than not having those things, but it isn't enough money to counter the significant broader decline in demand for services (unless you are Weil, and literally only Weil -- at every other firm the bankrtupcy practice can't offset the broader declines). Keeping billing rates tied to law school graduation, which it currently looks like the market can bear, will keep 2009 declines from becoming even bigger. If they don't, 2009 declines will be a little bit bigger, but what that means about the market for law firm services will be even more grave in the long run.

"Target" bonuses?

63 -- FYI, there have been associate firings lately.

63, I think many firms think they have to make the salary decision for the year now. Some firms have tried not doing that and it's an interesting alternative approach. How bad 2009 will be isn't clear yet so I don't think every firm wants to lay off associates yet. That trend will pick up if 2009 is bad enough. If they have a choice, most firms probably think layoffs and freezes will both hurt morale, willingness to work hard and recruiting, but layoffs more than freezes. So they're trying freezes for now while they see how 2009 is looking. Maybe that's wrong.

27:

Dewey did not freeze salaries.

Someone at Goodwin left the windows open and now everyone is frozen.

skeet skeet skeet

Finally - some commentary worth reading.

49, 51,59, 65, 68 - If this is the same person, how about an anonymous "Partner Straight Talk" column at ATL? A double blind question and answer format might work well.

As to the bonus portion, 1850 INCLUDING pro bono is a pretty reasonable floor.

While I agree that 49, 51, 59, 65, and 68 may be one person and may be a partner, the posts aren't exactly "insider track" insights.

41, this is so 1999. I can't believe you Quinn douchebags are still bragging about dressing casual.

To many associates, it's not about the $, it's the signal that it sends.

67,

Yeah, I've heard about the firings. I was referring to those firms who have opted for freezes instead.

68,

I think it's an interesting question as to which strategy--freezes or firings--hurts reputation/morale/hiring-prospects more, as a general rule.

51, 59, 65 and 68 are the same person. 49 is different. 49 incorporates concepts of getting paid "plenty" and "entitlements" which I don't think are relevant.

77, thanks! Everyone else, more thoughtful comments please! You can do it!

Please explain "target bonus."

it's GOOD when the partners WIN!!!

Goodwin associates -- Sorry to hear your bad news. Has the firm started laying off support staff or will they?

Goodwin associates -- Sorry to hear your bad news. Has the firm started laying off support staff or will they?

Hiring freeze as well?

Goodwin to 190 (stealth layoffs)!

Question--when salaries get "unfrozen" will people get a double raise or is this actually just a new scale (1st and 2nd years make the same, 3 is the old 2, etc...)

For FY2009 (which started Oct. 1), Goodwin significantly increased its billing rates. I was actually very surprised because they were the largest increases I think I had seen in the past few years. I would imagine that the increases were planned before the economic meltdown, but if I were a client and the attorneys I work with started charging me that much more, I'd be pretty pissed. What's new?

85 - Why would anyone on this board, or anyone in the world for that matter, know the answer to that question?

85 - Why would anyone on this board, or anyone in the world for that matter, know the answer to that question?

85,

After freezes, it will take YEARS for the market to come back and then only then will we see double digit increases to salaries. Ask me in 2021 or thereabouts.

Don't worry, be happy. Be happy you have a job.

87-I know! Watch for announcements of lowered 1st-year starting salaries coming up this spring/summer. That will even things out. And with it still being an employer's market, the firms that lower those salaries will still have enough acceptances to fill the few openings.

74--You must work at Schulte. I had heard that Schulte instituted banana hammock Fridays. Good for you!

BTW, slacks? Seriously, who says slacks?

Smooches!-41

Any word on the bloated summer class of last year? They were second largest in Boston behind the 100+ throng at Ropes.

86: I'd think how a client feels about a rate increase would depend on a lot of things. I don't they ever jump for joy, but "pissed"? And I don't follow the "What's new?" comment.

Quinn did NOT freeze its salaries. No formal announcement; raises just showed up in our first 2009 paychecks (issued yesterday).

However, it IS conducting stealth layoffs.

94, numbers? How do you know that Quinn firings are any different than those usually assocaited with annual reviews? Not saying they aren't, but info please.

Are they just going to start firing each class when the new one arrives? Swap out 2008 for 2009, and so on.

96 go away.

Is WIllkie freezing salaries? What about Paul Hastings and Winston & Strawn?

THANK YOU FOR NOT USING THE TERM "HALF SKADDEN" ANYMORE

wgwag

All of this turmoil is just partners taking advantage of an opportunity to trim costs while they can. There is no economic crisis seriously affecting law firms (look at the huge PPP numbers). Kudos to Skadden, Kasowitz, Boies, and other firms (maybe OMM) for maintaining integrity.

Anybody know what these firms are doing re: bonuses and salaries?

Kirkland
Irell
Gibson Dunn

you guys realize its impossible to tell whether ropes and goodwin made intelligent moves right now. for example, if ropes actually should have freezed salaries the effects will be felt a couple years down the road. the better economists may be at goodwin. or, alternatively, ropes>goodwin.

i think it's certain that a salary freeze will kill a firm in a cross-firm battle over recruits. i went to HLS. i don't think any HLS student in his or her right mind would choose goodwin over ropes now, though i recall serious consideration of that when i was in school. if i had a ropes offer, i wouldn't even talk to goodwin. and were the salary freeze the other way around, and i had a goodwin offer, i wouldn't talk to ropes. that's how serious a salary freeze is.

"Anybody know what these firms are doing re: bonuses and salaries?

Kirkland"

Anyone who knows how to use the Search box does. How are you making it through LS with those research skills?

101, what do PPPs from last year have to so with it? Agreed, actual payouts to partners (at firms making them around now) may have relevence because that actually shows belt tightening. These decisions about salary are about expectations for 2009 and beyond. Possibly the firms doing freezes are wrong to be so freaked out, but I'm not so sure.
104, guess what, it is not a law student's job market anymore.

106: guess what? i don't believe the law student job market is any different in fall 2009. because the fact of the matter is firms are still making enormous profits off of associate hours. there is no firm that is struggling. the bad economy isn't causing all this associate misery; it's simply an excuse for firms to shed costs without destroying their individual reputations. latham led the way, and most firms jumped at the opportunity.

107: the market was different THIS past fall recruiting season, than in previous years. You think it will be less so next year? And lay-offs don't tell you there is less demand.

Actually, re-reading your whole paragraph makes me laugh. I'm not sure you aren't a troll.

i love how firms "weather the storm" by making millions of dollars in profits per partner. what a joke. every associate on this board needs to wise up.

"there is no firm that is struggling."

What, now that Heller, Thacher and Thelen are gone all the problems are cured? Cadwalader isn't struggling?

Wise up and do what exactly, 109?

109 is cute! Nice puppy.

Goodwin PPProcter

That fact that firms dissolve doesn't mean they're struggling. It means the partners think they can make more money somewhere else. Cadwalader's drop in PPP doesn't show any signs of a struggle--the partners had an incredible year. Look at the profits. It's like if I make 40% in the stock market one year, but only 20% the next--it's not a struggle. I repeat what I said: associates need to wise up. There is no actual crisis in law firms. Partners making millions of dollars per year or high hundreds of thousands do not have any second option other than law. The fact that they made less than last year is not a crisis.

As for what associates and law students should do, they should reject any firm that froze salaries FOR MANY YEARS TO COME. Any firm that froze salaries is long-term garbage. I hope law students not just in 2009 but in 2010 and beyond will remember this.

We should also work together and use this opportunity to start new law firms. We don't have to take this.

Good luck with that, 114. Let us know how things are going after you've hung up your shingle.

Thank you 115 (I will take your comment seriously).

"Cadwalader's drop in PPP doesn't show any signs of a struggle"

Not in a vacuum, but it is common knowledge that many of the partners have agreements with guaranteed comp. It is quite possible that the drop was much more than 30% for those partners not paid pursuant to guarantee agreements.

"That fact that firms dissolve doesn't mean they're struggling"

?????????????

"That fact that firms dissolve doesn't mean they're struggling."

Dead men feel no pain..

Goodwin has really set a surprising precedent as compared to ropes. No more internal comments about wanting to compete, this speaks volumes

This will hurt goodwin in Boston

Goodwin won't lose major clients because of this. And there are lots of lawyers (experienced and new) who would still accept any offer to work there. As with other large firms, the money is still very good and the openings are fewer, so they'll be OK.

...unless, of course, their ill-timed expansion into 5 new offices in Cali, their raising 2009 rates significantly, and their very expensive NYC office costs bite them in the rear.

I agree with 119. Ropes wins. Wilmer will likely win over GP as well. The top tier appears to number only two in Boston. And it will be those two who will fight over the prized few who choose to remain in the declining city of Boston.

You are kidding, right 122? Nobody in Boston ever thought of Goodwin as being in the same league as Wilmer or Ropes. They are in the Bingham/Mintz/S&W tier, and they've now reinforced that fact.

I can confirm the "stealth layoffs" occurring at Goodwin as, unfortunately, I became one today, and it's my understanding (from intra-associate buzz) that there will be about 40 folks in my shoes when they're all done -- and they are ongoing. After years of strong performance reviews and a lot of encouraging pep talks about "advancement," I was instead told that I should be expecting my three-month notice in a month or two (whatever that means). And, miraculously, Goodwin has just recently hired an outplacement consultant to "assist" people "in this position" - now there's a coincidence -- NOT. Not too classy, boys, not too classy.

I can confirm the "stealth layoffs" occurring at Goodwin as, unfortunately, I became one today, and it's my understanding (from intra-associate buzz) that there will be about 40 folks in my shoes when they're all done -- and they are ongoing. After years of strong performance reviews and a lot of encouraging pep talks about "advancement," I was instead told that I should be expecting my three-month notice in a month or two (whatever that means). And, miraculously, Goodwin has just recently hired an outplacement consultant to "assist" people "in this position" - now there's a coincidence -- NOT. Not too classy, boys, not too classy.

Sorry about the double post (124 and 125).

Ropes>Wilmer>>>Goodwin>>>>Foley Hoag/Mintz/Bingham/Etc.

Well Goodwin got what they wanted, they're in a league of their own....too bad its a second tier league.

124/125 -- what class year?

Goodwin ProcTTTer.

124 - The rumors are total B.S. And why is it "not too classy" for the firm to try to help people in finding jobs in a tough market? Better than kicking you out on your ass.

130. The rumors aren't B.S. I'm aware of a dozen Boston associates who've been let go over the past 2 months.

Boston ranking is simple, based on what associates get paid:

Skadden > Ropes/Proskauer/Dechert/Bingham/Wilmer > Goodwin/everyone else > S&W (why are these guys even getting mentioned).

130 - GP partner who's pissed about all the money they wasted on branding & marketing

Associates: unite during this scam freeze. walk out, start your own lawfirm, together, taking along the experienced laid off staffers. Bring the fu__ing PPPs down. You have the power! Where's the will?

Given a golden opportunity and unable to see it. Open your eyes! already. Sink the ship before it sinks you. Damn. Wake up! How did the large firms begin? A few lowly associates breaking away from rules and regulations not supportive of their goals. Where's the courage today? Who are those lowly associates today? Take the years of experienced staff with you and make it happen. What large firm can operate without you? Eliminate the PPP profits and start afresh, put them out of business! Show 'em who's boss and kick 'em to the curb already.

-An unlaid off staff member willing to see it happen during this scam powerless crisis and hoping to see a boomerang effect.

130, this is 124 -- you're right, and I admit that that was an uncalled for swipe at Goodwin on my part -- just feeling pissed off late in the night of the bad day. I intend to work with the outplacement person, and I do appreciate (very much, actually) the fact that I'm not just being kicked out on my ass -- in fact, it's very classy of them to offer all of this given the business decision made. So, we'll see...

134--i totally agree. i'm looking for like-minded people to start a serious litigation firm. there's no doubt in mind that i can do the same quality work as the partners who are raking it in at my (well known) firm. i feel the same is true for some associate friends of mine. and i can do it a hell of lot more efficiently for the client. i'm convinced my firm goes out of its way to waste the client's money on bullshit billables.

three people at my firm have expressed interest in starting our own firm. i think about it seriously every day now. and i will make one promise: there will never be an associate compensation cut at my firm when profits per partner exceed $1 million. because that's bullshit.

110 - Cadwalader isn't struggling. You show me a firm with PPP of $1.8 million that is struggling and I'll show you TTT with under $1 million PPP and associates sitting around doing nothing.

WSGR is not freezing, it's going to 145K

I am fully expecting my firm to begin "stealth layoffs" when reviews start next week.

124/136 - What does getting your "three-month notice in a month or two" mean? Does this mean your last day wont be for a month or two and then your 3 months severance starts? So, if that's the case you end up getting paid for 5 months of doing nothing? Not too bad actually....

Goodwin has the cheesiest ad ever printed for a large law firm - the one with the guy walking out of meeting pumping his fist in the air with a huge shit eating grin on his face- just awful.

138, when people talk about a firm struggling, it's the firm they're talking about, not whether the partners earned nice incomes last year. Cadwalader is bleeding rainmakers. And firms quickly collapse when rainmakers leave. That Cadwalader is on the short list of firms at risk of dissolution is beyond question. Are there many firms where partners would kill to make what Cadwalader partners make? Yes. But the trouble is, some partners at Cadwalader, even in this market, can get more elsewhere. If Cadwalader pays enough, and the prospects for the firm are good enough, the collegiality and safety of that environment works. But it doesn't take too much of a drop in pay for the underpinnings of the firm to fall like dominos.

This is what every firm is like in one way or another. If Cadwalader's partners can earn an average of $1.8mm in 2009, will they be extraordinarily prosperous people? Of course. But they could earn that pay and also be panicked that the firm is in danger of collapsing. Firms at any level of profitability can collapse.

I have no idea what Cadwalader is like on the inside of the partnership. But the recent partnership defections are a very bad sign. And you can bet others who might have otherwise stayed are looking.

124: they've had that out placement consultant for years. How much of the rest of what you say isn't true?

i hope cadwalader disintegrates, along with every other firm with a poor reputation among associates and law students.

Goodwin sucks. Their IP practice is nothing but kiss the ass of Teva. They cut their rates significantly; cannot take on new clients; and have horrible associates. Their a 2nd rate firm at best

145: out of curiousity, what is your first language?

Goodwin=leaning tower of Pisa. And it might topple.

124--

That sucks. Sorry to hear it. I can't see how partners can tell associates that they're doing a great job for years on end only to fire them without any meaningful notice. It's bullshit. Unfortunately, it's not unexpected behavior from partners at many larger law firms. I hope you land on your feet soon.

Goodwin's memo - let's do it for clients; good idea, let's also raise billing rates. Associates should have expected this; yes, goodwin is right - maybe if they were even remotely transparent and maybe if Goodwin's "peer" Boston firms didn't increase salaries. Best move is to freeze salaries for our...partners (although maybe it's a select few pushing this through). This freeze shows a lack of care for associates and what they provide to the firm, but I guess this is standard intoday's times.

Goodwin’s greedy partners chose to sacrifice associates’ compensation and moral to keep their fat profit up. How sad – Goodwin just became a second tier firm.

146 you are a shit head; goodwin sucks

Goodwin sucks.

goodwin has never been anyone of any significance; they are second rate and always have been.

Goodwin is a third tier player; thier IP practice is shit

If you are not a jew they wont hire you

If you are not a jew they wont hire you

goodwin is awful; cheap; short sighted; and super jewish

goodwin is awful; cheap; short sighted; and super jewish

they hire litigators soley on where you went to law school; As a result they end up with people who look good on paper but suck. they are a horrible firm.

jews suck

********relevant lobster comment********

worst job ever? pulling lobsters from jayne mansfield's *sshole..."a lot of lobsters fancy her bum".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SentQjMIioY

I cannot believe that (i) i stumbled across a youtube vid/skit so relevant to our new favorite topic and (ii) I finally have something relevant to add to the comments section.

Whohoo! Go me!

It's vitally important for associates reading threads like this to fight back every way you can. Bill fewer hours, if possible. Search for other jobs--put your resume out there. Do not help the firm with recruiting. To the contrary, dissuade recruits--lead them elsewhere. If you don't want to be screwed in the future, you have to do the best you can do to screw your firm back. Everyone one of us who feels aggrieved has to respond.

162--

I see you use "you" a lot more than "we." No skin in the game? Collective action problem? Also, what firm would be exempted from this quasi-strike you have in mind?

Face it: the best way for those aggrieved to proceed is to do good work, get trained and then go out on their own and start their own shops. If you think you can run things better than your current firm, I suggest you throw down and keep your communist rhetoric to yourself.

Actually, 162 is right, the best thing you can do to respond when firms freeze salaries and pull other bullshit is to actively hurt recruiting - if morale is in the toilet, the partners are vicious ass holes, and half of the people you know are looking for other jobs, tell the recruits that.

You will increase your own value at the firm when partners have a hard time getting other associates and not until then - so make yourself slightly less fungible.

It will take a while to work, but they may be inclined to unfreeze sooner than otherwise if it severely affects recruiting. Of course, this won't matter until the firms actually care about recruiting again - most of the freeze firms probably wish they could cancel their summer programs altogether and are planning on significant no-offer percentages. I'm sure Latham will no-offer at least half of its summer class, but then again, anyone who would work at Latham is a tool anyway.

164 - insightful.

Outstanding job 161. I, too, am amazed. Bewildered even.

164 strategy=backfire. First, as you note, firms don't care about recruiting now. Second, when they do care about recruiting again, they will always find people to hire; those hires will just be crappier lawyers or crappeir people if the firms rep is in the toilet with law students. And there is definitely a trickle-up negative effect on quality of work that comes from adding bad lawyers to practices. And you'll be working with dunces or jerks. If you work at a firm, you at least have something invested: you might not want to stay, but you've always got that firms name on your resume. Trying to tank your own firm with recruits is stupid.