Speaking negatively about ATL is offensive. Please moderate.

Have you been a victim of a new world strategy? You don't need double talk... You need Bob Loblaw.

"InternatioNal." This isn't to sound like a BigLaw nitpicker who has nothing better to do than find fault, but these typos due to lack of proofreading are really bad and aren't rare occurrences. Someone really needs to proofread because the authors clearly seem to be unable to edit their own copy.

Usually I don't care about typos, but this is fucking ridiculous! Elie, you USELESS FAT FUCK, read what you write before publishing it.

This blog has slipped immeasurably since FATASS MysTTTAL took over as EIC.

Usually I don't care about typos, but this is fucking ridiculous! Elie, you USELESS FAT FUCK, read what you write before publishing it.

This blog has slipped immeasurably since FATASS MysTTTAL took over as EIC.

I don't know what's worse checking my stock portfolio or visiting this site to see which one of my friends has been laid off today....

Internatioal typo watch has concluded.

5 = EPIC FAIL.

GIMME GIMME GIMME

-Greedy Associate

1, 4 - it's a friggin blog. unclench your sphincter, kindly. k, thx.

at what point with these layoffs should a nervous T-10 1L be really worried? when a V10 firm publically announces layoffs?

*prays for that w&c next year*

-nervous T-10 1L
4 interviews
3 offers
1 sa position

Ok. I'm nervous. Should I quit spending because my husband may get booted from his firm or should I keep spending to do my part to prop up the economy (granted, I don't shop with any of my husband's clients)?

at what point with these layoffs should a nervous T-10 1L be really worried? when a V10 firm publically announces layoffs?

*prays for that w&c next year*

-nervous T-10 1L
4 interviews
3 offers
1 sa position

NWS 4 Life!

What about Link NY?

Anyone think layoffs are imminent at Cravath? I don't see how the firm can retain all of its current associates and accommodate all incoming associates, considering they had 91 summer associates in 2007 and upped that number to 164 last year. According to NALP, the firm only has 296 associates total. How can a firm, no matter how prestigious it is, increase its associate headcount by around 55% in this climate?

(numbers from http://www.nalpdirectory.com)

Instead of modifying the way that comments are posted, perhaps another way to modify the website is to allow wiki-style editing, so that laid-off or underemployed and bored lawyers can contribute free labor and clean up the typos that the posters won't or can't.

Instead of modifying the way that comments are posted, perhaps another way to modify the website is to allow wiki-style editing, so that laid-off or underemployed and bored lawyers can contribute free labor and clean up the typos that the posters won't or can't.

LAYOFFS?!?! Don't talk about -- LAYOFFS??!!?! You kidding me? LAYOFFS???

Here's what I don't understand about the typos on this blog: Firefox has a feature similar to MS Word's that will tell you when you misspell a word. Why isn't that used to prevent careless errors?

I loooove it when Trophy Wife posts!

--Trophy Wife (doh!)

21 = EPIC FAIL.

21 and all the other people who rag on Elie for his typos:

His typing skills aren't bad, considering he has glaucoma.

See: http://abovethelaw.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=12&search=glaucoma&searchsubmit.x=0&searchsubmit.y=0&searchsubmit=submit

-Not Elie

Comments 1-20 are offensive, kindly moderate.

Elie,

Why can't we post comments in the thread "Open Thread: Business as Usual, or The Firms That Have Not Frozen Salaries" any longer? If there is any way to go that fixed that would be great.

This Jim Mora shtick has some serious potential.

--Jim Mora guy (double doh!)

17 Because @ CSM we do whatever the F* we want. As the top of the pecking order, more associates just mean that the clients that had to go with the TTT Skaddens of the world will switch over to CSM.

there are likely going to be a couple hundred more layoffs in europe and the firm has already laid off aroud a dozen people in the new york office

oh noes!!! i double posted (and am now using another comment). this never happens!

*embarrassingly shuffles off to class*

-nervous T-10 1L
4 interviews
3 offers
1 sa position

ASSociates should LOB insults at their maSTERS

ASSociates should LOB insults at their maSTERS

17 -- I have the same questions about Cravath. I also wonder if the firm signed an unwieldy lease at the exact wrong time, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aar21pxL.2ow , and was more heavily exposed to the banking sector than other firms. Like you, I only have questions, no answers

Man, I wish those fart-faced partners would get over their negro-itis and just start having threeways instead of laying off associates. Sheesh.

-nagana... -nagana... Not gonna work here anymore...

The pun in the headline would work better as "More like SeeYouLaters"

Maybe here is a solution for BigLaw associates hoping to avoid layoffs:

(From http://news.ino.com/headlines/?newsid=689607674712)

Restaurant workers tell boss: It's on the house

(AP:MUSKEGON, Mich.) Some workers at a Michigan pancake restaurant found a sweet way to help out their boss and the workplace they love.

With customer traffic down a bit at Mr. B's Pancake House lately, lead server Mary VanDam asked co-workers if they might be willing to work a shift without wages to help out owner Dave Barham.

The 17 servers, cooks, busboys, dishwashers, cashiers and hostesses who worked the day shift on Jan. 18 received only tips for compensation.

"This is a wonderful business. We want to see it succeed," VanDam, 51, told The Muskegon Chronicle for a story published Tuesday.

When customers heard about the workers' effort, they tipped a little more. The shift's workers divided the gratuities equally and each took home $51.

"Isn't that something?" Barham asked.

He said he doesn't want people to get the impression his business is doing poorly, but "it's tight for everyone all over."

VanDam said Barham met his payroll more than once by dipping into his own pockets.

All 31 of the restaurant's workers had volunteered, but they agreed the no-wage effort would be for one shift.

"We wish we could have saved him $5,000," VanDam said. "We wanted to give back to him, lighten the load a little."

As for a country where the legal industry is thriving? Try Brazil. I am trying to hire people there and I just can`t. Everyone is too expensive and you can't find lawyers looking for jobs.

As for a country where the legal industry is thriving? Try Brazil. I am trying to hire people there and I just can`t. Everyone is too expensive and you can't find lawyers looking for jobs.

Layoffis in NY office too.

17, 33:

First, Cravath has over 400 associates and nearly 100 partners.

Second, its partners have massive amounts of money and can do whatever the hell they want, including paying for the richest lease in history.

Third, it is one of few top firms that actually increased its M&A practice in 2008. The firm has enough clout that it is not nearly as sensitive to the market downturn as other firms. It simply snaps up business from other firms that were taking its "overflow" in years past. Clients want Cravath, but in the past they couldn't always get in the door and had to settle for next best. Now things are shifting and TTT firms are suffering.

That actually raises an interesting question: If they aren't suffering as much as other firms, how much crappier is the fact that they led the market in the race to the bottom of compensation this year?

Oh, and one more thing, attrition at Cravath is huge. Someone told me that only 25% of a summer class is still around after year 2.

-41

20 - very funny

41/42, perhaps your "interesting question" would give you a clue as to why your glowing portrayal of Cravath does not mesh with the reality of their situation.

Also, the Cravath partners' money are their own money. For obvious reasons, those partners like having money. They are not going to give it back to the firm and flush it down a hole supporting idle associates.

Cravath also relies on their historically high attrition more than most firms. Since Cravath almost never fires people unless they're involved in a sex scandal, most of that attrition was voluntary. So look at what happened at other firms when they didn't get their historical levels of voluntary attrition...

Linklaters has been doing "performance-based" layoffs of associates for the last few months, too.

41, where are you getting this from? Have you already forgotten that Cravath was the firm that led the bonus market downward this year -- the day after Skadden announced it was staying with last year's model (minus "special" bonuses)? That's not the act of a firm that is insensitive to market downturns.

Sorry, 41, your post was too inane for me to bother actually reading to your last paragraph. I sign on to 44's post.

-46

44: I thought you had to die before the sex scandal erupted (but then it's tough to get fired when you're already dead). See http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE7DC1E3FF931A25752C1A964958260

39, are you a recruiter? Any way to get in touch?

48, no, recall the Cravath of counsel who's currently in prison for paying a mother to have sex with her pre-teen daughters (the one who then sued Cravath from prison claiming they owed him a bonus). I believe he was also fired as a result.

41 - The nearly 400 associates--does that include the 90+ associates that just began working in October? To me, that number seems to indicate that the problem is bigger, not smaller, than what I indicated in my post at 17. I guarantee you attrition rates are much lower at Cravath this year than in years past. There just aren’t the same career opportunities out there right now, even if you are coming from Cravath. How can a firm go from having under 300 associates during boom times, to over 500 associates during a prolonged recession? Even if the firm picks up work that it might not have otherwise, it only goes to figure that this work is not as lucrative as the work that has disappeared (hence, Cravath turned it away during good times). Also, an extra 200 associates is a TON to be paying for during a recession. Plus, Cravath just signed a ridiculously expensive lease, as another commenter pointed out. Sure, Cravath could probably afford to pay for all of this and its partners would still make out nicely, but do you really think the partners would watch their PPP slip down the ladder a even three or four spots just to hang on to a hugely bloated class of associates based on overly optimistic predictions of the future?

34 gets it.

40:

Was curious if you -- or anyone else -- could be more specific about any Linklaters layoffs in the NYC office?

Thanks

40:

Was curious if you -- or anyone else -- could be more specific about any Linklaters layoffs in the NYC office?

Thanks

40:

Was curious if you -- or anyone else -- could be more specific about any Linklaters layoffs in the NYC office?

Thanks

44, 46, 48, 51:

Let me try to sort out the non-sequitur going on here...

So, the initial theory was that Cravath is going to be hurting for money because of a huge lease and too many summers, and that will result in layoffs. To put it simply, not having enough money = layoffs.

I then respond by saying that Cravath makes more money than God, so the theory is not accurate. Simply put, denying the antecedent, for those of you who have any formal logic background.

Then I get attacked for equating having money to not having layoffs. That wasn't my assumption, that was the original logic.

Further, to the assertion that partner money is somehow distinct from firm money... Someone needs to take business associations again. Partners are owners. They own (hence the label) the profit of a firm. If a firm makes sick profits, the partners are rich. Clearly, there is some separation between the firm's money and liquidity and that of a partner, but not enough to severe the ownership. See also, DLA Piper, et al who are requiring partners to invest in the firm to make it liquid.

Finally, to whomever the dumb-ass is that said that having more associates makes the problem even worse... Your original premise was that absorbing a 50% increase in associate ranks was the problem (along with the lease burden.) If that is the case, it is clearly a smaller problem if the percentage is smaller. You have no brain--congratulations on charading as a human being without one.

41/56 = pwned tool.

Nobody is saying that CSM will actually run out of money and be forced to liquidate. The "initial theory" was that expensive rent + more summers = more costs = lower profit margins/PPP = pressure to layoff people to maintain PPP and PPP rankings. Try to deny the right antecedent the next time.

Why all the discussion of CSM. They don't give a shit about the market condition. They can do whatever they want to. Law students will beg to join the firm under whatever circumstances.

57,

So your argument is that the firm will be pressured to conduct layoffs to keep partners around? Where are they going to go? Oh, my bad--they'll just jump ship to the other firms where they can make $3M a year. You are missing the point: Cravath partners make more money than other firms. They have further to fall in profits before they have other options to make more money. Conducting layoffs is not necessary to stay on top, if you will still be on top without layoffs. Otherwise, every firm would layoff associates, because they all make less than Cravath partners. Cravath PPP will go up in 2008 and they will not conduct layoffs.

58 is right. If CSM lays off associates, it won't be because of some lease. They will do it because they feel like it and are immune to the fallout.

56 - let me take this slow for you so you can comprehend. I think that Cravath has too many first year associates and incoming first year associates. In my original post, looking at the NALP numbers, I figured Cravath has a little under 300 associates (296 according to NALP). However, you indicated that they have around 400, meaning that the approximately 90 associates that started in October 2008 were not counted in the numbers on NALP's directory. Because of less attrition than normal and a bloated summer class in 2008 (not to mention classes the previous two years that were large because of a booming economy), Cravath's associate count is going to balloon from around 300 in the summer of 2008, to 500+ in October 2008 (assuming start dates don't get pushed back). (300+90+160 = 550, so this still assumes that approximately 50 associates leave voluntarily, for performance reasons, are promoted to partner, or are made of counsel). The firm is obviously going to have to pay all of these new associates, while at the same time business is likely slowing down--especially in corporate, which is normally a huge cash cow. More expenses and less revenue (or even just not a big enough increase in revenue, as we've already seen with many firms) will lead to smaller PPP.

58 is right. If CSM lays off associates, it won't be because of some lease. They will do it because they feel like it and are immune to the fallout.

59, no the firm will conduct layoffs so that they don't drop 10 steps on the PPP rankings due to flat revenues and higher costs. Just like how law schools obsess over UsNews rankings, biglaw partners obsess over PPP comparisons, believe me. Cutting the useless associates is easy money.

58 is right. If CSM lays off associates, it won't be because of some lease. They will do it because they feel like it and are immune to the fallout.

Has CSM ever laid off associates?

Why all the discussion of CSM. They don't give a shit about the market condition. They can do whatever they want to. Law students will beg to join the firm under whatever circumstances.

63: Why should we believe you that law firms obsess over PPP? Are you a partner? Doesn't seem to be rational that they would. Unlike law schools, firms don't make more money because of PPP. If anything, it pisses off clients. They seem to like to whine and moan about their profits more than they like to brag about them.

Kill the Partners
By Tyrone Green and his Reggae Band

I was laid off from Links,
had to move to a shantytown.
Now we have no money
so we have to sleep on the ground.
I went to Oxford. And now I dig a ditch.
My wife she do laundry, life sure was a bitch.

But 'till we killed the partners.
Ooh we gonna make them hurt.
Kill the partners yeah.
But pay my severance first

We sing of fair reviews and equality.
But we really don’t care
we just want money money money.
We want to drive in a big black limousine.
Get so high off ganja we cant even see.

And then we kill the partners.
Ooh we gonna make them hurt.
Kill the partners. Yeah.
Ooh but pay my severance first.

When they come for my review.
We gonna wait outside.
We gonna hit them in the head with a bat
and make them cry.

And then we kill the partners.
Ooh we gonna make them hurt.
Kill the partners. Yeah.
Ooh but pay my severance first.