K & E can wipe Skadden's ass

Firms known to have advanced salaries as usual:

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland

Additions?

I was wondering if I'd hear about this. The day K&E bonuses were announced, I overheard a non-share partner talking with an upper-level associate about this. I didn't eavesdrop long enough or well enough to be sure, but I thought the non-share was saying she'd just been laid off, or at least told she was going to be laid off. Best of luck to all of those leaving.

Holy rusted metal, Batman! This is serious!

Thirteenth!

...better than layoffs...

Proofread big guy.

3 - JD advanced ABOVE market at least in a few cases, though i have no idea how common that is or not. And yes, that subtracts out a half-Skadden bonus which they may not give with their wacky system.

I was wondering if I'd hear about this. The day K&E bonuses were announced, I overheard a non-share partner talking with an upper-level associate about this. I didn't eavesdrop long enough or well enough to be sure, but I thought the non-share was saying she'd just been laid off, or at least told she was going to be laid off. Best of luck to all of those leaving.

Oh snap

Can someone please explain Kirkland's partner system to me? They made like 50 partners this year, I get it--that's just what they call senior associates, most of them are 5th years, not 8th. So why is this a layoff, as its not a layoff to tell an 8th year senior associate at a normal firm to leave, that's called just not making (equity) partner. Also, does this mean they don't normally do this? They just keep all of the non-equity partners indefinitely? That's a lot of senior salaries to pay.

Paul Weiss and Willkie

The point of this list is to find out whether the "market" is freezing salaries, or doing usual raises (and thus the freezing firms are outliers). ATL has been good at providing information on freezing firms, but (surprisingly, I think) firms that are raising salaries as usual are not trumpeting this loudly.

-3

The number was 25, and most were rated at or above their classes. Layoffs. Each Kirkland shares is worth $90,000; each new share partner gets 12.5 shares and there are 3 partners at kirkland with 80 shares (the cap). Unreal. "We lead the market" Pure B.S.

Holy rusted metal, Batman! This is serious!

you'd swear this guy doesn't even read what he wrote just once before posting it.

Anyone able to comment, please provide specifics.

--how many were laid off, and when?
--what reason, if any, was given?
--what class years and practice groups were affected?
--have any associates been laid off?

--Nervous

Firms known to have advanced salaries as usual:

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr

Additions?

It sounds like K&E has been taking pointers from Dechert.

you can make non-share partner after your 6th year. So, if you are an NSP, you are at least equivalent to a 7th year associate. This is maybe 1 year earlier than other 2-tier p'ship firms.

I believe you must be an NSP for 5 years before you are considered for Shares.

Layoffs?
Don't talk about - layoffs?
You kidding me?
Layoffs?

Ropes & Gray

Anyone know anything on how McDermott Will & Emery non-equity partners have fared? They have quite a few as well.

Let's all wait for Steve R. (Chicago corp. share partner) to respond at how great Kirkland is, and this wasn't layoffs, blah, blah, blah.....

22 - How do you know that? (I work at R&G and don't know my salary yet).

21, love it.

Layoffs? I just hope we can win a case!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3-eavMSBnk

20-thanks. And are NSPs kept indefinitely in normal times? Are they asked to leave on an individual basis?

we talking about bonuses man!, no salary, bonuses! not 401K contribution, bonuses! bonuses man! bonuses! we talking bout bonuses! bonuses! not salary, bonuses! bonuses?, bonuses? we in recession and we talking bout bonuses! bonuses? not salary, bonuses!

Why are there so many weight loss/flat stomach ads on this blog? Is this some kind of subliminal message to Elie?

How many NSPs does Kirkland have? Is this a big cut percentage-wise?

Partners at K&E get rated according to whether they are performing with their class year!?

Non-equity or not, that sounds like horrible existence.

OMM, that NY litigation shop (Kasowitz), Linklaters, Dechert, Weil...

29: TITCR

Firms known to have advanced salaries as usual:

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Kasowitz
Linklaters
Weil
Ropes & Gray (disputed?)

Additions?

27 - I don't think they are kept indefinitely. There is a review process and I think the NSP have to show they are on track to making share partner after 5 years. I am not sure what goals and hurdles there are, but I think don't think it is K&E's intent to keep people on indefintely. Sometimes NSPs are made "of counsel", but there are relatively few of those. Still, to lay off 25 at once seems outside the ordinary course.

18: Cahill

1-800-ABOGADOS!

Dear 21,

You rocked my world.

-Paralegal

Dear 21,

You rocked my world.

-Paralegal

18: Cahill

Firms known to have advanced salaries as usual:

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Kasowitz
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Ropes & Gray (disputed?)

Additions?

28 = AI

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Kasowitz
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Ropes & Gray (disputed?)

Additions?

milbank advanced salaries.

1. These essentially are layoffs. NSP's are like senior associates at other firms.

2. Also, I dont think NSP's have shares, so I'm not sure what the relevance of 14's comment is.

3. NSP's are normally kept until they decide to leave or until they are up for equity partnership after their 10th year (or 4th year of being an NSP), at which point its up or out

4. I'd venture that there are 200-250 NSP's firmwide. This based on (1) the fact that they make ~50 a year and its up or out and NSP lasts 4 years and (2) inferences from NALP data. I'd guess that half of the "partners" number are actually NSPs. So 25 is a 10% cut.

5. it's interesting how all these cuts are coming from Chicago.

milbank advanced salaries.

milbank advanced salaries.

milbank advanced salaries.

Hey ATL,

Instead of us having to put together lists within talkbacks, can't you just dedicate a page to compilings relevant lists, such as: salary freeze confirmations, remedial bonus chart (Skadden, everyone else, no bonus), layoff confirmations, etc.

That would be really helpful (and probably drive page views!).

Thanks in advance,
CC (Constructive Critic)

Any news from Mintz Levin on salaries?

45 - Good points. Some noted in the post:

"Kirkland & Ellis has a fairly large class of non-equity or income partners. Kirkland uses the "non-share partner" classification liberally, and they tend to make more lawyers "partners," at earlier stages in their careers. Some K&E "partners" would be senior associates at other firms."

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Kasowitz
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Milbank Tweed
Ropes & Gray (disputed?)

Additions?

Latham will come out of this recession on TOP! How stupid does their salary freeze look now?

Hey ATL,

Instead of us having to put together lists within talkbacks, can't you just dedicate a page to compilings relevant lists, such as: salary freeze confirmations, remedial bonus chart (Skadden, everyone else, no bonus), layoff confirmations, etc.

That would be really helpful (and probably drive page views!).

Thanks in advance,
CC (Constructive Critic)

d&p has sent round memos today advancing salaries

For all you Skadden dorks out there, it's pretty clear that all firms are hurting out there. You guys got lucky because your firm jumped the gun and is overpaying your bonuses, but you can bet that they will make back that money some other way, most likely in layoffs early next year.

30 my guess is that this represents about 10-20% of the NSPs in the Chicago office (assuming they are all from Chicago). There are 298 partners in the Chicago office- includes SPs and NSPs.

Ropes associates do not yet know salaries for 2009. There has been no announcement from the firm.

I (in my humble Ropes 5th year opinion) expect this means salaries will advance.

In the past, Ropes has only announced salary adjustments (other than regular advancement) to associates.

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Kasowitz
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Milbank Tweed
Debevoise
Ropes & Gray (disputed?)

Additions?

Then Ropes & Gray comes off the list:

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Kasowitz
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Milbank Tweed
Debevoise

36 - Cahill advanced?

Hey ATL,

Instead of us having to put together lists within talkbacks, can't you just dedicate a page to compilings relevant lists, such as: salary freeze confirmations, remedial bonus chart (Skadden, everyone else, no bonus), layoff confirmations, etc.

That would be really helpful (and probably drive page views!).

Thanks in advance,
CC (Constructive Critic)

I'm not a partner, but from what I gather it sounds as if upper-level associates who stick around Kirkland long enough make non-share partner as a matter of course. So I think the comparison to 7th-year associates is valid. The "partner" title probably provides a morale boost and may open up more attractive lateral opportunities.

3 and 52 - Holland & Knight has increased pay as expected, its just not lockstep. I.e. those making their hours have been rewarded more than those who did not make their hours. Everybody, however, received a raise.

has shearman raised salaries? I know they announced the cravath bonus...

What is the point of being a non-equity partner? It seems like the Assistant to the Regional Manager title of the legal world...

Firms known to have advanced salaries:

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Kasowitz
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Milbank Tweed
Debevoise
Holland & Knight

Kirkland is moving to a new building this year. Rent is much more than the old 200 East Randolph digs.

An ugly, ugly building at that.

mlb increased as expected

"I'd venture that there are 200-250 NSP's firmwide."

Too low

"its up or out and NSP lasts 4 years"

Not true. 1. 4 years isn't "normal", 2. it hasn't been a hard up or out and 3. many NSPs are off-track on individual schedules due to specialized practice or other issues.

"I'd guess that half of the "partners" number are actually NSPs."

More like b/t 2/3 and 3/4.

"25 is a 10% cut."

That's about right w/r/t Chicago only. Over 10%, less than 15%.

66, putting "partner" on your resume is what counts.

68, not only that, but K&E will be paying double-rent, both at E Randolph and at the new building.

Constructive Critic (54 and 62) has a good suggestion - ATL should compile a full list of firms that raised salaries accordingly to class year. That seems to be the norm - Latham and Orrick are clearly the outliers.

"Kirkland is moving to a new building this year. Rent is much more than the old 200 East Randolph digs."

Somewhere b/t 50% and 75% higher.

No herpes bonus?

Firms known to have advanced salaries:

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Kasowitz
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Milbank Tweed
Debevoise
Holland & Knight
Morgan Lewis

Is D&L officially out of Charlotte and Hartford now or they still have offices there?

This is a big deal for K&E. K&E does a great job of poaching the best laterals from the top 5 firms. The big selling poins are (1) you're going to make more money than your peers and (2) you're going to have the title "partner" way before your classmates. Therefore, K&E treads very lightly when it comes to NSPs. NSPs are usually protected until after their fourth year (up or out at that point). A 10-20% cut in NSPs is a huge deal, especially if its only out of one office. This just sent the word out to all laterals that non-share partners are also fungible assets in every way, shape and form.

Meanwhile, in my butt, there's a battle raging between the pinworms and feces, someone's wristwatch is up there, and there is some crazy Christ-Clown busily trying to hold a stench exorcism.

I'm so tired.

I was told that the layoffs occurred by means of voice mails left on Christmas Eve. Wow.

Not to state the obvious, but not all NSPs are 7th year associates (not that being a 7th year associate is not an impressive accomplishment in its own right). They are between 7 and 11 years out of law school. Many would be equity partners at other firms. And they are all very good lawyers.

64, did your office announce this? My office has not said a word about salaries yet . . . I assumed we were going to freeze. (I'm not in Florida).

"K&E will be paying double-rent, both at E Randolph and at the new building"

For what, 9 months? And their variable costs will be going down (Amoco is an enviro nightmare). And the average individual office space will be much smaller. And this may allow them to delay taking a whole floor at 300 North.

As good a time as any to say - NY TO 190K!!

"[K&E NSPs] are between 7 and 11 years out of law school."

Don't be a rube. Many of them are more than 11 years out. K&E is notorious for asking laterals to step back a class year or two (or more). Plus there are a number of NSPs who have separate agreements. Plus there are a TON of one or two year deferrals from share consideration (i.e., passed over as an 11, maybe passed over as a 12, but making it at the end of 13).

I would like to get me a CWT NY female associate - I hear they are SUPER HORNY!!

Latham & Watkins - Leading the market with repeated layoffs, salary cuts, and other douchebaggery since 1990.

You'd have to be an abject moron to take a job at this place if you have other options. Friends don't let friends work at Latham.

Kirkland's lease runs until 2011.

I'm with 86.

65 -

I'm surprised ATL has not commented on this yet. The situation, from what I heard is pretty dire. Lots of people were told to leave (performance based). Others were told they are on probation and not receiving bonuses since they are not in good standing. Now they need to figure out how to accomodate that bloated SA class. Not pretty. I wouldn't be shocked if they froze salaries as well.

Firms known to have paid more money than yours:

Wachtell
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden

91 - That's gold.

85 - I'm not a rube, I just am not that senior to know what you know. In any event my point is that NSPs are in general more experienced than the commenters on this site are assuming. So, you are just making my point with better info. Thanks.

90, you mean 66?

There's no way people rated with or above the class were laid off. In my class I was told by my reviewer that some 20% or so FIRMWIDE (not just chicago) received below the class reviews. Laying off all of those people from one class might get you to the numbers you are quoting - so if there are more than 4 years of NSP classes, why or how could they lay off people at or above the class? That's just sillyness. Someone was told to leave and they don't want to admit they got a poor review. But they are bitter enough to spread rumors that make no sense.

People with above the class reviews and good hours got bonuses much much much much better than Cravath's (which were frankly insulting at higher levels) (for instance, some were as much as 5x Cravath's bonus for a commensurate year) and above Skadden's too.

There's no question NSPs are glorified associates - but the title is nice. The track is longer than other firms - but hey, if you get shares, the pay off is worth it. NY income, Chicago prices and lifestyle.

As for layoffs - times are crappy. More people are going to be let go everywhere. To expect firms to hold on to everyone is just sadly impossible. For those of us with jobs - we should be happy and go find some work to do so we can keep them.

The way to accomodate a bloated SA class is to recind offers. There's no reason to cut the comp of people you already paid to learn something.

Shearman is freezing

91 gets a 180

94-

No I mean 65. (In re Shearman)

19,

Dechert is a K&E wanna-be. They'll probably can 25 partners in Philly and NY just to keep up.

"Kirkland's lease runs until 2011."

With a year (or more) early termination, no? And it's 1/31/11, isn't it?

Something is screwy with the comment numbering.

Kasowitz hasn't said a word about salaries for '09. In any event, they don't pay salary increases until the end up June, retroactive to January, so raises are pretty much moot until then. It's always been this way.

Firms known to have paid more money than yours:

Wachtell
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
Skadden
S&C (Spring 2009 extra bonus tied to firm profits)

You want to go after a non-equity partner, one of my non-equity partners, you go after one that doesn't do the right things. You don't downgrade him because he does everything right and may not work as hard on Saturday and you let us make that decision. That's why I don't read ATL because it's garbage. And the editor that let it come out is garbage! Come after me! I'm the man! I'm 40. That's all I got to say. It makes me want to puke.

87 = Latham recruiter and/or partner trying to avoid first year layoffs

Firms known to have advanced salaries:

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Milbank Tweed
Debevoise
Holland & Knight
Morgan Lewis

is arnold officially frozen?

105 - that comment doesn't even make sense. Is english your native language?

97: where do you get your info? I heard Shearman was advancing salaries as normal.

Anyone comment on Luc Despins? Is he as much of an a-hole as I've heard? Would you go work with him at Paul Hastings if you want to do committee work? Will he get more business than Marty B seems to be getting and Dewey?

Apparently Gibson is following the standard salary increase:

http://abovethelaw.com/2008/12/associate_bonus_watch_gibson_d.php

Apparently 109 has not seen one of the greatest sports Youtube clips of all time.

Note: this is coming from a 2L.

I don't understand why firms are laying off experienced attorneys yet continuing to hire summer associates and new associates? Wouldn't it make more sense to keep the person who you already invested time and money on than trade him for someone with no idea what they are doing?

Also wouldn't it create a better morale to just quit hiring indefinitely and keep those already there?

you know what's sad? Most of the knowledge I have about my firm's hierarchy, partnership prospects/politics, financial condition, etc. comes from this blog.

- K&E Associate

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Milbank Tweed
Debevoise
Holland & Knight
Morgan Lewis
Gibson Dunn
Shearman (disputed?)

113 - link? Apparently I haven't.

80 - are you serious? Even for K&E, that's low. They don't have the "storm troopers" do the dirty work anymore?

Enjoy -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoMmbUmKN0E

114: Despite what you've probably heard, floors full of know-nothing associates churning away is what makes law firm partners rich. Elevating too many of those associates into partnership is financial suicide for a firm.

If a more senior attorney is slow, for whatever reason, the firm still has to pay him a lot, and that slow, senior attorney is earning the firm far less profit than a high-billing, yet legally unhelpful, first year associate. That's the beginning, end and middle of the explanation for this situation.

Kudos to Elie for putting in a call to K&E to follow up the tip he received.

"Kirkland & Ellis spokespeople did not respond to requests for comment by the time of this posting."

That's good journalism.

What about Quinn Emanuel? WHAT ABOUT THEM?!?

Can anyone report anything about Jenner? Bonuses? Salaries? I'm curious because the managing partner came out awhile back and declared that profits -- not revenue, profits -- would be up this year.

114, law firms are a business. The business belongs to the equity partners. They want to maximize equity partner profits. In good years, NS partners add to leverage. But in a bad environment, they take away equity value. You are right, so do SAs and 1st years, but the partners need bodies down the road when the economy recovers (or that is the theory) so it is better to keep some SAs and first years.

109, 105 here -

I want to talk about this article. Three-fourths of this is inaccurate. It’s fiction and this article embarrasses me to be involved with the law tremendously. That article had to have been written by a person that doesn’t have a non-equity partner and has never had a non-equity partner that’s had their heart broken and come home upset! And had to deal with the non-equity partner when he is upset! And kick a person when he’s down!

Here’s all that non-equity partner did! He goes to work. He is respectful to the media! He’s respectful to the public! And he’s a good employee, and he’s not an equity partner and he doesn’t deserve to be kicked when he’s down.

If you have a non-equity partner someday, you’ll understand how it feels. But you obviously don’t have a non-equity partner. I do. If your non-equity partner goes down the street and somebody makes fun of him because he made a typo, or says he’s fat, and he comes home crying to his mom, you’d understand. But you haven’t had that.

105 -- Thanks, Coach

I want to second the fact that KE is notorious in kicking down laterals. In the NY office, I personally know at least 10 laterals that were demoted 1-2 class years when they lateralled.

The bonus numbers as the years go up are not fully accruate with KE, since it shows a Class of 05 getting a high bonus, when really this person was a Class of 04 getting a slightly better bonus.

111: major a-hole, but does good work, but phjw is a ttt in decline

Lat, Elie?

Are the Shearman rumors true?

If any partners or associates can help with a question about reviews:

What do "below the class" reviews look like? Is it an objective classification or is it based on the overall feel of the review?

"since it shows a Class of 05 getting a high bonus, when really this person was a Class of 04 getting a slightly better bonus"

Is part of that a "make good" on the forgone bonus from prior firm (i.e., join K&E in September 07, you lose you 2007 bonus at prior firm and in Dec.08 have a full year at K&E--getting comped in part for you lost 07 bonus)? Are they really counting deferred "signing" bonuses in their bonus grid to make it look better? Wouldn't surprise me.

That said, is this just a symptom of a particularly harsh year for Share Partner decisions, with fewer "you'll make it next year"s and more "get the ef out"s? Could this just be a strict enforcement of "up or out" after a few years of being a little more lax, b/c there was more than enough work? I'm sure that will become the party line, no matter teh truth.

"What do "below the class" reviews look like? Is it an objective classification or is it based on the overall feel of the review?"

They tell you straight up (usually, sometimes the P talking sugarcoats a little--but if the words "you aren't going to make partner" are said, you're behind the class), at least after first year. First year it might be more of a "feel" and you best be prepared to bust ass if you want to stay for more than 15 months.

A below class review is, 130, is when the partner tells you--during the review--that your performance reviews are worse than is the norm for your class year. It's pretty clear.

95 says: "There's no way people rated with or above the class were laid off."

Agreed. I think the truth of the matter is being lost in some semantics -- NSPs let go were generally rated above or with their class in prior years, but had trumped-up/alleged below-the-class ratings this year.

116, thanks for the list.

No news from Winston or Mayer yet? Is this normal timing for them?

132 and 133,

Thank you. What if one or several aspects are "below the class" but others are "above the class"? Does even one or several mean a serious red flag, setting the 15-month exit belt in motion?

"you know what's sad? Most of the knowledge I have about my firm's hierarchy, partnership prospects/politics, financial condition, etc. comes from this blog."

You need to latch on to one of the (few) loose-lipped share partners or one of the (more common) loose-lipped NSPs who are friends with share partners.

Elie, you need more information about who these NSPs were before you run with a story like this. Are these all 10-13 year NSPs, or are more junior NSPs getting axed? If they are all in the "up or out" years, the fact that they were asked to leave is not news worthy of this blog.

Does a mix of "above the class" and "below the class" ratings average out? Or does one "below the class" rating generally mark an associate or NSP as "below the class"?

130/136:

Did you get a full bonus for "with the class" and your hours? Are you an '05 or younger? Then you have little to worry about, as long as you are able to improve on the areas where you were "behind the class". Especially if those BTCs were from Ps who also rated you ATC in other areas.

If you got no bonus, stop spending money now. You're on your way out soon.

128 (or anyone else that know about Luc Despins):
The PHJW thing is rough, since I could probably go Vault 5 for the name. But I wonder if joining him there, where they have a small BK group, would allow me to work right next to him and learn from him. What makes him such an a-hole? Like, is he just tenacious and hardworking and won't tolerate mistakes, or is it more like sleezy I kick puppies and steal from widows kind of stuff? I could tolerate the former.

Guys in my high school used to blow the perfect Rickrolling opportunity like 119 did all the time, it was no big deal.

-FRAT STUD

All partners are basically a-holes. That's what happens to a person who only cares about work and money. It doesn't exactly nurture a love of life and other people.

"is it more like sleezy I kick puppies and steal from widows kind of stuff?"

Or [try to] f*ck summer associates? (So the long ago rumor goes).

Is there a prominent BK lawyer who doesn't get called an a-hole by those working across the table (other than, maybe Harvey and Sprayregen)? You need to ask someone from Milbank who worked for him.

When I interviewed with K&E and a bunch of other NYC places, everyone gave me dire warnings about K&E, like in a low voice, "That's a different kind of place. They're brutal over there."

Fight the salary feeze! Cut costs by laying off the fucking 2009 summers...they haven't had a taste of the "good life" yet (oh it is so damn sweet in big law). They won't know what they're missing. Then law students will suck us off for lunch Nobu! And we'll be able to take them to NoBu as long as are salaries aren't frozen. Those bitches don't have no skillz. They can't. It's impossible. I guarantee they're all completely useless right now. Heck, don't lay them off, fire them for performance reasons. They don't even know what a blackline iz. Just lay them off. They'll thank us later....

"When I interviewed with K&E and a bunch of other NYC places, everyone gave me dire warnings about K&E, like in a low voice, "That's a different kind of place. They're brutal over there.""

Jeebus, they're brutal everywhere. K&E just doesn't put up with dead weight, and allows a culture of [fear of] backstabbing persist. Also, they treat you like sh!t if you leave. But that mostly applies to Partners, not associates, other than the dead weight thing.

141: you'll be FAR happier at Skadden.

Damn straight 143. I've said it before and I'll say it again - BigLaw partners are mostly selfish, duplicitous, thieving mother fuckers who would shoot you for a dime if they weren't also complete pussies when half a millimeter out of their element. Know it going in and remember every day, and perhaps you'll make it out alive.

-- Ex-BigLaw

142 nailed it. Might as well close the comments; there is nothing more to say.

The commenters complaining that the laid-off attorneys (and those who protest the deceptive lay-offs) shouldn't complain is.. um.. rich. Someone who made it into a large law firm, and then lasted approximately eight years, has obviously bought into the system about as completely as it is possible to do. I don't think we're dealing with a bunch of malcontents. I do think that many in the profession seem to have a knee jerk urge to dump on those who have been mistreated. Every single time ATL posts a story like this, SOMEONE gets on here and says, "It would all be rosy if they would just stop complaining." Would it, though? Do you really think a poor attitude is the reason the firm laid them off on Christmas Eve? Doesn't it seem more like the firm, not the attorney, had more control here? So what's the point of dumping on the attorney?

This profession attracts such tools.

'I do think that many in the profession seem to have a knee jerk urge to dump on those who have been mistreated. "

Do you have a theory as to why that is?

so basically they just let go of a bunch of senior associates who weren't going to make (share) partner anyway, right?

152, it's a defense mechanism. They tell themselves: Those laid off lawyers were all idiots and had it coming. Layoffs (or other bad things) can't happen to me. I went to a T14 school and graduated in the top 40% so obviously the firm will fire the Fordham graduates first...etc etc

"Do you have a theory as to why that is?"

Yes. I think people who are very fearful/cautious and want to be told what to do are attracted to the law. They have such large fear issues that they NEED the system to be right. So, when someone is hurt by the system, you'd expect them to feel sympathetic. Instead, they feel panic. "Oh no - this makes it look like the system doesn't always work and that means it's NOT my substitute father and won't always fix everything for me!" So they attack the person who made them feel fear, with the idea that if the problem can be explained away, then the system does work, and they are safe. If the system hurt a classmate or coworker, then we're all at risk, and they can't handle that. But if it was the coworker's own fault, then the tool thinks he's still safe.

Basically, they crave security and control. And they lie to themselves and others to get it.

Mayer has not announced yet, and no one knows why for sure. They normally announce in December (though individual numbers aren't provided until February). They told associates twice in Q4 last year that the bonus structure was going to remain the same, but who knows what that is worth nowadays.

I see everything twice!

154 -- spot on. Everyone wants to believe it can't / won't happen to them.

Luc Despins is a great lawyer and a huge addition to PHJW's small NYC bankruptcy practice. He hasn't been here very long, but if he is able to adjust his style to the laid-back atmosphere here it should be a perfect situation for a junior bankrutpcy lawyer.

--lawyer who actually knows something about PHJW

Is this close of year cull of "non-equity partners" just standard operating procedure for such a big firm as K&E? Or is it a result of the economy? Given the pyramid structure of firms and this firm's large size, it seems this could just be a routine thinning of the ranks.

155 -- Dr. Freud, much? I'm afraid the reality is more pedestrian. Law firms are businesses and, more often than not, act rationally. There usually is a reasonable explaination for terminations that does not involve evil partners or amoral firms anymore than it does lousy associates who "deserved" to be laid off. The terminated lawyers may be really good lawyers, but the firm, for whatever reason, believes it can make more money without them. They haven't been "mistreated," they have merely been made subject to the realities of supply and demand.

Cravath
Skadden
Sullivan
Clifford Chance
Dechert
Jones Day
Kirkland
Paul Weiss
Willkie Farr
O'Melveny
Linklaters
Weil
Cahill
Greenberg Traurig
Milbank Tweed
Debevoise
Holland & Knight
Morgan Lewis
Gibson Dunn
Shearman (disputed?)
Hogan and Hartson

161, apparently you are either a partner and cannot stand to be thought of as the scum you very likely are, or have simply not been exposed to the backstabbing and BS BigLaw partners are famous for - canceled and ruined vacations that could have been avoided, surprise bad reviews, disrespectful and unprofessional treatment, lying to people's faces, blaming associates for their own errors and failures, and a wide variety of other crimes and misdemeanors. There IS a reason that partners get such a bad rap here - by and large, they earn it.

We've updated the BigLaw Layoff Tracker at http://www.lawshucks.com - this brings our tracked total to 1,787 since 1/10/08 (Cadwalader) to now, and starts the year off with a bang.

Thanks 155.

So much word, 163.

Big firms can turn into shark tanks, incredibly quickly. Your actual work performance has little to do with the politics of being fired and/or screwed over, quite often.

In fact, the whole "performance stealth" layoff is really dangerous.

Law firms, as a general rule, are full of people who make the sort of racial, sexual, or sexual orientation gaffes that read terribly in a summary judgment motion.

If such an associate's reviews are fine (which can easily be determined, through pulling official copies of the old reviews) and they were members of a protected class, pulling these sorts of shenanigans really open firms up to all sorts of liabilities. Just another reason why I wouldn't give open ended credit lines to big firms.

Of course, this can be remedied by just giving all members of protected classes crappy evaluations from the jump, heh. Just set up the stealth firing from day one.

K&E did this a few years ago as well. The first is an up and out firm. It makes people NSPs early in their careers (after year 7, which essentially means you are a K&E associate, but -- oh joy -- you get to pay for all of your own benefits, including parking and health insurance). You are "allegedly" up for equity partner about 5 years after you make NSP, but making equity is a pipe dream. So after a few years they lay people off. They usually give them 3-6 months to get a new gig. This is so K&E can make the PR pitch that no one was really laid off -- instead all those who left have made alternative career choices....

163 nailed it. It's not that people are oblivious to the realities of supply and demand. It's that associates (and probably non share partners too) put up with a shitty working environment: canceled vacations, a short leash, nitty demands, all because they were assured a basic level of stability and compensation. Now, apparently at the first sign of financial instability partners immediately reveal that was bullshit. We fed you a shit sandwich for below market value associates. Hope you can find somebody else to make some more shit sandwiches for you.

152, see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error

"Just-world hypothesis: The belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get, which was first theorized by Melvin Lerner (1977). Attributing failures to dispositional causes rather than situational causes, which are unchangeable and uncontrollable, satisfies our need to believe that the world is fair and we have control over our life. We are motivated to see a just world because this reduces our perceived threats, gives us a sense of security, helps us find meaning in difficult and unsettling circumstances, and benefits us psychologically. Unfortunately, the just world hypothesis also results in a tendency for people to blame and derogate the victim of a tragic or accidental event, such as victims of rape and domestic abuse to reassure themselves of their insusceptibility to such events."

~154

where are the typical fuctards who will say this means the firm is in trouble? or have said fuctards of the first part finally realized that firms are BUSINESSES and if you dont have work, you dont keep idle, expensive associates around?

it is horrible that these third year assoc... i mean "partners" were laid off...but as "partners" they have clients and will land on their feet, right????

it is horrible that these third year assoc... i mean "partners" were laid off...but as "partners" they have clients and will land on their feet, right????

91 - that doesn't apply to everyone. I don't think K&E was the only firm that did this, but K&E's bonus scale went above the Skadden numbers for the top people (high hours/ratings). I realize that the average associate apparently did better at Skadden THIS YEAR for the first time in a while, but if you were a top biller at Skadden I still earned more than you as a top biller at K&E chicago.

Oh, it could be good business to lay off someone. It's bad business to characterize it as being performance based when the firm is trying to acting as a rational business that needs to cut costs.

169 - great theory, but no one (literally) believes the world is fair (except maybe some hindoos i suppose)

175 - Are you saying the world is not LITERALLY fair but, perhaps, FIGURATIVELY fair? What does that even mean?

176 = epic fail (literally)

K&E is literally a group of figurative d-bags.

Ropes & Gray had major stealth layoffs in the NY office and is bleeding because of all of their over hiring.

Ropes & Gray had major stealth layoffs in the NY office and is bleeding because of all of their over hiring.

Ropes & Gray had major stealth layoffs in the NY office and is bleeding because of all of their over hiring.

Ropes & Gray had major stealth layoffs in the NY office and is bleeding because of all of their over hiring.

Ropes & Gray had major stealth layoffs in the NY office and is bleeding because of all of their over hiring.

Ropes & Gray had major stealth layoffs in the NY office ( i'm surprised ATL has not covered it yet) and is bleeding because of all of their over hiring.

Ropes & Gray had major stealth layoffs in the NY office ( i'm surprised ATL has not covered it yet) and is bleeding because of all of their over hiring.

Ropes & Gray had major stealth double-posting in the NY office.

K&E seems like such a shitty place to work. When I interviewed there (several years ago when business was gangbusters) everyone seemed to be ridiculously anxious about their position in the firm. I can only imagine the mood around the office now...

The partners are who we thought they were!

Associates don't make NSP simply as a matter of course after 6 years. Associates who would otherwise get passed over get the picture early enough to know that they should start looking around so they don't have to suffer the indignities of being passed over. Those associates leave. It's also a grueling place to work, so many associates bail out before making it that far.

Making it from NSP to Share Partner is a black box. Very few make it. In some offices, it's been 2 or more years since anyone was promoted. The message has gone out to those approaching promotion that next year will be just as tough. Traditionally, when an NSP is passed over, they're typically left to die on the vine, i.e., given no new work. Very few are welcomed to stick around, and those NSPs start spending all their time job hunting. NSPs have fewer options in this economy, and it seems that K&E is now proactively showing NSPs the door to get them out more quickly. Sucks for them.

K & E is going down the tubes

173 is incorrect, at least for my year. Ahead of class, 2500+ hours, 70% of Skadden. Fuck.

179-186. Stop your nonsense on R&G.

150: Guys at my high school used to nail it all the time, it was no big deal.

what is TITCR? tits? i'm so confused. some of you guys are such internet nerds with all your acronyms!

First, K&E paid some associates more than double the Skadden bonus amount. Second, non-share partners make quite a bit more money than mere 6th/7th/8th year associates would make at another firm.

I'm a K&E Associate, and I'm happy to be here. I'm glad that we have storm troopers, I'm glad that we're up or out and I'm glad we aren't sharing the pie with a bunch of folks who haven't earned it. Don't be bitter, be better.

196: lamo

197 - don't be bitter, be better.

I'm literally, figuratively, a better lamo attorney at Nipple Kicker & Fnord and I'm happy to be there. Well, not entirely happy. I was let go today due to performance issues--which I have an issue with. I walked into a pre trial conference pre-meeting meeting wearing only orange fur lined speedos and purple turkish slippers and sang "I Kissed a Girl". I mean, come one, that's fucking perFORmance, man. I can't believe I figuratively, literally got let go.

I was at K&E and have worked with them since I went in-house. First, K&E non-shares are only senior associates. Whether they are treated better (other than title-wise), I don't know, as I didn't stay that long, but I know the average partnership track is 10 to 11 years -- 3 to 4 years longer than is average in New York. Next, you do, I believe, make more money, even as an associate, at K&E if you are good and work long hours, than you do at virtually any firm other than Wachtell. Making partner is hard, and being partner is not as harmonious as it is at some other firms as they constantly reallocate shares, which leads partners to explain, every other year, why they are better than their peers. Not pleasant. That said, having viewed them from the outside, the partners seem to work much less (to the detriment of the work) than partners in other NY firms -- delegating too much to associates. Finally, I think Luc is a good attorney. Q - does anyone know what kind of work K&E's NY litigation group is doing post-Morgan Stanley? Any securities stuff?

BREAKING NEWS!!!

Kirkland is an up and out firm!!

Thanks for the update, Elie.

K&E is crazy at the screening interview at my t5 the partner started the interview illegally. I should have walked out.

Finally. Finally!!! I usually don't care about stupid crap, but the K&E trolls on this blog the past few months have been the worst.. THE WORST, talking about how awesome K&E is doing and blah blah blah. Now I hope they all just sit down and shut up. K&E is a good firm, but that's it. They aren't Weil. They aren't Skadden. They CERTAINLY are not Cravath, or S&C or Wachtell for that matter. And they never will be. Their whole "non-equity" partner shtick is so transparent, and if you are a K&E-er and don't realize how the true top firms think K&E is a joke, I feel sorry for you. K&E didn't get enough flack in my opinion when they started their non-equity partner b.s. An 1--13 "real" partner track, market bonuses, and market pay. Sounds just like every other follower firm, except possibly 5 years longer to make partner. What a shit place to work.

"[K&E] aren't Weil."

And I think that everyone at K&E is happy about that.

28 = Kanye West

204- I'm sure the 25 senior associ... I mean "partners" who just got fired, are not.

21, 105 - You made my day.

196, 198 - Voted for Bush (twice) and McCain.

111,

I have worked with, and across the table from, Luc. He is an incredibly demanding boss and a very effective, aggressive lawyer. That being said, he's no different from 90% of partners who actually bring in big money. Working for him will be challenging but if you're willing to put in the hours (and I mean major hours) and the occasional yelling and screaming, you'll learn a lot.

Understand, however, that there are several major partners in the bankruptcy world who are not difficult people. In fact, some of are (gulp) kind and easy to work for. They are few and far between but they are there.

As for Paul Hastings, I would not go there if you had other options. If you can indeed land at top firms, I would choose Skadden or Weil for major bankruptcy work, or even Simpson (however, its a very sub-niche focused bankruptcy practice). I'm not confident that Luc will be able to get major work to move to Paul Hastings.

The bankruptcy world is very clubby and firm repuation matters a lot because the bar is so small. So, for example, a Cieri can move from Jones Day to Gibson and be almost shut out of major work (GDC has zero credibility in bankruptcy work). However, when he moved to Kirkland (which has a good rep and used to have a deep bench), the work poured in. In the same way, I'm not sure clients will follow Luc because Paul Hastings isn't a big name.

In general, I would say the same advice for choosing law school applies to law firms: choose the most prestigious law firm in your field and you'll do well. Good luck with your choice.

203=rejected by K&E.

K&E is dealing with the consequences of its rapid growth over the last three years during which it added over 100 lawyers every year. It will be curious to see whether the cuts extend to the other offices. Washington D.C. is still averaging over 2000 hours even at expanded staffing levels. Alot of us are expecting the knives to come out during this year's review process.

Will

203: Skadden may have a stronger traditional M&A practice, but K&E is better than Skadden or Weil in PE, is better than Skadden and at least the equal of Weil in IP, and is better than both in Lit.

Re your partnership comments, ppl are generally up for share partnership at K&E in year 10. How is that 5 years longer than NY shops?

I admit some of the comments from K&E ppl are annoying, but your comments miss the mark pretty badly, you obviously have a huge chip on your shoulder about K&E, and you sound like a complete dick.

I laughed at the comments about PHJW being a "laid back" place to work. It's a terrible place for associates. They have made a point about recruiting every dickhead K&E partner they can get. From Kirsch to Despins. PHJW makes more equity partners laterally than from within. It's up-from-the-ranks promotion rate is atrocious.

212- PE doesnt exist anymore, so there goes that

PHJW has a great flex time program for expectant mothers.

216: why such a terrible place for associates, aside from the bad partnership prospects?

213: Your mention of Kirsch has left me screaming and convulsing on the floor. Is there a doctor on this site?

Any word on Nixon Peabody?

"Kirkland (which ... used to have a deep bench)"

You actually think they miss any of the BK folks who left? Name one departure that actually hurt (several of them improved the place) since Luc.

217: Former K&Eer here. When the phone rang in my office and the name "Kirsch" flashed my phone screen, I would have palpitations.

28 - I think it goes more like this:

Ok, someone says Kirkland is laying off Non-Shares and that's that. You all believe it. It ain't about that. It ain't about that at all. I mean we talk'n about Non-Shares, we talk'n about Non-Shares. We ain't even talk'n about Share Partners, we talk'n about Non-Shares. We ain't talk'n about Share Partners, you know, the ones who give it their all every day and bring in all the clients and fees. We ain't talk'n about laying off Share Partners. The real partners who count. Man, we talk'n about Non-Shares. I mean how ridiculous is that? It's funny to me too. We talk'n about Non-Shares. How the hell you gonna make a firm better with Non-Shares?

219 -- Gee, maybe Kirsch, Fred Bartlit, Steven Lever, Robert Hallock, Don Kempf, Alberto Gonzales, Bob Greenlee,

221= tool

222 - BK = bankruptcy. Kirsch [sprinkling holy water on self at thought of him], Bartlit, Kempf and Gonzales aren't bankrtupcy attorneys. I don't know who Lever, Hallock or Greenlee are.

220: I feel your pain. He was one of the worst ever, and he had some pretty stiff competition in that area.

Oh, GREAT! The attornment business is slowing down, and lawyers are being laid off!

This saves us from having to behead the dirtbags who devalued American labor with NAFTA, CAFTA, and SHAFTYA.

STARVE, you dirty shysters! DIE, you nasty little esquires!

Oh, GREAT! The attornment business is slowing down, and lawyers are being laid off!

This saves us from having to behead the dirtbags who devalued American labor with NAFTA, CAFTA, and SHAFTYA.

STARVE, you dirty shysters! DIE, you nasty little esquires!

Just last week Chicago partner Kevan Evanich told the Chicago Tribune: "Kirkland, on the other hand, has no plans to curtail hiring, Evanich said. It's a lesson learned from the last recession. The firm reduced hiring and was burned when the economy turned around, he said." http://tinyurl.com/75rctw

K&E = shit.

It's as simple as that.

222 & 224:

"I don't know who Lever, Hallock or Greenlee are"

Whoever they are, they weren't BK lawyers at K&E after Despins left who left any meaningful impression.

And, 222, ask **ANY** share partner at K&E who ever worked with any of the other 4 whether the firm is better off w/o them---almost no one will say anything other than "they sucked, we're lucky they left". It's SOP at K&E.

Also, 222, I'm fairly certain that AGAG never worked for K&E--AGAG is a Texas boy and K&E never had a Texas office. I think you are thinking of a number of Gonzales aides, assistants, etc. like Ted Ullyot, Paul Clement, etc. And of course those were meaningful losses (as was Brett Kavanaugh), but none of them were BANKRUPTCY attorneys, you moron.

221 = funny. I mean, that's what we talkin bout.

Billy K. is rumored to be the model of decorum at his present firm.

233: I don't believe that's possible. People (or people-like creatures) don't change. If the evil isn't on display at PH, then it's breaking free somewhere in the world outside that office.

232: I don't believe that's possible. People (or people-like creatures) don't change. If the evil isn't on display at PH, then it's breaking free somewhere in the world outside that office.

233/234:

From what I hear, it's more about being the 80 share corp partner, rather than being specific to Billy. Also, being humbled (if only a little) does change a person sometimes.

Billy K. found out that no one wanted him after leaving his insurance company gig. The only firm that took him was PH for its new Chi branch office. Billy did recruit some K&E attorneys for PH. Humble pie.

Dude, come on--don't tell me you can't figure out they're just telling NSPs to leave a year earlier than they usually do. In other words, DUH--instead of stringing them along until the last minute and then terminating them (providing they're billing), they are just informing them 12 months earlier that they will NOT become a SP. Therefore, if you don't become a SP, you're OUT---that's the way it's always been at K&E. So, in otherwords, nothing new at K&E.

Two of the NSPs being given the boot were made NSPs back in 1998. They should have been out a long time ago.

I slashed the the junior associates first.

Then I cut the incoming first years.

Next were the tasty young summer associates.

Now I'm after the partners.

Fear Me.