Add RSS RSS

International Layoff Watch: DLA Piper Cuts 140 U.K. Employees

DLA Piper logo Above the Law blog.jpgIt should come as no surprise that one of the largest international law firms has suffered from significant international layoffs. The Lawyer reports today that DLA Piper has laid off 140 employees in the U.K.: 30 attorneys, and 110 support staff. According to the report:

An internal email announcement, seen by The Lawyer, told staff: “There has been a downturn in economic activity since we last reviewed resource and when we budgeted for our 2009 business year. We expect the current market conditions to continue for some time.

DLA released this statement in response to the reports:

Having carefully considered current volumes of business activity and the predicted impact of the ongoing downturn we are conducting a formal redundancy consultation process in the UK which is likely to result in up to 140 redundancies. Approximately 30 are likely to be fee earners and the remainder will be direct and indirect business support staff in our 8 UK locations. This is a difficult but necessary decision based on our reassessment of resource levels following the continuing deterioration of the market. This prudent action will align our capacity levels with existing client demands.

DLA spokespeople declined to comment on any U.S. fallout from these U.K. moves. DLA has already instituted a salary freeze, so hopefully their costs are under control.

Update (5:05): Additional sources have informed us that the process of laying off associates works differently in the U.K. than it does here. There is a “consultation” phase that happens before layoffs, and that phase can take a few months. Official numbers on overall force reductions won’t be available for a couple of months, as DLA goes through the consultation process.

DLA Piper: 140 more jobs to go [The Lawyer]

Earlier: Nationwide Pay Freeze Watch: DLA Piper
Prior ATL coverage on law firm layoffs

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:37 PM

FIRST

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:42 PM

Of course, let the jeering begin. It always does. At least you're hearing about these layoffs. You honestly think Skadden still needs 1500 lawyers in New York? Of course not, but that place has so much turn over, who would notice 30 attorneys leaving?

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:43 PM

Can a human being really be a "redundancy"? The Queen's English is a chilly bitch and makes our "force reductions" look positively fuzzy in comparison...

4 Posted by ShamWOW | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:48 PM

Vince Offer here saying that DLA associates can wipe their tears with a ShamWOW.

Plus, if you call in the next twenty minutes (because I can't do this all day), you get another ShamWOW for your car, which you now have to sell.

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:49 PM

Did they merge their Swindon branch with the Slough branch?

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:50 PM

Dude you're not funny

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:50 PM

Vince, I love your nuts.

8 Posted by ShamWOW | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:51 PM

7--Vince here saying that's what Billy Mays said.

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:53 PM

HAHA to 4- maybe I can use that for my tears that I have been shedding since I was laid off (NOT!!!)...guess I am a "redundancy" as well. But seriously, why is no one talking about the layoffs at GOODWIN PROCTER???

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:54 PM

4, after I saw the Billy Mays avitar I was thinking about creating one for Vince Offer. Well played, Trebek.

Also, as an FYI, did anyone else know that Vince Offer was the guy behind "The Underground Comedy Movie" that Comedy Central used to run ads for circa 2003ish?

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:55 PM

ShamWOW guy to V1.

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:00 PM

Hey laid off female DLA piper associate,

BITCH SPREAD THE BUTTCHEEKS SO I CAN SMELL THE JUICY INSIDES!

avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:07 PM

9, what Goodwin layoffs? The 30 layoffs from several weeks ago? Or do you have something new?

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:10 PM

I like the term "fee earners".

"What do you do?"

"Oh, I'm a fee earner."

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:15 PM

SkaddenLA is next up on the chopping block. Office is very bloated.

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:20 PM

At least DLA's UK offices are honest about these "redundancies." The US offices have conducted significant stealth layoffs.

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:21 PM

Thank you #12, its about time somebody said that. Finally a breath of fresh insides.

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:30 PM

2 lay off stories, 1 salary cap, and an interest piece on how work sucks now. . . Just another day on ATL.

avatar
19 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:40 PM

Heard Goodwin Procter layoffs Thurs, Feb.12, 2009

avatar
20 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:44 PM

@2:40 - Which offices - and are they going to be stealth or official?

avatar
21 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:59 PM

@2:44 not sure which offices, but "heard" official (rumor has it). Was originally planned for Friday until they realized it was Friday the 13th.

avatar
22 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:07 PM

best of luck

23 Posted by Michael Ray Richardson | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:20 PM

The ship be sinking...

24 Posted by The 80s Guy | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:30 PM

What this firm needs is the sleek, dazeling veneer of the 1980's!

avatar
25 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:42 PM

Lee, Lee, Lee, Lee,
Lee Lee Lee Lee Lee Lee Lee Lee Lee,
We're talkin' fuckin' Lee.
I had a friend named Lee,
He cast a spell a spell on me.
If me and Lee and KG could be three,
Flyin' free Tenacious Lee,
Skinny-dippin' in a sea of Lee,
I'd propose on bended knee
To Lee Lee Lee, Lee Lee Lee,
Lee Lee,
Lee Lee Lee, Lee Lee Lee,
Lee Lee,
Le-Lut-Le-Le-Le-Lee Lee Lee,
Le-Lut-Le-Le-Le-Lee Lee,
If me, and Lee, and KG, (that's me)
Could be three, (could be three)
Plant a tree, (plant a tree)
Just for Lee, (just for Lee)
Just for Lee, (Lee)
Just for Lee!
Lee, Lee, Lee: Leeee, Leeee, Leeee:
LEE!

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:52 PM

DLA Piper is the DLA Piper of law firms.

avatar
27 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:38 PM

8 UK locations!?! Starbucks, what!?

avatar
28 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:27 PM

You must be a REAL loser if you would rather go back to law school than high school. High school was more fun and less work. You also had your entire future ahead of you. In law school, you are pretty much locked in to a boring and possibly dead-end career.

Plus, you read so much as a lawyer that your face actually starts to sag.

I've always wondered why people value excessive money over health, and then I slap myself in the head for actually doing it myself. I woke up after a couple of years and realized that I had lost my true identity. Now I'm looking to get out.

Does anyone else here think that law sucks the life out of you?

How about the partners? Was it worth it? How is life just as a partner, regardless of the work it took to get to that level? You still have high billable hour requirements, so it can't be that great. But let me know.

avatar
29 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:00 PM

28 - are you going to keep posting the same message over and over on this site? Why would you do that instead of spending time finding your "true identity"?

avatar
30 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:14 PM

DLA is about to lay off 120 associates in the US on Thursday. Watch out. This includes newly hired first years.

avatar
31 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:40 PM

30 - How do you know? Today, the firm oddly required everyone to have all of their time in today. Usually, they give some advanced notice but they didn't today. People think that they want the time in because they are going to let people go.

avatar
32 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:41 PM

30 - How do you know? Today, the firm oddly required everyone to have all of their time in today. Usually, they give some advanced notice but they didn't today. People think that they want the time in because they are going to let people go.

avatar
33 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, February 10, 2009 11:46 PM

31/32 is correct - the time entry message was a week early. Something is definitely up - annual reviews scheduled for the first week of February were suddenly canceled (and have not been rescheduled).

avatar
34 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 12:20 AM

How can the same firm be so schizofrenic - DLA US must have laid off 50+ attorneys during the December and January "performance-based" purges - and all on the sly - whilst DLA UK is upfront and honest about its layoffs being economy-based. There is simply no honour in the US legal system anymore.

avatar
35 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 12:58 AM

It's actually less than 120 once the partners started horsetrading. I know because the partner I work for told me. We're having firmwide come to Jesus meetings on Friday by the way. Don't expect to get much work done then - if you are lucky enough to have any.

avatar
36 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 6:10 AM

34 - it's a different legal system. Associates in England have employment contracts with a three month notice requirement for both the employer and employee, while associates in the US are employed "at will". Whether it's "performance based" or economy based, getting rid of US associates is much easier - you don't need a reason (so long as it's not discriminatory). An English employer would need pretty strong bases for mass "performance based" layoffs (negative appraisals and warnings, for example, for each individual), so they go the redundancy consultation route. That's all.

avatar
37 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 8:25 AM

Does anyone know what offices and what practice groups will be hit worst?

avatar
38 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 9:46 AM

28--Yes, it is worth it. The practice of law, whether lucrative or not, is often far more interesting than most jobs/professions. The practice changes constantly as new problems/cases/transactions come in the door requiring solutions to new puzzles. I suppose the grass is always greener, as I have more than a few corporate/non-law friends who complain that the Groundhog Day repetitiveness of their jobs is sucking the life out of them. And living without a decent income isn't stree free either unless you're a trust fund baby. Having no $$$ and stressing over making ends meet can be life sucking too.

avatar
39 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:00 AM

All offices and practice groups are affected. It's hard not to since it's more than 5% of the associates. The practice groups most affected would obviously be those with the least expected work for the comming year. You'll find out tomorrow. Either your partner of an HR rep, some being flown in, will tell you tomorrow. Better keep neglecting your family and working ungodly hours, soon you may no longer have that opportunity.

avatar
40 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:01 AM

All offices and practice groups are affected. It's hard not to since it's more than 5% of the associates. The practice groups most affected would obviously be those with the least expected work for the comming year. You'll find out tomorrow. Either your partner or an HR rep, some being flown in, will tell you tomorrow. Better keep neglecting your family and working ungodly hours, soon you may no longer have that opportunity.

avatar
41 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:14 AM

I know it's certainly not good news, but any thoughts on the fate of an SA headed to a non-NY/DC/Chicago DLA office this summer?

avatar
42 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:24 AM

41--You're basically a steerage passenger on the Titanic. Remember how they were treated in the movie?

avatar
43 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:34 AM

I had a managing partner named Lee
He cast a spell on me
If me and Lee and Grand Pubah Frankie could be three
Flyin Free Tenacious post- Marbury
Skinny dippin in a sea of Lee
I'd propose on bended knee
To the architect of this melee
Lee Lee Lee Lee Lee Lee
Lee Lee Lee Lee Lee
Talkin' fuckin' Lee

avatar
44 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:56 AM

Any word on San Diego DLA? They've laid off half of their corporate associates already just in the last few months. Are anymore going to be culled in the upcoming reduction?

avatar
45 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 11:26 AM

As of right now no offers have been rescinded. The ones who are really screwed are those laidoff first years. I'm guessing that last summer's class will be fine seeing that we'll need to have replacements anyway.

avatar
46 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 12:12 PM

BOHICA

avatar
47 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, February 11, 2009 1:09 PM

I imagine Chicago is in trouble.

avatar
48 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:00 PM

Whats the skinny? Still no news on whether lay-offs have gone down?

avatar
49 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:01 PM

Whats the skinny? Still no news on whether lay-offs have gone down?

Post Your Comment