2nd!

3rd?

So does this mean the severance for the involuntary departures will be (significantly) less than 3 months?

wait- so you could tell your group you want this, only to have them refuse your offer? Good luck with not getting fired before the end of the year after that...

Does a firm really offer this kind of "voluntary" departure unless they are planning on screwing those who remain in the involuntary departure?

I guess, regardless, if you do take the voluntary departure without another job offer already in hand, you are still going to be screwed. Good luck finding a job in this market within the three months severance period.

My advice...let it ride, and hope you are not included. Beware first-years...yeah, I'm talking to you...you are not safe. If your practice area involves "transactions," you do have cause to be concerned.

"and are selected" - WTF? What's the criteria? "We know you will think seriously about this offer?" Nice. Assholes. I hope every law student who considers working at this TTT firm will give this offer the same serious thought.

You don't get unemployment if you quit.....

I think this is actually a classy move (by a shit firm)

I'm guessing that Pillsbury already has selected which individuals it will terminate. Any employees that choose the voluntary reduction plan and were not already selected for termination are just icing on the cake for the firm. Extra cost reductions above what is already planned.

This is just about the dumbest idea ever. LAME.

On second thought, maybe this voluntary departure is a good idea. Those numb-nuts who don't actually need a job (aka trust fund) will take the severance as a form of paid vacation. This means less associates who have families to support and massive student loan debt will be affected.

Maybe not such a bad thing...still freaking weird though.

Good point 10. I wasn't thinking "big firmish" enough. They know already who is getting terminated. This is just to snag a few extras.

I LOVE this plan: who would like to step forward and get their head chopped off? If you volunteer, we will use a nice, sharp axe.

For those of you who don't volunteer, we will use the dull, rusty axe.

And they make it sound like getting selected for "The Program" is a glorious achievement:

Attorneys interested in considering the program will have until Friday, February 27, to state their desire to be included. Promptly thereafter, the local and firm-wide practice section leaders will consider whether attorneys in their sections who have expressed interest in the voluntary departure program can be accommodated. This analysis will depend in large part on the existing and anticipated needs of the practice section. On Tuesday, March 3, attorneys who have expressed interest in the voluntary departure program will be notified about whether they have been selected to participate.

This is a whole new low.

12, I don't think this is going to work out that way. Trust funders don't go to TTTs like Pillsbury.

This means they shied away from their original firing plan, didn't the tipster say they were naming names?

But a nice, gentle, family-friendly firm like Pilsbury wouldn't lay off first years, right?

They only have until FRIDAY?!

"Responses to Frequently Asked Questions ("FAQs") will be posted on the Universe this afternoon and updated daily. "

So Pillsbury controls the Universe? I, for one, welcome our new Pillsbury overlords.

You've to to add in the time pressure. Otherwise, you wouldn't get associates stupid enough to make this decision.

Doesn't this seem like it's designed simply to have the firm lay off as few people as possible who don't want to go, and allow those who do want to go to signal that?

If I were a partner thinking, ok, I've gotta go down by 30 people, I'd sure like to have people step forward so I'd have to fire as few as possible. Joke all you want, but partners are not monsters; no one enjoys tossing anyone out on their ass into the worst economy in memory. This is probably the shittiest thing these partners have had to do in their entire careers.

And if I were an associate looking to go, I'd prefer not to have any of my colleagues fired while I sit on my ass, ride out the storm, and then quit a month later.

Plans like this seem designed to minimize as much as possible (which may not be much) the involuntariness of all this.

The only people who would elect to voluntarily depart are those who are pretty certain that they are going to get axed involuntarily if they don't. If they make the move first, they get 3 months severance. If not, no severance. The firm is betting that enough people will be paraniod enough to quit with the severance.

Doesn't this seem like it's designed simply to have the firm lay off as few people as possible who don't want to go, and allow those who do want to go to signal that?

If I were a partner thinking, ok, I've gotta go down by 30 people, I'd sure like to have people step forward so I'd have to fire as few as possible. Joke all you want, but partners are not monsters; no one enjoys tossing anyone out on their ass into the worst economy in memory. This is probably the shittiest thing these partners have had to do in their entire careers.

And if I were an associate looking to go, I'd prefer not to have any of my colleagues fired while I sit on my ass, ride out the storm, and then quit a month later.

Plans like this seem designed to minimize as much as possible (which may not be much) the involuntariness of all this.

twenty-fourth

8 is spot on. Why would you deny yourself 6 months or more of unemployment benefits when you don't know what you're giving up (i.e., are they paying less than 3 months severance for the involuntary departures?).

25, unemployment benefits in many states are capped at something around $600 a week. It seems obvious that involuntary departures will be less than three months (otherwise not much of an incentive). Take the three months of 3000+/week salary. If you are worth anyhting to the firm the will choose to not select you to "participate" in the program and you can have some comfort in knowing you werent that low on the totom pole

21: Maybe. But the compassionate partner is not likely the person coming up with this plan. The list of terminees is likely already generated. They just want to also weed out those who don't really want to be there as well. If there's some overlap, great. If not, then you lost those who didn't want to be there anyway and saved more costs.

In various threads, I've seen discussion about firms allowing terminated associates to remain on the firm's website. Not sure if that is the case here, so this may be a bit off topic.

Does that mean you can leave the firm on your resume during that time? Are there ethical or legal issues with doing so?

This post makes a lot more sense once you realize that a fat partner shouted the memo through a bullhorn on the 6 train during morning rush hour.

Brobeck offered the same type of buyout before it went down.

Right now, every Pillsbury partner who has an associate that he or she knows is about to be fired anyway is talking to that associate, saying things like, "you know, I don't know if I can protect you, it might be a good idea for you to strongly consider the voluntary program."

That way, the partner can believe they are the good guy, and the firm avoids any employment lawsuits because the associate quit voluntarily. Normally, a firm using this method would also avoid the bad PR that accompanies involuntary terminations, but the idiot Pillsbury partner on the train made sure that Pillsbury wouldn't enjoy that benefit.

Right now, every Pillsbury partner who has an associate that he or she knows is about to be fired anyway is talking to that associate, saying things like, "you know, I don't know if I can protect you, it might be a good idea for you to strongly consider the voluntary program."

That way, the partner can believe they are the good guy, and the firm avoids any employment lawsuits because the associate quit voluntarily. Normally, a firm using this method would also avoid the bad PR that accompanies involuntary terminations, but the idiot Pillsbury partner on the train made sure that Pillsbury wouldn't enjoy that benefit.

27, 21 (and, uh, 23) here. I'm not seeing why people stepping up to leave wouldn't reduce the number of people a given firm has to fire.

It doesn't make sense for firms to maximize the number of people they can whack by adding up voluntary departures and layoffs -- if they wanted a larger layoff number, they could just *make* a larger layoff number and keep full control over who they whack.

What's up with the story at Cravath where one associate was terminated immediately and got escorted out of the building?!

FAT CLAMS quit.

50 attorneys at Clifford Chance (London) accepted the same 'voluntary reduction' offer last week. Perhaps Pillsbury is hoping for something similar...
http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=136827

Right now, every associate at Pillsbury with low billables is having heart palpitations over whether they should volunteer to get the axe and get three months severance or whether they should roll the dice and wind up with almost no severance.

If associates were smart they would all get together (temporarily unionize) and all take the voluntary option, all at once and sink the shit out of this firm and teach the a-hole partners that you can't treat people like shit to protect your PPP and get away with it. If even 1/2 of the associates left that firm would be F-ed.

-- Ray S. Ipsa

37: if that's the case, then the whole firm is having heart problems.

As a bankruptcy lawyer, if I was in Pillsbury's restructuring group, I'd take the offer as an added bonus and go join up with another NYC shop. You could probably have a job within weeks and have scored a nice $50k + bonus.

34 - say more, please. What's the story?

Why is Pillsbury such a TTT for doing this? I mean, not that Pillsbury isn't a TTT regardless, but I think if you are going to perform layoffs then this is a good first step.

This offer is more like a threat:

“those who don’t come forward now on their own will be severely punished.”

38 - obviously they can't do that because you have to be selected for the voluntary option

Pillsbury has been really slow for some time.

Insiders, what's the scoop?

I'm not seeing why people stepping up to leave wouldn't reduce the number of people a given firm has to fire.
__________________________________________

The firm said in the announcement that regardless of the response to their voluntary reduction offer, it will not "obviate the need for an involuntary reduction in force." That suggests that they don't much care how many people volunteer--they are moving forward with a set number of layoffs anyway, and the volunteers will either be (1) overlap or (2) icing on the cake. This isn't designed to change anything about the firm's plans other than potentially increase the number terminated.

Faustian bargain: to be willing to sacrifice anything to satisfy a limitless desire for knowledge or power.

Try again.

36, that article should have been covered here on ATL.

This strikes me as frighteningly similar to the Prisoner's Dilemma problem.

I wish my firm would do this.

if someone takes voluntary departure, but does not leave as agreed, will he be barred from the working as a lawyer for 10 years?

44, 38 here 'obviously' you didn't read the article correctly. It is a voluntary program as evidenced by this quote from the actual memo "The voluntary departure program will provide attorneys who elect to leave and are selected a severance package that consists, among other things, of three months of base pay. "

Carefully read posts before shooting down awesome, novel, groundbreaking ideas. K thanks.

More bad news for this economy. The Obama Recession is really starting to hit hard.

44 38 again, you were right I was wrong...this isn't the real 38 either I just thought his idea was good....im a d-bag

Heart,

me

Gentlemen at the legal preparatory academy with which I was once affiliated were in the habit of inscribing pentagrams, reciting incantations, and engaging in other arcane and profound activities pertaining to the occult, for the purpose of negotiating so-called "Faustian bargains" with supremely evil beings, such as equity partners. In the end, the gentlemen failed to obtain the benefit of their bargain, duly inscribed in blood, but were just the same smote by the aforementioned beings. This was not considered particularly newsworthy.

38, while that seems like a good idea, Pillsbury probably would not approve all of the voluntary departures. Remember, it's a "program" and you have to apply and be selected. Lol. So they'd approve a certain number and everybody else would either be kept on (and grateful for the job) or terminated with no severance until Pillsbury reached their magic number.

38, 52 and all other stupid people -

"Promptly thereafter, the local and firm-wide practice section leaders will consider whether attorneys in their sections who have expressed interest in the voluntary departure program can be accommodated."

OBVIOUSLY the firm cannot accommodate the ENTIRE firm walking out and paying EVERYONE a three month severance.

horrid

57 - 'OBVIOUSLY' you are a Pillsbury TTTroll, 38 was suggesting that they cannot afford to pay out everyone leaving and thus this act would unilaterally "sink the shit out of the firm" -- you see 38 was banking on the fact that they couldn't cover all the departures and as a result the firm would go under...Its genius really except for the selection requirement, the fact that most people will not act in concert. Still...it would be funny and probably would teach those old partner shit monkeys a thing about treating people well.

38, don't be silly. If half the associates opted in, the firm would just not select most of them to be part of The Program. There's no way to screw the firm apart from the associates walking (with no severance)

Pillsbury did the same layoff routine in 2006. It's gonna be ugly, again.

Three simple words sum up this offer:

DON'T DO IT.

Hold on and suck every last piece of marrow out of them.

19 - Pillsbury controls a parallel universe, one in which the orbit of large bodies in motion (i.e., Doughboys) are unpredictable.

Once again law firm management has shown itself to be more incompetent than your average mcdees employee. Do they think any rational person is going to walk out on the street in this economy?

Just put the associates out of their fucking misery and implement the 'reduction' already!

I've heard unemployment in NYC is $400/week. So it would seem to me that by taking this plan, you get 3 months at law firm salary, meaning that a first year would get (pre-tax) about $36,900. On the other hand, 6 months of unemployment would be $9600. At $600/week it would be $14400. Even if you forfeit unemployment benefits, this seems like the better plan... am I missing something?

isnt three months severance standard? way to stay classy.

Assuming whatever severance (if any) the involuntarily terminated are going to receive is less than the three months offered to those that leave voluntarily, I wonder if Pillsbury would be so heartless to reject someone who volunteers that they were planning on terminating anyway.

I'm betting yes.

I'm looking at the Universe out of my window, and I cannot see any answers to frequently asked questions.

Since they will be cutting "staff" as well, any idea if they are being offered any "package" to leave of their own volition OR are only the dorks being fired, so they don't need volunteers.

Brobeck offered "voluntary" payouts of 5 months severance in November 2001. In spring 2002, Brobeck followed with layoffs such that the severance of the laid off attorneys ran out only a few weeks after the payouts to the first "voluntary" group. Essentially, those who turned down the voluntary payout but were then laid off ended up working for free for several months.

What if you step forward for a voluntary departure and they deny you? One word: awkward.

PRICELESS 19! lol

Well, even when a firm pays you a severence for a certain amount of time, after that expires, if you still haven't found a job, you can still apply for unemployment (if the termination was involuntary). I did that last year, had no problems collecting unemployment for 3 months after my 3 months severence stopped (then fortunately found another job).

The question here is will Pillsbury allow an associated to "voluntarily" leave with their severence and be allowed to file for unemployment if the associate has still not found new work after the severence is done. I'd also want to know what those other benefits include, such as paid health care and similar.

PRICELESS 19! lol

Bank Nationalization will hurt law firms. There was an article about this on http://www.blackbooklegal.com

#68 its not the afternoon yet

#76 - it is afternoon somewhere!

what to do, what to do??????????

Great idea. Firms not even considering layoffs should do this, but make 12-18 months severance part of the "program" deal. See who steps forward, and then deny them all acceptance into the program. The information gained from this will prove helpful for future decisions...

Obviously the NY office is tanking, does anyone know how LA is doing?

what to do, what to do??????????

I don't understand what they plan to give the involuntary holdouts. I thought most, if not all the firms, gave 3 months and they still get to apply for unemployment.
Can we get a poll which asks the recently cut:
What firm laid you off? How much severace? Do you still get to apply for unemployment? What year? What practice group?

77 -
On a moment like this, I can't help but wonder: "What would Jimmy Buffett do?"

I am at Pillsbury. It is really not that slow. Like most places depends on the group. Some groups are booming, others have nothing. If I had to guess I would say that this will disproportionately hit the transactional practices. Most people did scratch their heads at this voluntary departure memo though. I myself have no intention of walking the plank voluntarily.

73- you are an idiot. You only get to claim unemployment if you are unvoluntarily let go. That does not apply to those that get the 3 months severance. I am surprised you found a job, let alone another job.

Signed,

Not an idiot.

85--"Unvoluntarily"? I think I know what you mean to say, but that is incongruent with your signature. I think you mean "involuntarily" but if you do, then you are an idiot. Please reconcile.

84- what groups are booming? what office?

86 - my sentiments exactly. hilarious.

I like the opening phrase of the memo "As you were advised last week" - works as long as you consider some loud mouth on the train blabbing all "advising" someone!

85 flunk English? That's unpossible!

I am an idiot.

--85

I'd prefer to be laid off and collect unemployment for 26 weeks.

84 - the only booming group is Doughboy Robbins on the train (he qualifies as a group).

I wonder if Obama will talk about Pillsbury in his address tonight?

So in other words, Pillsbury can find out which associates want to leave, "deny" then participation in the program, and then fire them without severance.

Brilliant.

As others have correctly noted, this is the best possible layoff strategy for the firm. Undoubtedly some will self-select, thus saving the firm the hassle and heartburn of having to let some people go involuntarily.

The downfall is no unemployment, and probably no student loan deferral, and no reduced COBRA premiums - but if you already have another place lined up to land, you basically scored yourself a few months' salary and saved someone else's job in the process.

I'm tired.
zzzzzzzzzzzzz

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I think the employees who were named by the bozo on the train should take this package, as anything else they get offered will be worse. I wonder if the law student took notes and can help them out.

Litigation and energy for example are quite busy. I believe environmental work is busy as well.

100 - bollocks. Litigation isn't "busy" - it's filled with non-rainmaking partners grabbing associates' work.

There may be small practice groups within Pillsbury that are doing well and are busy; however, those small groups cannot support the rest of Pillsbury.

68 -- The "Universe" is Pillsbury's intranet, which has occasionally led to such error messages as "The Universe is currently unavailable." Confusing, to say the least.

If you're going to make an offer like this, let the people who want it take it. Don't pull this "discretionary" crap. What a hole.

I would take the 26 weeks unemployment and here's why. If I take the voluntary three months, I get that no matter what and my wife will nag me to go look for a job. If I get laid off and collect the unemployment, my continued unemployment is conditioned on me NOT getting a job and I have an excuse to just sit around for six months!

I'm going to make them an offer they can't refuse.

103 - Thank you for that. I am laughing uncontrollably at "The Universe is currently unavailable."

wow, how lame is Pillsbury, one their main firm website they are touting their Q&A on the digital TV transition. Memo to PIllsbury, just about everyone in America is sick and tired of the transition explanations. this is your idea of value-added legal advice? yikes.

Personally i wonder how hard this round of layoffs will hit Pillsbury's.......Virtual Worlds & Video Games Practice Group? Wha?

107 - what is less laughable is the Universe doesn't have any answers to your FAQs.

Actually, according to my friends in the video game industry, things are going well. People are staying home and playing video games because it's cheap entertainment.

Well 111, porn is a billion dollar industry, but not really seeing firms set up whole practice groups along those lines. But maybe that's the way to go: Cravath could use that to get the PPP back up. Wasn't one of their former partners quite enamored of prostitutes?

If they try to take my stapler I'm going to set the building on fire.

what I find interesting is that of those that "volunteer" for the layoff, you still have the be "selected" in order to receive this package. does that mean that someone who might "volunteer" and isn't selected is wanted by the firm to remain there, or is it not selected to get the package?

but yeah, one can't make an informed decision without knowing what other benefits are included, what type of 'layoff package' there is for one who doesn't volunteer, and whether the firm will contest an attempt to collect unemployment if one still doesn't have work after the three month layoff.

First off, with all the bad news and layoff horror stories, Pillsbury is really acting like a bunch of turds in coming up with this plan. It is a terrible choice for associates to have to make. That being said, the only way out of this would be for ALL associates to agree to be part of the "voluntary departure program". At my former firm, we would sometimes have "associates meetings" that usually coincided with partner meetings to discuss the firm. Perhaps someone at Pillsbury should send out an anonymous e-mail from a gmail account to all associates informing them of an associates meeting in their main conference room in their city at 4:00 PM today. At the meeting someone should pass out a sheet of paper with all associates names on it with a place to sign that basically states that everyone is willing to take part in the voluntary program. The firm will firm who they want to anyway. At least this way if everyone agrees to be a part of the program the people who are fired will get 3 months severance.

Regarding unemployment, by my read of the plan, if you agree to possibly take part in the plan the firm retains the right to either fire you or not fire you. So you have not really quit your job. You have just offered the firm the option of laying you off with severance. You would still be able to collect unemployment. It would be highly unlikely the firm would contest unemployment for any former associates who "agreed" to possibly be laid off, or not......

No one voluntarily take the package. Don't do it. It was their stupidity to overhire and ruin people's lives. They should pay big for their mismanagement. Everyone organize and demand money.

the atmosphere at pillsbury is strange now. don't know who to trust (answer: no one), and everyone has caught the new business bug. where were the partners 2 ago when management couldn't even them to go out and pitch new business?

Voluntary? Like: "March 15th is your last day unless you decide to voluntarily leave before that date"?

Such a crap firm... so glad I left. They treated us all like garbage.

Yeah, but we biglaw associates really are garbage. We're interchangeable, we have very little real world experience and most of us have no outstanding talent. Gone is the era when you could be comfortable just because you had an above average IQ and looked better than average in a brooks brothers suit.

65, you said:

"I've heard unemployment in NYC is $400/week. So it would seem to me that by taking this plan, you get 3 months at law firm salary, meaning that a first year would get (pre-tax) about $36,900. On the other hand, 6 months of unemployment would be $9600. At $600/week it would be $14400. Even if you forfeit unemployment benefits, this seems like the better plan... am I missing something?"

You may be missing two things:

1. You could ask for "voluntary" reduction and not be selected, but be laid off anyway.

2. By asking for "voluntary" reduction, you could become one of those chosen for lay off, even though the firm had planned to keep you.