Sonnenschein partners are going to Vegas, baby! Vegas!
The legal world is imploding. Salary freezes. Layoffs. Baby sized bonuses. But as Sonnenschein chairman Elliott Portnoy told BusinessWeek last week, the firm sees these troubled times as ripe with opportunity, as evidenced by its cannibalization of Thacher Proffitt late last year.
Times are good apparently. Today, the majority of Sonnenschein’s partners are flying from around the country and from Europe to attend a partners’ meeting in Las Vegas. A fact mentioned by AmLaw in passing last week, and brought to our attention again yesterday by an angry tipster:
Guess which newly merged law firm is flying all of their partners to Vegas for a retreat despite massive layoffs of both attorneys and staff last month? Correct! Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal… The kicker is that these fools are choosing to stay at the Wynn, though I am not sure what level of rooms they are getting or if these grey-haired dbags will have to share.
At first, we imagined the partners cruising through the desert in convertibles, sitting around the roulette table gambling away their PPPs, lounging in Rainman suites, and getting all spa’ed up. Not so, says a source within the firm. It’s a “scaled-back partners’ meeting” not a retreat, says the source, the Thursday through Saturday schedule chockful of 130 meetings. The only firm-sponsored recreational activity will be a “fun run” on Friday morning.
Wells Fargo canceled its Vegas trip to the Wynn this week after some Congressional criticism. Our Sonnenschein source says the firm considered canceling the trip— which had been booked years in advance— but would have lost a hefty non-refundable deposit.
How Sonnenschein is trimming the fat on the Vegas trip, after the jump.
The firm “massively scaled back” on the meeting, said the source. Here’s how:
The Wynn’s not doing so well in the dismal economy as Americans cut back on traveling and gambling, reports Reuters. Perhaps Sonnenschein can consider their patronage of the troubled Las Vegas resort a pro bono effort.
Amid Downturn, Law Firm Sonnenschein Scales Up [BusinessWeek]
(61) 
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
First!
This is UNBELIEVABLE!! (But then again, what do we expect? In the end, we're just disposable cogs...)
justmarvy.blogspot.com
The only thing I can think of is that Sonnenschein or its Partners already expended vast sums for this retreat that they couldn't get back.
Otherwise, this is really the height of douchebaggery.
SECOND. At least the strippers and other entertainers should make some money out of this
Scott Turow eats children.
so what? it's their money, not like they're taking any bailout funds.
Douchebags.
good for them. And when they return they will just dissolve and take their money and run
Sorry, not a big deal. Partners' meetings are necessary for any firm every couple of years. I would say the need to meet and plan strategy is heightened given the current climate. Vegas is just as good a place as any to meet, and probably cheaper than most alternatives.
--Not a Sonnenschein partner or associate
Why is everyone getting their panties in a wad? These partners OWN the firm, it is their money. There are no shareholders being screwed over and no direct government bailout funds are being used. If they feel like they want to subsidize their own money for this trip, than so be it. Folks on here are worse than the secretaries at law firms who bitch and moan when their attorneys buy a new BMW or a new suit. These are law firms, not a fucking support group.
I still can not find any logical explanation for this ungodly pressure on my sphincter.
I like the Swingers reference.
Guys from my high school used to go to Vegas all the time....It was no big deal :)
Frat Stud
10 = wordy rewording of 6.
Unbelievable? Yeah, unbelievable that anyone should find this to be problematic. Do you people complaining understand that these partners OWN the firm? They are free to do with their money what they wish and they are not at the behest of the federal government or taxpayers, let alone freshly laid off associates and staff.
Unbelievable? Yeah, unbelievable that anyone should find this to be problematic. Do you people complaining understand that these partners OWN the firm? They are free to do with their money what they wish and they are not at the behest of the federal government or taxpayers, let alone freshly laid off associates and staff.
10:
Thanks for educating us. None of us who work at law firms understand how they work. Moreover, we're completely unable to make the distinctions that you allude to in your post. So thanks.
Seriously, nobody is quibbling with the fact that they have the right to do whatever the fuck they want with their money. They own the firm. We get it.
But this is bad optics for a firm that has laid off a bunch of Associates under the aegis of a bad economy. The firm already has a shitty reputation among its Associates. This just adds fuel to the fire.
Not having a golf outing doesn't show that you're aware of the economic environment in which you're operating. Maybe they don't give a fuck. That's their prerogative. But if they are pilloried for it by younger attorneys, many of whom has been laid off, they absolutely deserve it.
This seems... entirely reasonable. Big deposit that would have been lost? Dramatically scaled back activities (pretty much nothing fun is left; kids, be warned, "fun run" is a dangerous, hurtful misnomer)? The necessary evil of firm-wide meetings?
Yup. This seems OK. This isn't like Wells Fargo rewarding their "top performing" mortgage brokers.
If its true that they had a huge nonrefundable deposit booked years ahead -- isn't it a more responsible use of funds to spend a little more and actually get something out of it, than to just donate a bunch of money to the Wynn and get nothing in return?
they obviously have the right to do it. it is questionable whether it's wise to do it given that they just laid off a bunch of folks, which indicates that firm finances may not be top notch. and although partners have no fiduciary duties to associates and staff, it's important to keep in mind that pissing off these groups by appearing callous and spendthrift may spell trouble in the long run. a matter of optics more than substance.
This isn't necessarily a bad idea. Vegas is one of the CHEAPEST cities for hotels and flights. The fact that it is warmer won't hurt either. If they had to have a face-to-face meeting with their partnership, going to Vegas could be fairly cost-effective.
- Not a Sonnenschein partner
21: i agree. vegas only seems inaccessible to people who've never been.
Offensive things happen in Vegas. I am offended by that. Please moderate so I will no longer be offended by offensive things.
Elie, you don't know what cannibalization is. Stop using words you don't understand.
Stop micromanaging every company out there. If SNR fails because they sent their partners to Vegas then the partners will be out of jobs. If they continue to fire people and go on trips to Vegas, their associates will take the first offer out of crazy town that comes along once the economy turns around (in 2035).
Stop micromanaging every company out there. If SNR fails because they sent their partners to Vegas then the partners will be out of jobs. If they continue to fire people and go on trips to Vegas, their associates will take the first offer out of crazy town that comes along once the economy turns around (in 2035).
Is cannibalization what happens when something gets cannaballed?
Hofstra Pride
I love Vegas. I recommend betting all the money that was saved by firing lazy associates on roulette.
I'm sure it was cheaper to fly 120 Chicago partners to Vegas and put them in the Wynn than to have the other offices come to Chicago.
Oh, wait....
Whine... whine... whine. I guess the associates on this site would not complain if any of the partners took the extra cash they would have received in distributions and spent it on a hair plug transplant procedure than trying to keep their firm afloat.
Paul Hastings just pushed an unwed mother down the stairs.
A fun run in Vegas? The only reason I'd run in Vegas is if my whore turned out to be a dude.
A fun run in Vegas? The only reason I'd run in Vegas is if my whore turned out to be a dude.
24 = racist. Didn't you bother to look and see that this post was written by Kash, not Elie. Stop hating!
"We didn't get our forty acres and a mule, but we did get you, CC."
I think I need a doctor.
30:
My sense is that there would be less whining if SNR opted not to ruin the careers of Associates and then shuttle off to Vegas shortly thereafter, but that's just me.
This would never happen in Fort Worth. We are a close knit group who treat one another with class and honor.
What does a good ole fashioned Flying Walenda go for these days on the strip?
Associates can bitch about this only if they plan to cancel their vacation plans this year, due to the bad economy. If you are cancelling your own trip, then damn right you have grounds to be mad at partners for not cancelling theirs. But, if you still are spending your week in Vale and two weeks in Cazumel, or whereever, then shut the F up. At least the partners are going to do some firm business on their vacay... what are you going to be doing that helps anything other than your tan?
39:
I'm paying for my vacation from my own bank account. It's slightly different, isn't it?
And if I was an employer that had to lay off employees, I'd have enough sense not to jet off my highest-paid employees to Vegas when I just dismissed many of the people who enable my highest-paid employees to be the highest-paid employees.
I suppose you would argue that the firm's bank account belongs to the Partners, but it's not obviously not the same thing.
Partner meetings aren't vacations, and partners pick up the tab for these meetings (hint: they own the firm).
You associates who suppose that somehow you are responsible for the success of your partners make me laugh. I'm happy to see that you haven't lost your sense of humor, despite these trying times.
41:
Would you even know how to conduct the most basic legal research if all of your Associates left today?
And are you saying that your take home pay is entirely attributable to the amount you bill and not anyone else's billings?
40
It obviously is to everyone but you.
42: Believe it or not, partners are smart enough to handle legal research, and some of us do when a client calls to ask for a quick opinion on something. Associates are tasked with the job, for the most part, because of their lower hourly rates. Clients don't want to pay partner rates for mundane tasks. You might be surprised to learn that when it comes to quick and dirty research involving government agencies, for example, I often ask my secretary to take charge. Granted, my secretary is one of those rare creatures who graduated with honors from a very good school, so I can trust her to handle a lot of requests that might be too complex for most secretaries or paralegals, and since we don't bill her time, the client gets the occasional freebie. But the point is, legal research can be conducted by anyone with a decent head on his or her shoulders.
To answer your second question, every employee of the firm, both billable and non-billable, contributes in varying degrees to the success of the firm. But those of us who have made partner did it ourselves -- it's not as though we climbed over your backs to make it to the top. Hell, you kids weren't even born then.
Has any firm canceled its partner retreat this year? I remember reading a list of Bay Area firms in October that were all heading to Scottsdale. Is there any firm that has canceled?
Partner retreats DO serve purpose. As owners of the firm the Partners are entitled to "state of the firm" address and discussion. Also to consider strategic issues and challenges, while also breaking into practice specific meetings. Firms might pare down the opulence and expense of retreats, but they won't eliminate them. Nor should they.
Partner retreats DO serve purpose. As owners of the firm the Partners are entitled to "state of the firm" address and discussion. Also to consider strategic issues and challenges, while also breaking into practice specific meetings. Firms might pare down the opulence and expense of retreats, but they won't eliminate them. Nor should they.
I'm an associate and the rest of you associates and law students whining about every big firm cutting associates need to get a clue. Are you so blinded by yesteryear's big firm associate salaries and assumed entitlement of a job because of your good grades that you haven't looked around you? Every business in the country is cutting jobs to try to stay afloat. Its not a charity - its a business - and if you are sitting around collecting a salary whether partner, associate or staff and not contributing because there is no work to do then why would you think you won't be cut at somepoint? And if you think that the heads of any business don't get together at somepoint to discuss their business, you are delusional.
41 -- I suppose you're flame, but associates do a heck of a lot more than legal research and I'd hope that you realize they need you AND you need them.
I don't care if partners blow their coin on a retreat. But after mass layoffs, you might want to be a little less conspicuous in the choice of location. A destination like Vegas just screams excess at a time when a little more moderation is probably appropriate. It's called having a little bit of tact. Partners might want to look into that.
Its your firm. Run it how you see fit. But when the economy picks back up, don't whine about associate retention in the legal publications.
18--"Yup. This seems OK. This isn't like Wells Fargo rewarding their "top performing" mortgage brokers."
So a business shouldn't reward their best employees? What if these top performers became top performers specifically because they knew they'd win a trip?
This is a Partner retreat. As in owner's of the firm getting together to conduct firm business, listen to a "state of the firm" address by Eliot Portnoy, make strategic business decisions, engage in practice group meetings, interact with others from different offices, etc. Firms will continue to have Partner retreats, though they may try to cap the opulence and expense a little harder. Get over it.
50--Associate retention has sucked at 99.9% of firms for more than a decade, because you self-proclaimed "greedy" employees jumped from firm to firm and job to job in your never-ending, pampered quest to self actualize, while (of course) making exorbitant salaries and feeling entitled to the $$$. Your idle (pun intended) threats now--"watch out when things pick up"--are pathetic...and laughable. None of us in law partnerships are concerned about associate retention; we're focused on associate attrition not living up to past experience, hence the need for layoffs. So your disloyalty to your firms over the past ten years is a major contributor to your current predicament, as we all over hired in recent years, in part in anticipation of the historic attrition rates which haven't materialized due to the economic slowdown.
53- Maybe you don't care about associate retention rates. But some of your brethren clearly do as some MPs, at least publicly, expressed concern over associate retention rates when the market was going gangbusters. You see, some firms actually care about that kind of stuff. And not because they want help associates "self-actualize" but because keeping good performers around actually makes business sense.
Are you saying that you don't think the economy is eventually going to "pick up"? If that's true, you're probably more screwed than I am. And "disloyalty to my firm"? What year are you living in? 1963? People are going to change jobs. Even your partners. And for any number of different reasons. Don't try to shoehorn all of these people into one generalization about lateral movement.
I'm not saying law firms shouldn't lay people off. Times are very difficult, and there's just not enough work in some areas. It sucks, but there are valid business reasons for it. But you're sending very mixed messages to staff when the partners go to a retreat in one of the most expensive vacation destinations in the country.
-50
Am I the only one to think that many of these partners are secretly thrilled over the no acompanying spouse policy?
@4: At least you get it. Imagine how difficult it would be to go to a strip club if you had to ditch your wife? It would get very expensive; all those shops. My wallet hurts just thinking about it.
51--to follow up on your argument, if Wells Fargo shouldn't reward top employees with a trip to Vegas, maybe law firms shouldn't reward associates with bonuses?
vale and cazumel sound fun
Clearly, Vegas is the best place for a partner meeting with no planned recreational activities, especially when Sonnenschein has no office in Vegas...
If there's one place to go to take your mind off of hundreds of attorney and staff layoffs in the past 6 months, no longer paying to maintain employee retirement accounts, and rumors of the elimination of paid vacation days..... it's Vegas.
Wow. Attorneys are the most self-centered creatures on the planets. FYI-SNR ASSociates got their full bonuses (granted they met their hours, which is true every year, so what's the big deal). Their support staff, however, was not so lucky. Staff moral at SNR is at an all-time low. The good ones that made it through the first round of cuts are actively looking for firms who appreciate staff or are already gone. In the next couple of years, SNR is going to be recruiting from the drive-thrus.