DAVIS!

Now we await Cravath.....

Second to say Davis!

Oceans rise.
Cities fall.
The "Conjoined Twins" poster on ATL remains.

Amazing how Quinn seems to be immune.

Is it possible that the mighty Wachtell will soon fall prey to the demise of its peers?!

Even the bisque was "severed"

The ship be sinking...

pwn pwn pwn

People take cover. The DPW defending trolls will be out in full force shortly.

Did the bisque get severance after being "severed"?

People take cover. The DPW defending trolls will be out in full force shortly.

Quinn is drowing in work--- I know of very few people who are billing under 200/mth . No firings (yet), but a dramatically smaller incoming first year class....I guess it's better to spend every waking moment of my life at my desk making $250 than hitting the bread line...

This isn't really surprising. I assume this is happening at pretty much all of the V10, minus Wachtell.

come on elie, mistakes in the body of the post are one thing, but misspelling the name of the firm in the title of the post is ridiculous. it's daviS polk

mysTTTal

You know, I've never been one to scream about nit-picky typos and grammatical errors, but DAVID Polk??? In the headline???

ATL's editorial process be sinking. When will it bottom out?

What 16 said. Do you put these posts up in between bong hits?

Thank God its only happening at David Polk and not Davis Polk. Scared me for a second.

Law Offices of David Polk, Esq., P.C. have announced layoffs!1!

Elie: For your second round of edits to the title/firm name, please note that DPW doesn't appear to use commas in its firm name.

Davis Polk 2009=Shearman & Sterling 2001

Pretty douchbag-like for a firm that purports to be oh so gentlemanly

Did Quinn lay off their entire Tokyo office?

I have to agree with 16-21. Good lord MysTTTal. No proofreading whatsoever!! Lat would never have had such poor quality control. And I'd like some of that bisque they are severing.

Boob.

No commas either in the name.

Nice one MysTTTal

"For obvious reasons...we simply do not comment on the details of any departures."

The obvious reason being they were hoping no one found out. Assholes.

David Polk is really hurting these days.

Come on, guys. Is it not clear at least from this that Elie is just trying to tickle the typo monsters? Relax!

Sidley chicago layoffs today. Get on it

Wow no severance? If this is true, this is worse than the firms who announced huge layoffs but gave generous severance packages

Congrats on fixing David/Davis. Now peer at the at the graphic you posted - see anything different between that and the firm name?

LOL at DPW thinking they could sneak 40+ layoffs under the radar

Um, the firm logo is on the right -- Maybe the law firm website has been spelling it incorrectly all these years.

33, there was severance today -- clearly, the tasty ginger carrot bisque was severed.

DPW FALLS

QUINN MOURNS

Also, Quinn Tokyo isn't a billing office so much as a place to meet with Pacific Rim clients.

Really sucky news today, I'll be giving hugs to all this week, pro bono.

Please point out grammatical errors. It results in more hits and more hits result in more revenue.

David Polk has added you as a friend on Facebook.

32: where do you get your info

7-

Quinn is in trouble as well. If you look in the amlaw issue, Quinn comments that they took the Parmalat matter on contingency and spent a significannt amount of resources preparing the case. They invested a lot and ended up losing the case against Citigroup and losing a 400 mm counterclaim for their client. They too will falter.

15--It's going to happen at Wachtell if it hasn't yet. It's going to happen everywhere.

So why would one keep working if marked for a stealth layoff? It seems you should only be billing to client #0001.

no commas in between Davis & Polk either. Why do we even check this site anymore?

What's the word from inside Weil?

All the morons who said that DPW would never have layoffs just demonstrates how little business sense lawyers and law students have. As if a firm like DPW could be staffed for several huge IPOs per month and then not lay anybody off when IPOs suddenly go to zero for almost a year!!!!! This should not even be a headline -- it was obvious it was gonna happen, just like it's obvious that Citibank is gonna lay people off.

Here's another one that might surprise lawyers: Tiffany's sales will drop this year!!!! Oh my god!!! No way!!!! Tiffany is too prestigious to have sales declines!!

47 - word is "layoffs"

Why would anyone "work their ass off" when they've been giving notice and there is no severance? Not sure I'd even show up.

43 - I think Quinn can survive based on their winnings from other contingency cases. That's normally how contingency works.

Are people always going to comment on the form rather than substance of these posts. Seriously, makes me sad to be a lawyer when every nit is picked up by people who should be billing hours. What a sad lot.

Gosh, all these layoffs are awful! Let's all stay strong and remember we existed before law firm life and will be ok. We're nothing if not strong people.

But I can't resist adding that I hope any of those at DPW who looked down on other V10s because DPW was so "lifestyle-friendly" enjoy their new lifestyles on the unemployment line. DPW: So lifestyle-friendly you don't even have to work.

Gosh, all these layoffs are awful! Let's all stay strong and remember we existed before law firm life and will be ok. We're nothing if not strong people.

But I can't resist adding that I hope any of those at DPW who looked down on other V10s because DPW was so "lifestyle-friendly" enjoy their new lifestyles on the unemployment line. DPW: So lifestyle-friendly, you don't even have to work.

No business sense, you say?

I would like to remind you, good sir, that indeed many of us have MBAs from the most presTTTigious of educational institutions.

50 - Because if you don't, it goes from being discreet to being "for cause - loafing" and then you get to explain that one.

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE REMOVE THAT STUPID DEALBREAKER VIDEO BANNER? IT IS THE MOST RETARDED THING ON EARTH. WHO WAS THE IDIOT WHO GOT THAT PAST THE MARKETING GUYS?

46 - What a moron? You check the site for news. CNN.com always has typos, but that doesn't change the substance of what is said. Typos are not an indication that we should be skeptical about the veracity of what is posted. There are much better indicators of that. You're an idiot. The Davis bit is a logo pulled from the firm's website. The firm chose not to have commas (as many others do) in the logo. Stop with the typo bs and just focus on what's said.

Elie: the layoffs at DPW were not limited to the corporate department, the firm also laid off senior litigation associates this past December.

Likewise, QUINN REMAINS free of the dependency other firms placed on their transactional practices, an albatross that has caused these firms (and as a result, their associates) to FALL

Simple not true that "nobody leaves voluntarily." Maybe fewer do, but the number isn't zero.

So 15-20 suspect "perfomance departures" with a 250+ corporate practice and 800+ total headcount is not a bombshell or anything near it.

Why can't all the "sleath layoff" posts wait a month? Look at old NALP forms and check websites for lawyer headcounts. Once that mysterious "3 month notice" period lapses, check the headcounts again. Then, report. Otherwise, there's no reason to pour gas on this fire today.

Best of luck to those who find themselves looking for work.

51 (re Quinn)

http://www.quinnemanuel.com/media/35863/amlaw_mighty_quinn_2006.pdf

Search Parmalat - and you'll see that they "hired a small army of contract lawyers [those fluent in Italian!].

The article states that Parmalat has been a "huge investment" for Quinn.

Maybe they have already taken the hit to earnings, which would be might impressive, but I'd bet that Quinnn takes their writedown on the balance sheet as a result of the failed litigation efforts this year.

Oh how the mighty have fallen!

First Kirkland & Ellis, now Davis Polk!

I am starting to hate the use of the term "stealth layoff" because it implies that a firm is trying to hide something. Hasn't DPW told under-performing associates to go to another firm in the years past? So, why is it considered "stealth layoff" just because it happened at the end of 2008? Is there good reason to believe that different standards were applied in 2008 as opposed to any other years?

Gosh, posting comments more than once is awful! Let's all stay strong and remember we only have to hit the post button once and our posting will be o.k. We're nothing if not strong people.

But I can't resist adding that I hope any of those who have posted their comments more than once, will now start posting them just once. Posting once: so easy and friendly, you only have to hit the button once.

Now for others posting this more than once :)

56- there are many ways to avoid doing work / not taking initative. I really doubt they'd fire you for cause. No reason to be working weekends or nights if you know you are out the door at the end of the month.

57- totally agree.

Yes; 64 there is very good reason to believe that different standards were applied in 2008: The Davis Polk partners are making a lot less money now, and so need to fire associates.

BUT I THOUGHT DAVIS POLK WAS SUPPOSED TO BE NICE!!!!?!?!????

The next few posts are for you, 65. Hate on:

Gosh, all these layoffs are awful! Let's all stay strong and remember we existed before law firm life and will be ok. We're nothing if not strong people.

But I can't resist adding that I hope any of those at DPW who looked down on other V10s because DPW was so "lifestyle-friendly" enjoy their new lifestyles on the unemployment line. DPW: So lifestyle-friendly you don't even have to work.

The next few posts are for you, 65. Hate on:

Gosh, all these layoffs are awful! Let's all stay strong and remember we existed before law firm life and will be ok. We're nothing if not strong people.

But I can't resist adding that I hope any of those at DPW who looked down on other V10s because DPW was so "lifestyle-friendly" enjoy their new lifestyles on the unemployment line. DPW: So lifestyle-friendly you don't even have to work.

The next few posts are for you, 65. Hate on:

Gosh, all these layoffs are awful! Let's all stay strong and remember we existed before law firm life and will be ok. We're nothing if not strong people.

But I can't resist adding that I hope any of those at DPW who looked down on other V10s because DPW was so "lifestyle-friendly" enjoy their new lifestyles on the unemployment line. DPW: So lifestyle-friendly you don't even have to work.

The next few posts are for you, 65. Hate on:

Gosh, all these layoffs are awful! Let's all stay strong and remember we existed before law firm life and will be ok. We're nothing if not strong people.

But I can't resist adding that I hope any of those at DPW who looked down on other V10s because DPW was so "lifestyle-friendly" enjoy their new lifestyles on the unemployment line. DPW: So lifestyle-friendly you don't even have to work.

When I interviewed at DPW, they said that the big difference between DPW and the other firms is that it is "people-friendly." Latham and Orrick said the same thing.

73 - They *are* people-friendly, hence why they're relieving people of the unfriendly experience of work. :)

49 - I call BS

62 - True, but you discount the successful outcomes they received for Parmalat in previous years, producing a whole bunch of seven figure settlements. They may have had to bite the bullet re: Citi, but overall they've made good money from the Parmalat litigation

32 -- Is your Sidley source as reliable as ATL's Kirkland source?

Finally! Layoffs at a firm that never would have given me a callback in the first place.

Godspeed, GULC. Godspeed.

THIS WOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED UNDER PRESIDENT MCCAIN!

What about Fried Frank?

DPW's lawyers have wide-ranging interests and exceptional talents. Davis Polk allows these interests to be explored and these talents to blossom. Their lawyers, who are among the most diverse of any firm, excel in the practice of law. They also participate in large numbers in pro bono and community service. DPW is committed to providing meaningful opportunities for advancement within the firm. They also maintain close links to their alumni, many of whom go on to become leaders in business, government and public service.

From the DPW website

So, stop the hate...

Fried Frank. Now that's my kinda firm

Not this time. I'll bet I'm the first one laid off! Just the thought of having to go to the state unemployment office and stand in line with those SCUMBAGS...

"Hasn't DPW told under-performing associates to go to another firm in the years past?"

Yes, but in the past there were actually other firms for them to go to. Now there are none.

"So, why is it considered "stealth layoff" just because it happened at the end of 2008?"

Because many other firms are openly laying people off and admitting that it is at least partially due to the economy. The "stealth" part comes when a firm doesn't admit this.

In the past, stealth layoffs was actually better for the lawyer because they could transition to another firm without the stigma of being let go. Now that there are no firms to go to, the opposite is true. At least with firms like Latham, it is public knowledge that the attorneys were let go in a large group and at least partially for economic reasons.

The problem with stealth layoffs now is that since almost no one would leave any law firm in this economy, the whole idea of trying to leave the reasons for departure ambiguous is ridiculous. The appearance, then, since the firm hasn't admitted the reasons for increased layoffs, or how many there have been, is that these are isolated layoffs for egregious underperformance (which may have been true up until the second half of 2008, but now that the partners are scrambling to preserve their PPP, it could just be that the associate was in the wrong practice group or didn't have a mentor to protect them).

"Is there good reason to believe that different standards were applied in 2008 as opposed to any other years?"

Does the worst economy in 50 years and a drop in PPP of 17% count as a good reason for you? How about the idiotic over-hiring of laterals and summer associates for the last three years?

Get back to work on your pro bono matters, all of you!

60,

The only explanation for leaving a firm "voluntarily" would be for a job at a different, and presumably less prestigious, firm.

Believe it or not, there are firms that have conducted layoffs but are willng to hire somone who has stellar credentials. Ask me how I know. DPW is just coverning for those people so they don't look like liars to the firms they have moved to (they would have told their new firms that they are in good standing etc.) and for any associates that may be interviewing etc.

The recent news coming from "people first" firms like Latham, DPW, and Orrick vindicate firms like CWT that are honest about their priorities yet receive criticism for not caring about their associates

Is Skadden V1? Discuss.

88 - no

DAAAAVE GORDOOOON!!!!

DAAAAVE GORDOOOON!!!!

89 - wrong

Firms need to wake up and realize that with thousands of associates floating around the job market and almost no jobs available, particularly for junior associates, there is little, if any, benefit to a stealth layoff. These associates, after their end dates have passed, are put in the awkward position of characterizing their job losses as layoffs while their employers have not acknowledged it. While, undoubtedly, these are layoffs (since they are not being replaced - i.e., a downsizing), their firms actions creates the perception of performance-based layoffs and taints everyone.

how do i date that asian chick in the greed commercial on the front page. btw i've never had a gf

98 said "taint"

47 & 49: Weil is doing the same thing as DPW.

Due to Kash-type reporting on this blog, there was a more than fair chance that this DPW report was bogus. But the fact that there have been almost 100 posts and NO ONE from DPW refuting the report is very telling as to what is going on at DPW and the accuracy of this report.

*contemplates trying to pay off 150k debt on a 35k toilet law salary, offs self*

-suicidal laid off 1st year (not from DPW)

Due to Kash-type reporting on this blog, there was a more than fair chance that this DPW report was bogus. But the fact that there have been almost 100 posts and NO ONE from DPW refuting the report is very telling as to what is going on at DPW and the accuracy of this report.

89 - dreaming

This is hardly a surprise. Their Capital Markets practice has been quiet for 5-6 months now. The New York firms are hardly immune to the same struggles as White & Case, Jones Day, Latham, Orrick, etc. I would expect to see some quiet layoffs from S&C and Simpson and a serious reduction in staff at Cravath.

xoxo once again beats ATL to the story.

http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=946450&mc=315&forum_id=2

I think the term we should use is "forced attrition" rather than "stealth layoffs". Presumably, in years past, DPW would have 30 or 40 associates quit over a six month period. Now, they are just assisting those who won't go on their own.

Law firm's need attrition to survive. There's no lifetime guarantee of a job. Up or out.

Didn't Skadden have a summer class of like 160 people in 2007? Those first year associates have to be shaking in their boots right now.

Now we're walking Spanish!

What's going on with the incoming 3Ls? Have they been given a deferred start date?

APOCOLYPSE NOW.

Sell the scraps, the ship be sunk

-Marbury

DAAAAAAVE GORDOOOON!!!!!!!

ANY WORD ON START DATES FOR INCOMING DPW 3Ls?

my friends at csm and stb have reported the same - not enough people leaving by their own accord, so to maintain what would otherwise be a normal attrition rate, the firms are implementing stricter performance reviews.

Stealth layoffs? I thought this was a classy firm. Where's the outrage about stealth layoffs now?

It's obviously the economy. There's no need to lie to these people and further hurt their already non-existent chance of getting a new job in this market.

106/109 - yes, we are starting in December. I guess it beats Latham, Orrick, etc.

Does any one know when Simpson Thacher gives performance reviews and when they pay bonuses? Trying to put two and two together.....

Quinn laid off attorneys at the end of the year. Didn't try to claim they were performance based, just said that they did not anticipate having enough work to keep the affected associates busy into 2009. Seemed to be focused on attorneys without patent backgrounds. They were very "stealth" about it, forbade the affected associates to discuss the employment decisions.

No word on deferring start dates for incoming first years. They will start in Sept/Oct/Nov 2009 (their choice), as usual.

anyone here about dwindling summer program? i h eard cravath lowered theres to 10 after promisng much more in writing, now eveyrone will do this

So who's right - 112 or 115?

I know opinions may differ on this, but can someone give me a rundown of what the perceived top 5 blue chip law firms are?

can anyone confirm 116?

112 is correct. My understanding is that we can NOT start before December 1st. Are certain incoming 3Ls able to start earlier???

What rank out of Chi for Davis Polk at fall OCI? Top quarter?

What is a "V5?"

Real adults use the AmLaw 100.

115 is right. Incoming 3L could choose Sept/Oct/Nov as their starting date.

STB pays year end bonus last paycycle of the year and typically has reviews in the spring. Bad reviews happen earlier in the spring and apparently also before bonus time which I assume means you wouldn't be getting a bonus and it's time to leave.

CravaTTTh

118- I am only answering you because I know it will cause a shitstorm of comments telling me how wrong I am.

Wachtell, Cravath, S&C, Skadden, and yes, Davis Polk.

There is no arguing with this. Say what you want. But our economy is going through unprecedented times right now, and to judge any firm based on this 2-3 year (5 year MAX) cycle is pointless. No firm without corporate can even pretend to be a "blue chip" firm. No firm whose bread and butter is bankruptcy can either. Sure, they are doing better now, but recessions are not the status quo. The V5 will do what they have to do to survive this drought, and they will emerge the same as before- the top 5 most respected firms in the country. That's it. Lawyers at other firms, and the law students headed there, love to knock the firms that are perceived better than theirs, so let them do it. Who cares.

OCEANS RISE

CITIES FALL

CLEARY GOTTLIEB REMAINS

Seriously though, anyone have any word (rumor or otherwise) on Cleary?

you can choose sep/oct/nov and if you want it, dec. same as year's past and all the same perks as usual (mover's fee, broker's fee, bar expenses, etc).

125- sorry they dinged you.

116: Did Cravath really lower to 10 week summers after saying you'd have longer? What does that mean for everyone else?

Well. I think this is just normal forced attrition. They have to make room for the incoming 3Ls and junior associates ready to join one of their practice groups.

CravaTTTh layoffs = all of the sudden, foreign associates required to sit for bar

Thanks 126, but I thought Cleary would be in the mix and Skadden would not be.

And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Vault 5 firm, lawyers of kings:
Look on my billed hours, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
-- Shelley

126 - Don't be an idiot. Skadden is the only firm other than Wachtell paying the same bonus as it is last year, the only other V5 other than Wachtell to not have rumors of layoffs swirling about it, and it should fall out of V5? Cleary trolling at its finest. Your "lifestyle" firm will soon lay your foolish behind off too. Say hello for me to the DPW and Latttham rejects when you get on the bread line.

Thanks 124. Does that mean an STB associate would find out if he/she received a bonus around Dec. 31?

Were they any stealth lay-offs at Stroock? ATL, please confirm.

126/133--

How is this notion of Blue Chip firms any different than the Vault prestige rankings? Blue Chip does not mean most prestigious it means well established with stable earnings and no extensive liabilities. Based on that, is Clearly more established than Skadden; does S&C have more stable earnings than Debevoise; isn't Wachtell more a boutique firm than a Blue Chip firm?

Reed Smith wrote the book on the 6 months ago. They've managed to let one or two associates go per month from each office without raising suspicions. It helped that they brought in Thelen people etc, but they started stealth layoffs before they were cool.

135 Here:

I should add that Wachtell is still #1. EVERYFIRMWACHTELLPWNED.

135---- I put Skadden in my top 5, so I don't know why you are saying I am an idiot.

but p.s.- Wachtell did NOT pay the same bonus as last year, they paid around 70% bonus... and they also haven't released their PPP figures--- which is odd, and ominous.

Skadden technically did not either, as they didnt pay special bonus. Also, there are ZERO rumors about layoffs at Cravath or S&C, and both firms have stated explicitly that there have been none, and there plan to be none. Skadden wiped out half of its staff attorneys, so while that may not be such a big deal, don't make accusations you cannot back up.

And either way, 133 said Cleary should be there, NOT me. Get it straight

Hey, I used to know a lawyer named David Polk! Too bad he fell on hard times.

135 Here:

126 - Chill out. Anyone with a 6th grade education could tell I meant my post for that floozy posting at 133. A simple typo. I forgive your misdirected aggression though - must be hard being laid off from DPW, the newest TTT.

Why would Blue Chip be considered much different than the V5? The V5 have been that for YEARS, and have had great profit and success, and are also the most profitable firms generally. Again, a few years of economic havoc should not change the fundamental picture of the legal word, and it wont.

you're the idiot, 135...wachtell is paying only ~70% of last year's bonus. and i don't hear any layoff rumors about s&c or csm, except for the occasional trolling going on. sorry you went to a t14 and couldn't get a better job than skadden...or sorry you went to a TTT, were in the top of your class, but a real law firm still wouldn't hire you because you're precisely the kind of bitter chip-on-their-shoulder cog skadden likes.

141---
I've heard from a handful of people at Cravath that small numbers of people have been let go over the past few months. You're right about S&C, though, not a peep.

126 is clueless. If these (minus wachtell) were the "blue chip" firms, why are they significantly less competitive to get compared to williams & connolly, munger, and several other boutiques? s&c takes you if you have a pulse from hls or even columbia.

the firms 126 lists (other than wachtell) have blue chip partners, but that doesn't NOT make them the best firms for a new associate. for example, s&c or dpw (or almost any other firm, save cravath b/c of their outdated no lateral policy) would grab an associate from williamsconnolly or munger in an instant to lateral; the reverse will never be true.

135 Here:

145 - Go suck your tranny mother's cock or better yet, go back to Devry, from which you most likely graduated judging from your inability to realize how foolish you seem calling me bitter while authoring a truly bitter, angry post. Must be hard over there on the unemployment line. I'm not at Skadden, but I'd take it over whatever lowlife's paradise pink-slipped you.

Your moment of Zen:

A poor farmer's horse ran off into the country of the barbarians. All his neighbors offered their condolences, but his father said, "How do you know that this isn't good fortune?" After a few months the horse returned home wit ha barbarian horse of excellent stock. All his neighbors offered their congratulations, but his father said, "How do you know that this isn't a disaster?" The farmer used the two horses for breeding and the family became rich in fine horses. The farmer's son spent much of his time riding the horses until one day when he fell off and broke his leg. All his neighbors offered the farmer his condolences, but his father said, "How do you know that this isn't good fortune?" Another year passed, and the neighboring barbarians invaded the country. All the able bodied young men were conscripted and nine-tenths of them died in the war.

Good fortune can be disaster and vice versa. Who can tell how events will be transformed.

These discussions are retarded: the V5 crowd says they are the best then the boutiques and DC outfits say they are even better. It all begs the question of what determines a "top" firm? Is it clients, reputation, school's recruited from, partner profiles, profits, ppp, salary, etc.? No one really knows and all the talk merely perpetuates the echo effect.

135 Here:

147 is right. And I'll add that at this point, anyone whether at Skadden or Cleary or whever, not at Wachtell better start working out because manual labor might be in your future after your firm lays you off. 70% bonuses or not, the true king of Big Law still stands all.

135 Here:

147 is right. And I'll add that at this point, anyone whether at Skadden or Cleary or wherever, not at Wachtell better start working out because manual labor might be in your future after your firm lays you off. 70% bonuses or not, the true king of Big Law still stands tall.

95 - Are you at Weil? How many have been let go that you know of?

150 -- it depends if we're talking about best firm to be an associate or be a partner. and given that like 1 in 25 associates become partners, the two are totally unrelated.

best firms to be an associate: low leverage, important cutting edge work, competitive to get hired, strong prestige to people that matter (ie, vault doesn't count).

PPP is almost irrelevant. skadden/cleary/s&c are the walmarts of law firms -- very high profitability and "prestige" in Fortune magazine, but who cares if you're the door greeter (a new associate) and not an executive. i'd rather work at a small boutique store -- a bit less profitable and not as known to the masses who read Fortune and the wsjj, but who cares?? walmart will hiire me as an executive after a few years at the small boutique store where i actually learn how to run the business and interact w/ mgmt, as opposed to being a door greeter.

154 - trenchant analysis my friend

Remember everyone, the average layman does not know the name of a single biglaw firm. It's just like how most lawyers would be hard-pressed to name a single architecture firm. If the layman has heard of a biglaw firm, it would be Skadden, which he would somehow think is a prestigious firm.
That is all you need to know about how much "prestige" matters.

I find it hard to believe that the legal lobby isn't powerful enough to at least seriously promote legislative action w/r/t forgiving student debt - especially since the public would probably be more amenable to direct economic relief for individuals who weren't being financially irrational than to bailing out corporations and people who were unquestionably irresponsible in their decisions to spend beyond their means.

SKADDEN. SKADDEN.

154

Your analogy is not convincing. Exchange walmart with Google and suddenly it sounds significantly more preferable to work at the behemoth rather than the boutique store where you might be "in charge" but only of selling an antique candlestick to an old lady.

does everyone agree 135 sounds rather TTT?

he couldn't even get skadden, lolz...but what's most pathetic is how he's vainly trying to associate himself with wachtell. probably white trash too.

159, no, the behemoth analogy in the tech world would be Microsoft. Big, prestigious, and the destination of the risk-averse.

161,

I was merely pointing out that walmart has a specifically bad reputation. By using walmart instead of google, microsoft (or many other companies), the poster creates a straw man that makes working at some small store (boutique law firm) appear somehow better. I reiterate that the analogy fails.

Just curious as to why everything has to be layoff these days? Firms got rid of under performing associates before the economic collapse and I assume they still do so afterwards. Why is it so hard to fathom that might be a reason for these departures?

Good catch, 162. Glad to see silly tricks don't work on everyone.

S&C is laying off. It's no secret around the firm anymore.

word is milbank will finally announce layoffs this week. deferred start dates for all!

157, I am all for debt forgiveness but the student/grad will have to serve one year in military for each $50K that is forgiven. Good luck in Iran.

Prestige follows PPP. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

I wonder why anyone cares about the Vault Associate Rankings... who cares what associates think about firms? If anything, the Partner Survey Rankings are what mean something. You want blue chip. Say whatever you want about Cravath, but they have been rated #1 by Partners since the Vault started surveying... not Wachtell or any other firm. What does that mean you ask? That is a stupid question, because then what does anything mean?
Cravath is the most respected firm by partners. That's what it means. And that means a lot. When you ask Corporation GC's, it's Skadden that is number 1, and Cravath number 2. What other measure or statistic is meaningful?

You want "blue chip"? That is Skadden and Cravath. They are the ONLY two firms who have almost equally respected Corporate AND Litigation practices.

Now all the commenters will start to troll on and on about Cravath lowering bonuses, and the big drop in PPP last year... or about Skadden not being selective, blah blah blah blah blah. That is just dumb, Just wait until 2 years from now. You'll see that these two firms will still be on top of the game.

159/162 -- so you're saying that working at williams&connolly or munger or susman is equivalent to selling a candlestick to an old lady? that's silly. williams&connolly currently pays more (in DC!!!!) than your precious cravath or s&c in NYC. how can they afford to do that by selling candlesticks to old ladies?

fine, i'll use your google analogy. i'd rather work at a cool startup where i'm not only doing tech stuff but also actually work w/ the founders and the venture capitalists and learn the intricacies of the business, rather than work at google where i sit in a cubicle and program all day. and after a few years at this start-up, google will hire me in an instant as a senior exec and i'll leapfrog all the risk-averse mediocre punks who were hired as mere programmers b/c google needed warm bodies.

whatever -- go to skadden/cravath where you'll be lucky to be put on doc review or master th ctrl-F function. the real cream of the law school crop will go to places like i mentioned, where we'll actually learn how to be lawyers. but at least you can tell grandma that you work at "the firm that represented IBM in the 70s"

any place that hires 160 summers -- like 35% of it's total lawyers is -- BY DEFINITION -- not very prestigious. blue chip, maybe (so is walmart). prestigious or very hard to get a job at? obviously not.

156-

1)Skidmore Owings & Merrill, Pei Cobb

2) Lay people are likely to be much more familiar with public interest/criminal/plaintiffs attorneys. The most famous lawyers of the 90s? OJ Simpsons dream team.

"I'm more prestigious than you"

"No you're not"

"Yes I am" WHO CARES!?!? http://blackbooklegal.blogspot.com/2009/03/are-you-not-ashamed-of-caring-so-much.html

"Why do you want to be a lawyer? This was the (predictably obvious) question posed to me at a pre-law seminar as a freshman in college. One student raised her hand and proclaimed that she wished to enter the legal profession because she wanted to change the world. How idealistic! I raised my hand and stood to attention. Confidently, and without thinking twice, I stated that I planned on becoming an attorney because I desired the prestige and the money. From the looks of others in the audience, it was the answer they had in mind too, but were ashamed to admit.

I’d like to think my answer was that of an immature eighteen year old, and, to an extent, it was. I ultimately chose to attend law school because I believed I’d be challenged intellectually and have the opportunity to study interesting issues and concepts. I am no longer eighteen and clearly there’s more to life than prestige.

If I keep telling myself that, maybe I can will myself into believing it?

But while I wish the prestige fixation was a lost vestige of the past, I've come to learn that law student’s prestige-focus is second-to-none (ok, maybe Anne Coulter gives us competition, but still…). As I have addressed earlier, (most) prospective law students desire to attend the most prestigious institution possible. For many, acceptance to the illusive “T14” consumes their existence. Undoubtedly, these students are eagerly anticipating the newest edition of U.S. News and World Report’s graduate school rankings. I can picture it now: incoming first years having panic attacks because the law school at which they deposited drops in the rankings.

It doesn’t end there. The next goal for law students is to place on the most prestigious law journal possible. Following that, of course, is fall recruitment. Law students nationwide compare their offers. For all too many, the most important indicator of a prospective employer’s worthiness is their vault ranking or “selectivity.”

Surely, a law student can relax after he or she has locked up a position at a prominent high-paying law firm. Right? You’ve done it! You’re (finally) a success! Think again. The question turns to what position you have on your respective journal’s editorial staff, and, then, (perhaps) to whether you have a prestigious clerkship lined up for post-graduation. Even those who don’t really want to clerk—who aren’t even interested in clerking at all—may choose to clerk. I guess I can’t blame them: it’s “prestigious” (although, in today's economy, risky). But when does this obsession with prestige end? And what’s the source of the law student’s infatuation with prestige?

I don’t have the answers to these central questions, but I do think that I have finally overcome my own prestige-obsession. This isn’t to say that I won’t continue to slosh through the morass of prestige with my peers. I almost certainly will—but, hopefully, for the right reasons: I’ll do what I do because I believe it will make me the best attorney rather than for its own, intrinsically “prestigious” sake. "

DPW always struck me as the odd man out among CSM and S&C. Great reputation but not nearly as geographically diverse as S&C. For example, S&C's London office is phenomenally successful--in terms of RPL, it's the best of any U.S. firm in London and beats the Magic Circle on their home turf. Also, DPW tends to hire based on looks and connections as compared to GPA, doesn't it? That has been the long-term reputation of that firm. Also, kind of cheap, a laggard to S&C's leader in compensation.

154: Walmart won't hire you as an executive based on your experience running your own boutique. You're better off starting as a door greeter then working your butt off and working up the management pyramid. I'm curious about whether it's the same withlaw firms. If you end up working at EveryMan LLP for a few years then applying at S&C let me know how it goes

173--Very impressive post, but you blew it all with "illusive."

And a small, regional firm BY DEFINITION can only take a few people...so you are just an idiot. Of course a smaller firm is going to NEED to be more selective-- that doesnt mean the people are better that they select. There are well over 160 people who are intelligent looking for law jobs... And who do you think goes on to become the most respected partners around (Cravath)... the associates who work there. Not all of them yes, but at least they are in the running in the first place.

I am a retired partner who still gets a dividend check from the Firm. To all these sniveling and undeserving brats that had the privilege of working at my Firm during your limited tenure, be very grateful for the experience and opportunity to work at a fine environment. We trained you at our expense to become fine lawyers. We groomed you during the early years when you were considered a liability. The economy has hit the skids. It is either the partner or you. Who do you think is going to come out on top? It's a dog eat dog world. Take your severance and walk away quietly before we bill you for the coffee, personal calls and personal car rides. I am disgusted at these posts from undeserving third year law students who think they are entitled to draw a salary at my Firm. You have a degree, if you are so smart, hang a shingle or make money on your own steam. I have to go to bed now as tee off time is at 7AM tomorrow.

32 -- Anything's possible, and I would be surprised if any firm WASN'T raising the bar on performance reviews this year. But Sidley just offered early Sept. start dates to their incoming federal clerks while promising full bonuses paid in full immediately. Seems unnecessarily brash if they're facing the same magnitude of distress as Latham, et al.

If you fools are going to start talking about marketability and exit opportunities, then you are silly if you think any firm matches Cravath or Wachtell (and SLIGHTLY less so, S&C). What is a Munger? WHo are Williams and Connelly and who cares about them? No one.

176: didn't blow it because it's not my words...i ripped it off from the link I posted.

I think the post is wrong with the T14 thing, but spot on everywhere else. This thread proves it. I really can't believe people are arguing over what makes a firm prestigious. So sad.

For those of you claiming Milbank layoffs,

have you forgotten the Milbank Promise?

what's with the "Daaave Gordon" thing?

136: yes, to receive a bonus at STB, you need to be "in good standing" at the firm as of December 31, the date of the payment of the bonus, The fact that there were about a dozen departures in mid-November and mid-December is highly suspicious, as I can't imagine why anyone would forfeit their bonus that they would otherwise have been entitled to, had they stayed on for just a couple extra weeks. And many of those who left were not leaving for some exciting job opportunity elsewhere but simply to take some rest and go on holidays. I think it is obvious that those were layoffs.

It's no surprise that STB did (and is still) doing layoffs, their PPP (profits per partner) dropped 13.7 per cent and teh partners are not happy about this. After all, private equity is dead, and STB is doing work on teh cheap ($300k for the Treasury, anyone?)

"Performance" layoffs also taking place at Weil...

178: Nice & true.

184,

STB departures so close to bonus payment are indeed suspicious (and ANY significant departures in this environment at least raise an eyebrow).

Is it also possible that January departures were involuntary? Could an attorney have waited and discovered only on December 31 that she did not receive a bonus and subsequently have left in January? Or is the better inference that any attorneys that left in January did so voluntarily after collecting their bonus?

We're in the Hudson

180 must be high. look at williams & connolly's bios -- ALL of them could have gotten one of the 160 offers cravath handed out, in a heartbeat. same w/ susman and munger and kellogg associates.

as for marketability and exit oppty's, how do you know this?? you don't. and in a few years, the only "exit oppty's" for s&c and cravath will be to the Treasury Dept, b/c it will own all the banks! most top students who aren't 100% devoted to corporate would probably choose covington over the top nyc firms nowadays (and they would DEFINITELY choose williamsconnolly).

totally disagree.... choosing between cravath and the d.c. or cali forms you named is all about where you want to live. it is simply untrue that any of those places is more respected than cravath in litigation.

I worked at Davis Polk a few year back and quit of my own accord. I'd almost say these attorneys getting laid off are better off , but as they weren't leaving this shit hole screaming years ago, they are clearly as bad as the general lot. DPW attorneys are bland, passive aggressive and high on their own fantasies of grandeur. I would break out in hives at the thought of required events where I had to mingle with these suckers.

191-- look at the vault litigation rankings. i also don't rememebr seeing cravath on amlaw's top litigation firm finalist lists.

w&c:
Vault Guide to the Top 100 Law Firms (2008-2009)

* #1 law firm in Washington, D.C.
* #1 litigation practice in the United States.
* #1 most prestigious litigation practice in the nation by partners from other top law firms.
* #1 for associate satisfaction.
* #1 for associate/partner relations.

and this from the same kind of person who says looking at vault is dumb...
look at Cravath, it is in the top 5 for litigation, retard. 4 i believe,
once you are at that level, its all about where you want to live.
cravath is the #1 most prestigious firm by partners overall, regardless of practice, so then there is that.

amlaw lists mean nothing

194 -- i never said vault was dumb.

you're the one that seems to be picking and choosing sources to fit your argument. amlaw means nothing, vault means this, my grandmother told me that, blah, blah, blah.

bottom line: i don't care if he just inherited a condo at trump plaza in nyc, dates a model in nyc, and hates dc with a passion -- no top law student seriously interested in trial lit would choose cravath over w&c. he would commute on amtrak to dc everyday before choosing cravath,

One of my relatives shares a parking lot with the W & C people. He says they always look unhappy.

oh yeah -- how's cravath's associate satisfaction ranking looking? have they made it out of the bottom 10 yet?

you can hone it into trial lit now to prove your point, but there are different kinds of litigation buddy... im not saying williams and connelly isn't an amazing firm... but it's not peerless... and cravath is one of its peers. there is no argument about that.

this thread is pointless

116 / 119 - Yes, Cravath's summer is now limited to 10 weeks. A little bummed.

For these underhanded deceptive practices dpw deserves to be knock out of v10, just as shearman was 7 years ago.

I read one of the most succinct and honest comments in an online article about law firm layoffs tonight from an unnamed partner at White & Case. He noted that the age of these global behemoth law firms is coming to an end, the economics just are not there, that no one is leaving voluntarily, and that firms of this size probably need to downsize to about 60-70 percent of their attorney levels. I have also heard from several of my former law partners who are scattered around major law firms that their January and February were extremely slow, business and receipts-wise, which is a situation which cannot continue. This means a whole lot of added "letting go" of associates, nonequity partners, and partners with relatively little business. Its gonna get much tougher.

I read one of the most succinct and honest comments in an online article about law firm layoffs tonight from an unnamed partner at White & Case. He noted that the age of these global behemoth law firms is coming to an end, the economics just are not there, that no one is leaving voluntarily, and that firms of this size probably need to downsize to about 60-70 percent of their attorney levels. I have also heard from several of my former law partners who are scattered around major law firms that their January and February were extremely slow, business and receipts-wise, which is a situation which cannot continue. This means a whole lot of added "letting go" of associates, nonequity partners, and partners with relatively little business. Its gonna get much tougher.

OH CIRCLE JERK! I LOVE CIRCLE JERKS!! YEAH! HOW YOU LIKE MY PRESTIGE DOODS?!?

Corporate law is so freakin' boring. REAL LAWYERS DO LITIGATION! Keker; Bartlit; Williams. Q.E.D.

OH CIRCLE JERK! I LOVE CIRCLE JERKS!! YEAH! HOW YOU LIKE MY PRESTIGE DOODS?!?

203-

Could you post the link to the comment?

Rumor that Fried Frank will be doing round 2 soon. Doubt it will be this week - the firm will not want to ruin the PR from Merck/Schering deal.

WHY hasn't Wachtell reported it's Revenue and PPP numbers?

THAT is perplexing.

195:
I'm a litigator and I chose Cravath over W&C. W&C is a great firm, but so is Cravath. It's kind of silly to argue which is the "best"... it just depends on what factors you are considering. W&C is better for some people, Cravath is better for others.

Dies iræ! dies illa
Solvet sæclum in favilla
Teste David cum Sibylla!

Skadden has chimp strength.

It's so funny hearing the top 1% of law students mock those students who can merely make the top 2%, or, gasp, the top 10%, 20%, etc.

Oh wow, the V5. I guess that poor sap at whatever firm is V6 should kill himself. Same with everyone at V11, V21, V101, etc.

The same goes for schools. I guess all students at UCLA (T15, methinks) should jump in front of a bus because they're outside the T14.

Try to have some perspective! Clearly the vast majority of posters on this board have never had a real job before law school.

I can't think of any other industry with such a silly, excessive prestige fetish. Get over yourselves and go to work.

Why does every thread turn into a Cravath (or name your favorite V3-V5 firm0 vs. the rest of the world?

This thread is about Davis?
Are these rumors even true??
What is the situation with DPW summer associates?
What is the situation with DPW incoming 1st years aka 3Ls?

Although I really must say I am shocked that Elie hasn't had about 17 million posts about Cravath right now given all the potential ammo. He guns for Cravath for months straight and now is all quiet when they are actually doing stuff that is newsworthy?
Let's have a post about Cravath's delayed start dates and shortened summer program.... so then we can actually comment sensibly on CSM vs. the rest of the world.

elie, if you promise to remove that stupid goddamn dealbreaker video banner, we, the commentors on ATL promise not to make fun of your spelling any longer

Cravath isn't doing layoffs, stealth or otherwise.
So, simply shortening its excessive summer program from 12 to 10 weeks or delaying its start date from September to October is hardly newsworthy when hundreds of associates are being fired every day.

nice one, 211

Is there anyone at Munger who wasn't on Harvard Law Review???

Milbank's Promise remains.

There are some firms that have made it through the Great Depression without ever having laid people off for economic reasons: Sullivan & Cromwell is one of them, Cravath is another (and perhaps Davis Polk just took themselves off this list). I think they'll get by in this economy in just the same manner. I've heard that Cravath is even loathe to have performance-related firings, which may or may not have been covers for stealth economic layoffs. Few firms can make such a claim.

Cravath's start dateS are October 24th (so, November), mid-November, AND January. And they are being assigned on a first come first serve basis. So No One knows when they are starting. It could very well be that everyone will conveniently be assigned a January start date-- which would be very newsworthy considering the amount of pull Cravath has over the rest of law firms' behavior. Just look at what happened with bonuses. Cravath lowered, and everyone followed suit.
If Cravath pushes start dates effectively to January, shortens its summer program, or (heaven forbid) lays off any considerable amount of associates, just watch the bloodbath that will ensue. It will make the situation right now look like heaven.

what is milbank's promise? am i missing something?

220 i'm not sure how in the world you know this. it's great that s&c and cravath keep such great records from the great depression about whom they laid off and for what reasons. next time s&c loses my expense receipt, i'll remind them of this.

i suspect that firms during the great depression had their own euphemisms for lay offs. maybe they called them "extended holidays" or "early retirement". since you seem to be in the know, what do cravath's well-kept records from 1933 say exactly about why each person left?

sarcasm aside, the legal profession is WAY different than it was in 1933. i've heard there has been an increase in lateraling and such. and if a firm -- i don't care who you are -- doesn't maintain ppp, partners start to leave.

Q: how low does your utilization have to dip before you are on the chopping block?

Prestige isn't prestige for its own sake. It's prestige because prestige often correlates with job security and pay scale. Nobody would want a SCOTUS clerkship if it wasn't for the immense opportunities, both in the private and public sector, that one opens. Sure, it's "prestigious," but it's prestigious precisely because of what it does.

I can confirm that the summer program at DPW hasn't been cut short - it's 14 weeks long :)

the milbank promise won't mean much after this week. trust me.

226-

i think cravath's was too before they cut it to 10

First of all, the world isn't coming to an end. Global economic output will be down slightly. Perhaps US GDP will be down 3-4% on the year. That doesn't mean all of a sudden US companies will need 50% of the legal services they needed before--not to mention things will pick up eventually so firms can't deleverage completely.

112 - how does DPW's December start date beat Latham? Latham has a December start date w/ the option of a $75k deferral.

not 112, 230 but it beats it because the start date is not actually december

For what it is worth, I've been tracking the number of associates at Weil (NYC and other offices), and the numbers have increased.

ppl pass bar, etc. 232

FYI, DPW pulled the same trick back in the early 1990s, w/ stealth layoffs at the end of '91. I was an associate during that period, when DPW was still down at 1 Chase. Milbank was upstairs; all the Milbank attorneys' names were on the lobby wall in brass letters and, each day, the maintenance people got up on ladders and took a few more names off the wall. It really spooked us DPW associates as we arrived at work each day'; more empty spaces on the Milbank wall. Meanwhile "our" associates were "leaving voluntarily" for a host of second and third tier jobs -- or just leaving. My guess at the time was that about 35 people were fired.

BTW, don't feel sorry for the partners. They cleaned up big-time prior to the economy crash. Plus, the food in the cafeteria is not bad and is subsidized; they won't starve.

233: True, but if there were anything significant going on I would think it would show up.

You all are crazy if you think that firms like cravath and s&c or anyone else is somehow immune from the laws of economics and upheaval in the economy -- and that "tradition" will somehow make partners forget that they're losing money by not having layoffs.

mckinsey, bcg, and other top mgmt consulting firms -- very prestigious places -- are all having explicit lay offs. it's no big deal -- they take care of their people but they are not gonna stick their heads in the sand and pretend like things are dandy and that they're not a BUSINESS. the people laid off knew this when they got hired. they weren't joining a charity.

people are going through serious denial if they think the "mighty" cravath can hire 160 summers and have a huge incoming class when the global economy is in depression, and not have layoffs.

God save DPW

DPW person here very reluctantly commenting.

I haven't seen any evidence of stealth layoffs at the firm, and I am fairly plugged into what is going on here from friends in most groups and from firm activities in which I am involved.

There have been some people asked to leave here - but by every indication (including having worked with some) it was truly performance based. Additionally, people tend to assume the worst, sometimes incorrectly. There is an associate who left of his own volition in a corporate group to pursue a non-legal job and people were trying to claim he was asked to leave (I speak to him and know this isn't the case). I know of the same untrue rumors swirling about an associate leaving voluntarily in litigation.

DPW has always been fairly strict in the performance review area, especially with laterals who may not fit into the system. Just prior to and after my arrival at the firm (way prior to this) 4 associates in my group (at the time) were shown the door for continual screw-ups or because everyone saw the writing on the wall and realized they weren't working out.

The annual partner meeting was this weekend, and I spoke to two partners who I am fairly close with after the meeting and all of them said while the discussion of the general business climate was very sobering and serious - the discussion of how the firm was doing was positive given the strength in counter-cyclical practice areas and a number of large individual matters.

Bottom line - without getting too specific - there have been some people who have left and/or been asked to leave, but there hasn't been a single one that has seemed that shocking or out of line with what the baseline level was back before this whole mess started. A few laterals who weren't working out and associates who were reaching the level were they weren't making the grade and had their chance.

Davis Polk is a poor man's Mayer Brown. Davis Polk doesn't even have a super awesome CHARLOTTE office. Pwn4d.

192 -- I agree. I worked at DPW out of financial necessity and danced all the way out the door when I left. On my last day, one of the support staff managers told me that she'd miss me, adding "All the shits stay and all the good people leave."

Lay-offs are a gift from the gods, assuming that you don't have a family to support. Go get a real job and leave the girls and boys in the bubble behind. Or do you want to be a 50 year old infant who has gone from home, to college, to law school, to the hothouse life of a big firm, with no life experience at all? These people are not grown-ups; they are children with inflated egos who reinforce one another's delusions.

Remember the following and repeat it often to whoever blames the layoffs on associate salaries (which barely beat inflation) or "performance" issues or any other red herring:

The main reason big firms are having financial problems now is because their business models assume extraordinary associate attrition (40% leave within 3 years in normal times--unprecedented in other industries). The reason for such high attrition is well known: law firms are bad places to work in terms of stress and work-life balance. Instead of correcting the underlying retention problem, law firm partners found that they could simply increase associate leverage--the base of the firm "pyramid"--and could maintain adequate staffing and ensure high profits despite the continuous churning of the associate ranks.

Unfortunately, in this economy associates can't find alternate employment and that means the associate ranks are becoming too big for the model. Layoffs are "forced" upon the firm because firms fear their partners will abandon them for more money elsewhere. While the partners can blame the credit crunch they never saw coming, they were playing with operating leverage the same way their clients were playing with financial leverage--and each got burned by the volatility .

Thus, at the root of the biglaw crisis we find law firm partners' short-sighted decision to address retention through leverage. Maybe on the next upturn some firms will realize you don't need classes of 120 first years if you could retain more than a handful of them.

DPW regularly reviews the performance of its associates in the annual review process, and as a result of those reviews, it is made clear to some associates that their future does not lie with the firm. The big difference between this year and in year's past is that because of the general economic condition, it is much easier for a type A DPW associate to reclassify their dismissal as a "layoff" and thereby avoid taking personal responsibility for a performance related dismissal. So, the real question is not whether people are being told they only have three months of bisque left, but whether it is more honest to tell an associate that they don't make the cut, or to avoid that discussion and blame the "tough decision" on a bad economy.

Do Cravath lawyers throw stuff around when they're pissed off?

Skadden lawyers love to throw stuff around.

241 = correct
238 = incorrect, or DPW stooge.

There are no lateral opportunities. DPW is only the first. Does anyone think Cravath can absorb 160 new attorneys every year?

Anyone who believes the butt-covering, associate-smearing tripe in comment 238 hasn't worked at Davis Polk. I left voluntarily -- after four miserable years -- but know and, indeed, worked with several people who were forced to leave, and can tell you for a fact that the issues were political, not "performance related." For example, one guy, who was brilliant and is now a partner at a top firm, was forced out because one of the partners just couldn't stand him. In 1995, several people -- including two women -- were forced to leave because the litigaiton partners got locked into a fight about six candidates and nobody would give ground. Another woman's partnership was delayed for many years because one of the litigation directors thought that she was too "ethnic". One woman, still at the firm, did not make partner because another partner hated her husband (also a partner) and announced that the woman would make partner "over his dead body." Yet another woman, an editor of the Harvard Law Review and smarter than every litigation partner (not just my opinion) at the firm, was forced out because she was regarded as too intellectual -- "didn't walk the walk and talk the talk," was the comment of one of the partners during her partnership review.

You think that there aren't stealth lay-offs? Ha, ha ha. As for the recent annual meeting --what do you think that the partners are going to say, 'Our take is down 17%, the projections for 2009 are poor, so we're firing your ass?"

I'm sorry that 238 is "reluctant.' I'm not reluctant at all. Bullshit, is my comment.

242: See 245, and get off your high horse.

infinitely better than this blog

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ketchup_example.jpg

238 and 242 = assclowns who never get laid.

Re supposed DPW "performance" cuts:

Almost every associate that makes it to DPW out of law school has a track record of extraordinary achievement at every stage of his or her life. It is very hard to believe that such persons are suddenly unable to "perform" to be highly competent, if not excellent, attorneys at DPW.

221-

Where do you get your info re: Cravath start dates?

Here's how it goes down at DPW. Go to 4:25. 238, 242 -- you guys would be Pesci in this scene.

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

Davis is a shithole with a bunch of shitfucking, know-nothing, stuck-up motherfuckin' gunners working there. Bout time these turds get flushed. You know what I'm saying if you've ever dealt with them.

241 is spot on except for one issue. Davis Polk's senior managers are not really afraid of their best attorneys leaving. That's because in the Davis Polk model, young partners have ZERO marketability. Why, you ask? Because all but about 15 of them have NO BOOK OF BUSINESS TO TAKE WITH THEM, they've been servicing the same client, who isn't their client, for 12 years. Hear that 238? The partners you work for probably are service partners who would push you off a cliff if they were told to by the senior partners on whom they depend. And while you blubbered about "But, but, you said the countercylic business were so good blah blah..." They would look at you like you were dead to them. My guess is you didn't talk to any of those exalted 15 partners who run the place because they wouldn't have given some kiss-up associate like you the time of day, if they even knew that you worked there at all.

Also 245: epic post. I have never seen a better explanation for what goes on behind closed doors. 238, and 242 think they all sit down and do a power points on how great your management of that doc review or deal closing in 2002 went. Yeah, right. Keep dreaming morons.

Also 238 is clearly DPW. That "relucatant" designation to the comment. That is vintage DPW passive aggression.

DPW is not delaying it's start date. The firm will be fine.

Stealth layoffs are just that, stealth. They are only taking in classes to keep up with one another and for appearances. As soon as one decides to limit the class or to stop hosting a class altogether then they are all lemmings.

d ttt pttt w ttt

looks like dpw is continuing to survive as it always has, except that it needs to replicate attrition the model was built on through forced, rather than voluntary, reductions associate headcount. this bodes well for 2Ls SAs at dpw and its peers.

Can we please get more information on the rumored Kirkland layoffs??

Can we please get more information on the rumored Kirkland layoffs??

Can we please get more information on the rumored Kirkland layoffs??

188,
Those who left in January either did not get the bonus or were simply told that they needed to seek opportunities elsewhere (STB staggers the layoffs so as to avoid detection)

This is GREAT (for me)!!!

-3L going to DPW

I think it's hilarious that all you "prestigious" Biglaw types are getting laid off.

Welcome to reality, bitches.

DPW is not the only firm doing this....

New Jersey based firm McCarter & English, LLP has been laying off associates firm-wide under the radar. What's more, it has even demoted a partner to "of-counsel" status. Many associates have jumped ship voluntarily due to the office climate and the likelihood of a layoff. The firm does not even offer legitimate severance packages. They expect associates to continue to work for 2-3 months while they look for a new job---in this economy!!!! What a joke!

and yet the TTT law schools (anything beneath top 10 or so natch) continue to churn out class after class of idiots who would have been better of (and better as) nurses and police officers....

poor, small law firm attorney here. okay, not poor, but not raking in the several hundreds of thousands you guys must be making.

I just wanted to let you know that while you are arguing amongst yourselves about who has more prestige, i am hooking up with your wife and raising your, scratch that, my kids on your dime while you are away at work. just know that when you get back from work around 10 or 11 at night, i just left your house. you get my sloppy seconds. doesn't matter, i will be back tomorrow night.

when you are 80 years old and have been through several wives and realize that no one really cares about you, only what you can do for them, or, when your daughter becomes a whore looking for any man to become a father figure to her because you were so busy arguing about what kind of prestige you have, take a look at the end of the bar at the guy smiling. that's me. hell, i may even finish up with your wife and when she becomes a haggard old lady, i may just become that father figure to your daughter and continue the cycle.

enjoy your prestige while I enjoy your wife.

DPW start dates for Fall 2009: Sept. 14, Oct. 19, and Nov. 16. Looks like things arent that bad, and we had 138 summers in our class and not a single one has been asked to defer.

S&C actually expanded their summer- 15 weeks, or 12 weeks for the optional later start date (depending on your finals schedule).

But there are 80+ in the NYC class- does this mean half of them [us] will be no offered?

- nervous v3 2L ha

hahah 266.. you are so funny. you must have been the most popular guy in school. actually, no you probably weren't. you probably were a loser in high schooll, and college, and not smart enough to get in a good law school or get a good job, so now you have to make silly posts like yours to make yourself feel better.
The reality of the situation is, that while I am making boatloads of money way earlier and way longer than you, you are going to be still slaving away until you are 80, working. And thats when you are going to be at the bar my kids own because they dont even have to work.

266 - Just wondering, how long have you had these sociopathic issues regarding women?

258-260: No, because there weren't any. Kash just likes to post whatever rumors she hears about firms that people love to hate. Drives up hits, profits.

266:

"i am hooking up with your wife and raising your, scratch that, my kids on your dime..."

"i may just become that father figure to your daughter and continue the cycle."

266 here - 269, make that money. that sounds great...for you. i wont be slaving away at my job. i will live within my means and save for retirement. oh, i forgot, only rich people can retire. guess all of us making less than 200k have no hope. despite what you may think, not everyone needs a large house(s), a boat, loads of money to feel good. I have a huge penis (ask your wife), so I really dont need any of that.

and that bar your kids own? please. they will be calling me daddy anyways. you may own it, but i am their dad and that money comes to me. you, sir, are actually paying me to screw your wife and be your kids' daddy.

have fun in the office. when your wife says she is out on appointments all day and cant get in touch with you, she is actually with me and is touching something else.

Help us Huebner and Bernstien. You're our only hope.

266/273

Does it really just make your day and is it really that much fun to post stupid and meaningless comments like that? Is it really that hard to find something more interesting to do in life (read a fun book, watch a new movie, chill with some friends, or at least go have sex with the millions of models who are evidently lining up for you)?

275- this whole blog is full of stupid posts. why the hell are you singling out me? Is it because I answered your house phone when you called your wife this morning? sorry about that. i will have her cleaned up before I pick up your kids from school and you come home from work.

or, is it because I touched a nerve, you realizing that either you are in this situation or you are realizing that your success in your big time, presitigous law firm lends itself to creating this sort of life.

hey, btw, dont get mad at me. you get to brag about how prestigious your law firm is to all your buddies at work and I get to take care of business at your house. its a win win for everyone.

OCEANS RISE

FIRMS FALL

QUINN.... will never be a respected firm.

265: non-top-10 does not equal TTT. Likewise, high LSAT score != good lawyer.

245 -- what you describe sounds perfectly believable, but it doesn't sound to me as if those were "stealth layoffs" either. It should hardly be a shock that internal politics are important at a large law firm, especially with respect to who makes partner.

245 / 253 --

Seriously? We're talking about "Layoffs" and you bring up people passed over for partnership because they are antisocial and can't craft a book of business?

#1 -- no partner terminations are EVER "layoffs." A partner's job is to produce business. If they are not doing so (or have pissed off the rest of the partnership in other ways) they have performed badly. That's the definition of performance-based.

People being passed over for partnership (and getting fired or encouraged out) is not a crime, or a sign of the end-times, or whatever other conspiracy-theory you want to attach. Up-or-Out has been the RULE at lawfirms since time immemorial. You either make it, or you gtfo. Those people did not make it, hence they had to gtfo.

Not all DPW associates are of the same quality, even though they have all done well in law school. Judgment, initiative, political savvy, sheer endurance, etc. are all very important, not to mention pure animal luck, and law school grades don't do anything to measure those traits. It's unrealistic to expect that any firm will not have performance based layoffs on a regular basis.

At the same time, no firm is a pure meritocracy, because internal politics and cultural fit always play a big part. There will always be senior associates who got on the wrong side of the politics, or just were not in the right practice groups at the right time. Some of them will move along on their own, and some will need a push.

In normal times, the attrition would be a mixture of the people who have gotten better offers, the people who have burned out and want to do something easier, and the people who have been asked to move along (whether for performance reasons or for political/cultural ones). It would only be in cases of terrible performance or after a long time of ignoring the signals that it was time to leave that you would be given a timetable that might result in being forced to leave without something else in mind.

These are obviously not normal times, and saying that they are just replicating normal attrition is hopelessly unrealistic. Were they just replicating normal staff growth when they started hiring laterals in greater numbers No, they were staffing up in response to a surge in work levels. And now they are shrinking their work force in response to the market being totally dead.

In this economy, there is no benefit to staff of trying to keep the situation discreet, and there is no shame in layoffs. DPW should be explicit about the layoffs and match Latham's severance. If they really want to do stealth layoffs, they should make sure that the effective notice is at least six months. From what I have heard, they are only giving people three months. If that's true, shame on them for not meeting the standard that Latham set when they can afford to meet it.

213- nice point.
225- you are right that prestige serves a function - the more prestigious the law school and/or clerkship, the more opportunities it presents. Additional doors are opened to you. The problem comes when people who have been hunting prestige for so long begin to see prestige as the end, rather than the means.

That said, having a "cool" job, however you measure that, is an ego boost. It is fun to tell people you work for Wachtell/Google/Angelina Jolie. Just don't let it swell your head too much, or cause you to denigrate others who are somehow "less" cool. It is really obnoxious, and makes you look petty and snobby.

266, is the best. gotta love the hook of banging self-righteous attorneys wifes.
-not 266

213 you sound like a douche who wants people to think he's just a prick. NEWS IS: you are a douche

280:

The associates whom I referenced in my comment above (245) were not anti-social, but rather charming, perceptive peole; and they could, and later did, "craft books of business." Nor was the book or lack or one a factor in the firing decision. How much business do you think any senior associate brings with him/her to the partnership? Essentially, he/she is bag-carrying for a partner.

And yes, most of the examples provided involved partnership decisions. My point, however, was that, at DPW and other mega-firms, performance does not determine outcome.

I can also provide a long list of associates who were forced out for what were essentially political or, in 1991, economic reasons, motives that were never acknowledged by the partnership. Stealth lay-offs are not based on how well a lawyer knows and practices law but rather on numerous other factors, including but not limited to (1) whether the economy is doing well enough and, as pointed out above, the firm has sufficient associate attrition, to sustain the partners' buoyant life styles; (2) who is pissed off at whom; (3) which partner has more clout re retaining "his" associates; (4) regrettable attitudes and expectations regarding class, race and ethnicity (Oh yes, those attitudes have survived; they rise from the partners like a bad odor. Not too many years ago, one white-bread DPW partner scheduled a closing party at a club that excluded Jews and blacks and told an associate who threatened not to show up, "We'll miss you." ); (5) billables, which is a reasonable requirement insofar as you're willing to admit that you are firing a competent attorney because he rejects peonage as both a concept and reailty

What is happening is that, as per usual, rather acknowledge that it is laying people off for economic reasons, DPW is protecting itself, and doing so in the time-honored corporate manner; i.e., by smearing people.

Rotten to the core.

281 and 285 nailed it. Those are some of the more perceptive comments on this post, showing understanding and analysis, rather than knee-jerk snobbery or sycophancy.

Thanks 281 and 285. I am one of the victims of the stealth layoff, and am quite angry at the approach DPW took. While I can understand the economics of the need to lay off junior associates who are overpaid and underworked, there is no reason to smear their reputations and lie to their faces about bad performance issues, just to save face. The economy is horrible, and lay offs are a fact of life. What is not fair, is telling a first year associate during their first review that they are underperforming and have been doing so consistently, and that it was their fault they lost their job. I think the emotional trauma caused by a lay off in this economy is sufficient without the need to crush their self-esteem.

In my case, the partners who told me the news could not even look me in the eye when I asked them to point out specific instances of my "poor performance." They punted the question to each other, and then couldn't provide me with a single example - rather they fell back on my "general attitude" and low hours. My hours WERE low for the last few months, but as was everyone elses, and from asking around, my hours were on average about the same as other first-years. Moreover, I never once received a negative comment on my work from supervising associates - rather, I received a decent amount of praise for my efficiency and good attitude. On the other hand, I know of associates who were routinely scolded for poor performance, with a record of failing to perform (that was recorded via mean emails and voicemails) who were not laid off. The difference however, is that these associates played the game better - i.e. sucking up to partners who were spineless weaklings, forgoing any sense of honesty by inflating hours, and playing golf and smoking cigars with partners that they then mocked relentlessly afterwards. I chose not to sink that low, even when layoffs were forthcoming, and so I paid the price.

Therefore, while I understand the reality of the economic situation and do not begrudge the firm for trimming the fat, I think the way the stealth layoffs are handled is just a sign of poor class and bad form. This is especially shocking to me since DPW really prides itself on its "gentlemanly" behavior and culture of "niceness." I now heartily agree with the people who have said DPW is nothing but a firm of passive aggressive assholes. Have some f*cking class, DPW - we all know it's a bad time, and are willing to live with the fall out, but we are human being too, who deserve to be treated with respect. There is no need to try and demean us, or wreck our self-esteem, just so you can save face to... the public? other firms? incoming 3Ls?...by claiming that we were fired for performance.

287:

285 here. It's an ego trip. They want to be players and don't want the competition -- their counterparts at S&C, Cravath, Debevoise, et al, to think that they had to lay off associates for economic reasons. Basically, they're in a pissing match with all the other bubble-dwellers and don't want to lose face (or clients). Some actually believe the bleep that they dish.

Passive aggression is a stealth tactic of the WASP elite. Be happy that you're out. My advice: if you have severance, take advantage of one of those Expedia last minute jaunts to the islands and spend a week on the beach with a significant other or buddy. You need, as they used to say in the seventies, "get your head together." Then cut your expenses (after the vacation) and find a legal career that is truly creative and rewarding. Davis Polk sucks -- and big firm jobs are for wieners, jerks and suckers.

Note that our new President , who could have had his pick of the big firms, blew them off for public interest, teaching, and politics. He was smarter than the barracudas who tried to hook him as window dressing. I say, follow the smart , ethical guy, not the dupes.

And cheer up! You learned a lesson early on, before wasting years at DPW. Plus, you have plenty of (smart) company; the guys who fired you fool nobody but themselves.

285, it's 287. I appreciate the comment, it makes me feel somewhat better to hear other people agree with my assessment of their crappy passive-aggressive and ultimately foolish behavior. I've already decided to say goodbye to biglaw, and will do something good, interesting, and useful with my law degree now.

sorry 287, but your story doesn't ring true to me.

Even if you don't think you are on the layoff list, you should be prepared to negotiate a good severance package - and you'd be amazed at what is negotiable. Check out Sweetening the Deal at www.layoffcoach.com. Well worth it.

this is total crap. all of their lay offs were warranted.
how can you accuse the most exclusive law firm in the country of stealth lay offs? if somone cannot cut it then they should not be working there.
end of story

R&G is engaging in stealth layoffs...