Nationwide Layoff Watch: Instant Reports From The Katten Meeting
Earlier today, we reported that Katten was holding a firm wide meeting this afternoon. Predictably, the talks soon turned to layoffs. Here is what some of the people who were at the meeting are telling us:
20% pay cut if average billables were less than 150 last year and less than 145 for the last 3 months. 12 associates laid off (seems VERY low …). Incoming associates deferred until Feb 2010 start date.
The 12 number seems low to other tipsters too. But the meeting isn’t over in all of the firm’s offices yet. And these numbers do not take into account how many (if any) staff were laid off, or income partners.
I say income partners because we have received more reports that some of them were let go as well.
Update (4:38): Katten has released an official statement. 69 people were let go. Like Jenner earlier today, Katten describes the layoffs as “relatively small.” It looks like we have a new “official euphemism,” but in both cases it happens to be true. Read the full statement after the jump.
But we are also getting some very interesting news about the severance package Katten is offering. Details on that after the jump.
We understand that income partners are receiving double the severance as laid off associates. But there is one big catch for both classes of people:
Associates get 1 month, unless they sign a separation agreement, which gives them 3 months. Income partners get 1 month, unless they sign a separation agreement, which gives them 6 months.
We asked the firm for details about the separation agreement, but they have not yet responded to our inquiries.
Still, unless the separation agreement involves finding 100 souls to man the Flying Dutchman in your stead, I think most people will sign the thing. Nobody wants to end up living in Tortuga in a month. (Fun fact: I’ve actually been to the real Tortuga.)
If the firm updates us on what is in the separation agreement, we’ll post it here.
Update (4:38): Read the official Katten response below.
KATTEN — STATEMENT — LAYOFFS
The firm is fortunate to have entered the current economic downturn from a position of strength and it remains on solid financial footing with virtually no long-term debt and unburdened by redundant and costly U.S. and international offices. This places us in the best-possible position to withstand the current downturn, capture additional market share in each of our core practice areas, and remain poised for future growth.
However, like many law firms, we have had to make some very difficult staffing decisions, including today’s layoff of a relatively small number of our attorneys and staff. These reductions included 12 associates, seven non-equity partners, four other attorneys, six
paralegals and 40 staff members.
This layoff was relatively small due to a new Katten program that will creatively reduce costs while preserving dozens of jobs. Under the program, underutilized associates will be placed on a lower compensation scale. This scale reduces an associate’s base salary by 20 percent if he or she did not bill within 200 hours of their billable target in 2008, but offers the chance for them to earn back their total base at the end of this year if they meet their hours going forward. Those who reached this billable hours target in 2008 and worked at a similar pace for the last three months of the fiscal year will continue to receive their full base compensation. This structure, while reducing some associates’ base compensation, will save their jobs, enable us to reduce costs, and maintain our existing practice teams.
We devote significant resources to recruiting talented lawyers and creating teams that provide exceptional client service, and this move allows us to preserve those strong teams. It also means that when economic conditions do improve, we will still have our people in place.
In conjunction with our new compensation program, we are implementing a number of additional measures designed to cut costs, including reducing the length of our summer associate program from 10 weeks to eight weeks and reducing summer associate salaries by 20 percent. We are also delaying the start date for incoming first-year associates until February 1, 2010, the beginning of our fiscal year. These associates will be compensated with an additional stipend.
We are confident that these combined measures will help us reduce our costs without stunting future growth.
Earlier: Mystery Meeting Set at Katten: 2:00 p.m. (CT) Today
(204) 
Comments
firsty?
Sucks for these guys
Phases of firm desperation, from least to most desperate. Where is your firm?
Cutting perks
Reduced 2L summer program (size & extravagance)
Shorter 2L summer program
Layoff Staff
Cutting bonuses
Delayed start date
Deferred start date
Temp salary freeze
Indefinite salary freeze
Stealth layoffs
No offer a few summers
Laying off associates
No offering substantial number of summers
Laying off first years
Rescinding 3L offers
Dissolving
http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=955463&mc=10&forum_id=2#11189282
my cat's breath smells like catfood
oh the humanity!
*nervously contemplates my future*
-nervous T-10 1L
soon to be nervous 1L sa
Katten summer 2Ls facing same 20% pay cut, with reduced summer program.
Separation agreements are no big deal. Just that you won't screw over or sue the firm. They are right to ask for it.
By the way, its 50 lawyers that were laid off.
Hey Eli, we still need a list of firms that have laid off first/second years. This would be valuable information to compile.
Not sure I understand why it is specifically terrible to lay off first years?
"average billables were less than 150 last year and less than 145 for the last 3 months."
Does this mean less than 150/145 hours per month?
On State Street, that great street
I just wanna say
They do thing's
They don't do on Broadway, say
They have the time
The time or their life
I saw a man
He danced with his wife (3500 sq ft and a Lexis)
In Chicago
Chicago, my home home town
February 2010?? What the hell do they expect incoming associates to do for 9 months after graduation? Something tells me that this is just a softer way of telling incoming associates that they won't have a job.
FIRMWIDE: 12 associates, seven non-equity partners, four other attorneys, six paralegals and 40 staff members.
LOS ANGELES: one floater secretary, two paralegals and one associate
How many people here really dislike Nervous T-10 1L? I wish he would go away.
Hi Elie, why doesn't this site cover salary raises any more? The site's focus is so focused on layoffs that it seems to be ignoring raises. thx
AIG BONUS NEWS:
90% Tax on Fat Cat Bonuses...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090319/ap_on_go_co/aig_outrage
This should soar right throught the Senate.
8 - get off your lazy ass and do it...elie wont.
3,
I'd put salary freezes around 4 or 5.
Not sure I understand why it is specifically terrible to lay off first years?
Call me Kit Kat.
Curious on the summer associate numbers. It says summers are reduced from 10 to 8 weeks and 20% reduction. Is this just the 20% going from 10 to 8 weeks, or does it mean they are getting 20% less per week, which would be a 36% reduction in summer pay.
youre the ass.
loser
did you call me a loser, loser?
yeah, i called you a loser.
get off your high horse, loser.
9, as a first year who was laid off, let me tell you.
everyone either wants experience, or they hire you right out of lawschool. if you get laid off in the in the middle, you are seriously FUCKED. no severance will make up for the hit to your career, UNLESS it's enough to pay off your loans.
plus, even though over half my class was laid off, the whole world doesn't know that, so now i have this layoff stigma early on.
get it. go to a firm that doesn't lay off first years. you do not want to be in the situation i'm in right now.
in short, don't go to a firm that will lay you off as a first year.
you come here.
come make me.
no, you come here spineless bastard.
f- you
9, as a first year who was laid off, let me tell you.
everyone either wants experience, or they hire you right out of lawschool. if you get laid off after only a few months, you are seriously FUCKED. no severance will make up for the hit to your career, UNLESS it's enough to pay off your loans.
plus, even though over half my class was laid off, the whole world doesn't know that, so now i have this layoff stigma early on.
get it. go to a firm that doesn't lay off first years. you do not want to be in the situation i'm in right now.
in short, don't go to a firm that will lay you off as a first year.
can someone list all the BigLaw firms that have deferred incoming associates? Mine hasn't yet but I'm beginning to worry.
every firm will lay you off as a first year
no they wont
yes they will bitch
who you calling bitch, btich
f- off
you bitch
you f-off
22 through 32.
Nananananana
What babies - and these are real attorneys?
34, please list the prestigious firms that have laid off first years. i only know of one and they are no longer prestigious.
can someone list all the BigLaw firms that have deferred incoming associates? Mine hasn't yet but I'm beginning to worry.
27 - if it's any consolation, you don't have a "layoff stigma" to worry about. Everyone understands what's going on in the industry right now. Nobody's going to hold it against you personally that Katten laid you off only a few months into your career.
Read that separation agreement very carefully. Make sure that they give you something confirming that your layoff was not for performance reasons. Katten's a dubious firm so keep things at arm's length.
44, i was not laid off by Katten. i don't know that Katten has even laid off first years.
How to survive from the bar exam until February? In my case, I temped in a variety of non-legal jobs. Did everything from answer phones to diagnose computer problems over the phone at a Help Desk. The work sucked but it allowed me to pay the bills without using the credit card too much. I also scrimped my last semester and all summer and saved as much of my loan money as possible.
I'd appreciate any information re which practice areas and class years were most affected. It also sounds fewer than 15 were laid off--please confirm if the number is actually 50.
44,
27 has the stigma...quit pampering him
46,
I'm glad you made it. I have a wife and 3 kids that require at least 60k to get by once student loans are due. I'm screwed.
21 - 20% less per week
41 must not do much litigation.
48- no he or she does not
yes, they do
no they dont
is this you again, shut up
you shut up bitch
-fing a stop
get out of here
you get out of here.
you are boring.
this is boring.
14 - I am so hoping that "nervous top-10 1L" gets no-offered this summer while he/she is a "nervous top-10 sa." F'ing loser.
"41 must not do much litigation."
Haha! That's true.
Litigators are a bunch of gay crybabies who write angry letters back and forth to each other.
go home.
48 -
agreed. 27 sucks. Good luck to you and your family.
- 44
how disappointed were you when you realized that "tortuga" and "tortilla" are not synonyms?
14 - I am so hoping that "nervous top-10 1L" gets no-offered this summer while he/she is a "nervous top-10 sa." F'ing loser.
Where is Mingo?
27: Should I go to a firm that lays off first years?
Since Katten had already frozen associate salaries, does that mean a 2nd year makes $128k instead of $175k, effectively making this a lot more than a 20% paycut against expectations?
And are first years making the same as 2nd years who didn't hit the hour threshold last year? That still doesn't seem fair, seeing as how 2nd years who didn't hit hours and 3rd years who didn't hit hours are still separated by $10K...
33, 35, 37, 39--34, 36, 38, 40 are rubber, you are glue....
I thought twice about posting this, because I really don't want to make things any tougher for people who have already got a lot to deal with, but there is ALWAYS a stigma to getting laid off.
When my former Fortune 50 employer tanked and was acquired a few years ago, and all of us at the acquiree lost our jobs, there was a stigma to being laid off. (If you'd been better, the acquiror would have fired its own people to keep you; if you'd been better, you could have prevented the merger from happening in the first place...)
I recall the same thing happening when I was a junior associate in the early 90s - some major firms went through 4 rounds of layoffs, and everyone was stigmatized, regardless.
Everybody may know what is happening, but unless the market is smoking hot, they need to use something to winnow out the piles of resumes on their desks, and so... Stigma happens.
I'm sorry to have to say it, but I've always thought it was best to know the truth.
72- you are a douche. we all know it, but its like pissing on someones grave.
get over yourself, 72 said the truth
no he didnt that was his situation
yes
you mean everyones situation may be different?
yeah, i know hard to believe, huh?
well, sucks for 72.
yeah, looks like he is trying to drag everyone down.
so, 72 should shut his trap?
no, but it should be udnerstood that everyone is different.
so no conclusory statements?
so no conclusory statements?
nope.
wait so no pay cut if you were lucky to get staffed on a big bankrupcy in the last three months?
weak
Just for the record, I truly hope that everyone laid off finds a really great new job really soon.
Unlike many of the people on this board, I have actually been through a layoff, so I know what it and its aftermath are like, and if I didn't feel so bad over what people are going through, I'd never even read ATL, much less post on it.
And I don't mind the name calling (although I'd have preferred "mean person" to "douche"). These are terrible times. Everybody is stressed, and who even knows any more what's the right thing to say to people.
--72
Reality Check!
I am one of the 7 non-equity partners. I billed over 150 hours per month last year and over 160 hours per month in the last quarter of last year. Hence. One of the 7.? Oh! And did I mention that my business doubled last year? Katten the great!
Wow. This is a pretty strong invitation for attorneys to pad their billings when they get close to the targets. Clients beware!
Did anyone hear that Paul Hastings got sanctioned $5 million in a patent case? And I guess they fired a girl right after she miscarried, too. Unreal.
What I found the most interesting about Biglaw (before leaving to work in house at BigPharma years ago) is how many service partners are working without generating business.
They are great attorneys but they insanely expensive and I've actually had to institute a policy in billing that requires notification if a partner (aside from the two or three relationship partners) are handling our matters. We decline additions on a weekly basis.
I can't handle seeing bills where some income partner is writing discovery, doing meet & confers over stupid shit, and writing nasty grams. This stuff isn't rocket science and can be handled by a 5th, 6th or 7th year who is well trained. And those people, in turn, shouldn't be billing me first-run document review.
In house people are under constant cost pressure. While I can cover my ass by claiming that this is what the best costs, I have a hard time doing that when there is no appreciable difference from a 5th year at Sidley writing a nasty gram as compared to the nasty gram written by the partner at Covington. (these are just examples, but you get the drift). And before you claim efficiency, both sample firms billed me the same exact number of hours. This happens all the freaking time and drives my own boss (the GC who was a partner at a V-25 before coming here) mad.
If I were on a management committee, I could see cutting 20-30 percent of the partners at firms without any appreciable difference in the kind of work product.
I get that the whole idea of partnership is that people get time to develop books or for old partners to die and hand down generational clients, but my own boss (A GC) is placing crazy pressure on us to justify why we are getting associate work from partners.
I'm surprised it hasn't come up more often.
OK, so having a job you love is better than having a job you hate/dislike (your choice) which is still better than not having a job at all (some people may disagree). However, I assume that you guys are all professionals (degree + license). If you get fired, yeah - that sucks, but don't you guys have clients of your own? So the first years may have a problem, but after 2-3 years, you should be able to pretty much pay your own ticket. At least that's the policy at our [small] firm.
How sleazy that the last three months (Dec-Jan-Feb) include Christmas and New Year's.
To answer what other people asked, you take out more loans. I'm living off a credit card now. Top 30 Law Grad, Law Review, did pro-bono volunteer work during summers of law school (my mistake), and passed the bar already. Can't even get temporary work now in NYC. Oh, and my mom died when a tree fell on her car. She had no life insurance. My dad's blind and lives off social security. But if I say I'm depressed, someone will suggest I take some pills to make everything better. Pssst. Good thing I'm too poor to see a doctor.
"This scale reduces an associate's base salary by 20 percent if he or she did not bill within 200 hours of their billable target in 2008, but offers the chance for them to earn back their total base at the end of this year if they meet their hours going forward"
How come no one is commenting about this clause! How is an associate suppose to meet his/her hour requirement when there is no WORK?! geez.
Katten? I fucked a bunch of Katten attorneys up the ass doggie style, they usually jerk their little dicks off when I unload...
-Stud at a better Chicago firm
One point that may not be immediately clear is that in order to avoid the pay cut you must have had both 1800 hours AND averaged 145 hours for Nov-Dec-Jan. So even if you billed 2200 hours last year, if you were slow in the holiday months, you got a massive pay cut. This is killing litigators who had a busy year but are always slow around the holidays.
In other words, this is a near universal 20% pay cut, just disguised so that it is not quite that obvious.
90 -- I totally agree with this. These dead wood partners should be pushed out rather than foisted on partners who actually have a book of business.
I knew I was fucked when I realized that the partners I was working for were hoarding discovery work. What 20 yr BIGLAW partner drafts responses to rogs? One hurting for billables. Client must loooove that...
- Recently laid off BIGLAW senior associate, now SMALLLAW senior associate (which, oddly, came with a raise). F-U BIGLAW.
Katten is finished
Here's the problems I see with the manner for determining pay cuts:
1. For the last several years while the economy has been booming, transactional practices have been carrying other sections, but now, when the economy is down, the other sections can't support the transactional sections, so the associates that will take the pay cuts are, primarily, transactional attorneys. Presumably this is being done to avoid further layoffs. The result, however, is you can have an average (or even crappy) litigator or bankruptcy attorney who is meeting the hours requirement keep full pay while a talented transactional attorney is short on hours (because other sections are keeping their work within their group, partners are keeping work so they have something to do rather than generating business--take your pick) and that talented attorney takes a pay cut.
2. Solely looking to hours (rather than performance reviews, input from partners, etc.) encourages associates to hoard work (and what client wants senior associates doing due diligence?), become inefficient and pad hours.
Not to mention that a straight percentage cut makes no sense. Senior associates take a much larger pay cut than a junior associate which results in further pay compression between associate classes. Market bumps were done with flat increases throughout all class years, so any pay cuts should be made in the same manner.
Get off your soapbox, 100
101 -- this is 100 -- you're right, I was totally wrong. My mistake.
100 likes to hear himself talk
100 -- Sorry but the litigators have probably been steadily busy over the years. Everyone needs to carry himself.
104 also likes to hear himself talk
wtf is with the comments in this post
I call bullshit on 87. No "non-equity" partner at Katten calls himself a "non-equity" partner.
100, this is why firms that pay lockstep are using a broken system. Those transactional lawyers should have been paid more during their busy years instead of having their wealth redistributed to lawyers with little work.
87 is total BS. They call themselves income partners and I guaranty none of the 7 have any book.
This is what happens when you have a non NY/DC firm raise salaries to match NY/DC firms. Billing rates in Chicago simply cannot support those salaries.
And while I have the floor, I don't understand how firing people and cutting salaries leads to "increased market share" -- which can only be increased by getting new clients or convincing existing clients to give you more business, which in both cases is achieved in a recession by taking work away from other firms.
110 is a recent or soon-to-be layoff victim
Katten Cumchin needs a Domino's Big Bailout.
Yum, pizza
Comment removed by moderator.
Katten Associate here. There is much to laud, and much to slam about the firm. However I welcome this, and I am pleased I work at a firm that worked hard to avoid mass layoffs. Don't be fooled, the alternative was associate layoffs in the high double maybe even triple digits. It could have been a lot worse. I work for a powerful partner in Chicago, and get good perfrmance reviews but I could not say for certain I would be safe in a mass cull.
The firm is trying to teach all associates to be rainmakers, and I also think this is great. Make people reaize they hold the power to mold their own career. Talks have been good so far, but I could do without the "motivational" (I think they are meant to be) emails we get once a week.
However I still have a problem with how senior associates are treated. It is an open secret you have to lateral in as a partner or you will be forever put off. And some of the people we made partner are terrible. We made 2 McNothing paper pushers partners when they moved over - and all they do is send out press releases. Here in Chicago we drove out 2 great associates only to bring in someone as partner who was passed over at another firm. And the Charlotte office seems to be a big mess. We made someone a partner in residential mortgages, who was a 5th year or something. Not sure why we still have it, as most of the office does real estate.
But still, right now, I would rather be in my dysfunctional nut house earning 20% less than out on the street OR getting 100% salary but working at a Latham or W&C where they may fire 100 people at a moments notice.
I hear you 115, but you've got no long term future there. And if you know that now, why keep lining someone else's pocket.
115, from what I see Katten's Charlotte office should be closed. Everybody from Katten's NYC office with whom I dealt hadn't the faintest concept what good lawyering means.
Is there anyone partner at Katten's NYC office who isn't 75+? That's an old folks' home masquerading as a law firm.
87, Bullshit. We call them income partners, and I know 1 of them let go. Good person. No book, but serviced clients. Those who know Katten know we have one HUGE client that made a lot of people partner. Couldn't last forever, and I expect more income partners to leave or be pshed before more associates go.
96, what part of "if you make you hours you get wage back at 100%" don't you get? Make hours and you have 8 months at lower level and one hell of a january/february paycheck.
110, it is about keeping good associates so the firm has capacity once things come back, while also encouraging associates to try and see what contacts they currently have.
115, fellow Katten associate here in New York. You don't know the half of the Charlotte story. No book when made, less of a book now. Partner I work with here is on some task force with her and is amazed, amazed.
I work in Katten's LA office. More is coming, we have heard.
119, what really happened in that 2 pm meeting?
116, sadly you are rught. Once things pick up I am off. But thats because of what will happen to me in 2 years when I am up for partner, not because of salary. Also, they stiffed me on my 5th year sabitical.
But in this downturn they should not be hammered for saving people. If it was better run then we would be more loyal.
116, sadly you are right. Once things pick up I am off. But thats because of what will happen to me in 2 years when I am up for partner, not because of salary. Also, they stiffed me on my 5th year sabitical.
But in this downturn they should not be hammered for saving people. If it was better run then we would be more loyal.
115
122, what office?
120, what more is coming?
122, what sabbatical?
we heard more layoffs in a possible second round, deeper than now
118,
One of my colleagues left chicago to go to new york office. she was young and very hot, but a real B*tch. Made partner when you just needed to service our existing clients. So they're not all old.
115
127, sure she wasn't there to wipe the baby food that dribbled on the chin of the partner off?
There is more to come 126? When? That is news. If 80% salary doesn't do it, what will?
When was murky, 129. We were told there was more, and this is a first wave that they hope will be enough. But that is not very confidence-building. Management thinks there are more cuts necessary. I'm not thrilled about this.
I'm in Chicago.
121, Vince was Vince. Very reassuring. I like him a lot as a person, but he doesn't run the group I work for. Made it sound like we were all sharing the pain, and I believe him. I know that 2 partners wanted to get rid of "at least" 60 associates - they openly talked about using the bad market to lessen the shock. So I do believe Vince did weigh all the options. Talked about getting business in, talked about making hours and getting fully paid. This is not (currently) a set wage cut. 2009 only.
I was told by 2 people here that no cuts again until October/November based on what rest of year is like. Not sure if LA is different. DB wants no more cuts until 2010 if needed and I think that is what they will try to do.
125, when you work here for 5 years you are allowed take a month off. I came with a partner as a 2nd year and this was my year to take that time off. This year they are enforcing the "be in good standing" rule (basically hours), even though they did not last year.
130, I spoke with several partners that I have a pretty frank relationship with. They said never say never, but this should prevent more cuts till collection commitee get together in November.
Interesting, 131. In LA, we were not told it would be in the Fall, although that makes sense, given the summer associate morale issue.
130, 131 what would you say the chances of dissolution are?
115, 117, and 119, shut up about Charlotte. Why wish to close an entire office and let go 100 more people?
The Charlotte office was the top performing office from 2002 to 2007. I am glad we took paycut instead of laying off people, and I am glad we are keeping the Charlotte office when fellow Chicago firms are abandoning them. Katten rewards loyalty, and doesn't chase the quick buck.
No firm is perfect, but I am sticking with those who stuck by me.
No idea, 134. I think slim, but the pay cut is ominous.
Not at Katten, but this does not sound good. If they are just holding on, why should a Capital Partner with business stay and not go to a higher PP firm.
What is Katten's PPP?
135, are you a katten partner? otherwise, why would you be singing the praises of a firm that f's you in the ass.
135
Katten is all about chasing the quick buck. Their FSG in NYC was all about the quick buck. The LIT group in Chicago is all about the quick buck. The ENT group in LA is all about the quick buck.
134, Katten is still taking in partners, not losing them. Dissolution is not even on the cards. The firm has hardly any debt (save from the merger) and the London office is just to peddle Josh's tax planning to Europeans. The financials are sound.
Now if a certain large financial institution goes south, who knows. But there are several other firms in this city who will go down before Katten.
I'm an insider who wants to believe this, so you can take this with a pinch of salt, but the next big firm failure in this city will be with a firm that starts with M. Debt and lawsuits are not a good mixture.
134 - The pay cut was a last resort measure. My firm did that, because they were afraid that the associates tossed out on the street would start soliciting business away. Or at least that's the way it was sold to the partners. In reality, the pay cut was not deep enough to offset the loss of business and layoffs may be looming. At least severance, will now be x months at x% of salary.
136, paycut is not ominous. It makes sense. What I hope is we cut billing rates. Several local banks in Ilinois would love to use us if we were a bit cheaper.
As for further layoffs, maybe LA will have, but I was talking with JMB last week and he said office was doing ok, some partners leaving but business good. GT runs a tight ship - or at least thats what they tell us here. However I know DC and Charlotte operate under different rules to most of us - no layoffs in last 2 rounds - so maybe all the sat offices are like that.
Another Chicago Lawyer hoping Illinois is not upset tonight,
141, in what groups are they taking in partners? Are they making any associates income partners?
143, thanks for the info. Paycut still hurts, though.
136
JMB is a liar
What's the perception of the NY and DC Office from the CHI office?
139, you think a Katten partner would be on? I know this site attracts cynics, but I like the firm and they have looked after me. I defended them in October. I have been on this site far too much. Dating back to the Katten Creep (naturally). I can say your firm is TTT, that Paul Hastins has Herpes, talk about Ass Lobsters, wonder where Layolla 2l is and call out Ellie on spelling mistakes if that somehow makes my comment more valid.
Shock - I like where I work, I am happy to continue to work there and I am glad we did not let go 100's of people today.
Are they going to have a summer program next year? Is anyone?
42: A number of firms have laid off first years. Proskauer may have laid off the most, though I don't know if you would include that firm in the "prestigious" category.
143, 148, drunk on Katten Kool Aid
148, Katten associate here, too. I agree. Good basic firm.
Were any first year's laid off?
Ah, at last, the post is dividing along pro-Katten and anti-Katten lines. Just like every other ATL post. Makes everything worthless form here on out.
149, Yes but smaller.
147, here in NY everyone bitches that Chicago doesn't get it - our bonuses are crap. I am told Chicago thinks we are a bunch of winners. The mid-level associate survey really showed that LA and NY not happy. Surprisingly Charlotte did really well.
136, tell me about it, not looking forward to April 16.
155 why April 16. day after taxes or some committee meeting day before?
146, shut the fuck up about things you don't understand. Why is he a liar? If you we're at the meeting you don't know what is true or not.
Chicago associate here (not Katten). We are in deep s here at MB.
Come on Western Kentucky!
157, shut up yourself, you mindless sheep. If you believe everything management says, you truly are a fool.
156 - no, thats when paycut happens. Katten is on 1st/16th pay structure.
154, at least the jew bashing hasn't started yet
150,
42 was probably referring to Latham, not Proskauer. Latham laid off about half of the first years in the NY office.
If you work in Chicago, what's the majority of Katten's work there? Litigation? Transactional? Who are their typical clients?
Why is the DC office so small? Shouldn't Katten be trying to get government work?
why must everyone deteriorate to swearing? it's a sign of failure when you have to resort to that -- you stupid fuck, 157.
164, Real Estate/FnServ.
Half DC office left 2 years ago. Followed a lawyer who was CONVICTED of insider trading. Yup, these people would rather work for a crook then Katten DC.
gulp
a lawyer who was CONVICTED of insider trading. Yup, these people would rather work for a crook then Katten DC.
gulp
So . . . you would be on the negative side of Katten. Why?
Not on negative side. That is the truth. I think it says more about them to be honest.
Katten is a big firm. It is as good or as bad as any other firm in the bottom v100. I will defend the pay cut but I still think loyal associates get shafted. People pretending their firms are better make me laugh. They are all going to screw you, the only questions are how far and for how long.
96 responding to 119 here.
You really think a promise to pay money back in January of 2010 means anything now? Anything could happen by then. Money now is money now, and right now, Katten is the lowest paying major firm in all of its markets except perhaps Charlotte (I don't know enough about that market to comment one way or the other).
To 143 - Yes a cut in the billing rates would make a ton of sense, and would make the pay cuts easier to stomach. Katten needs to figure out what it wants to be. Right now, it's flailing by trying to run with the big boys when it really can't. But there is plenty of work available at a lower rate, and there is nothing wrong with targeting that. In fact, in the long run, I believe it would be more profitable for the firm to do so.
Totally agree 169. Lower billing rate would fit in with SE's emails and make me think and act like a team player.
We could get work from the big boys at a lower rate too.
First Katten, now Western Kentucky. Can the night get any worse?
Katten LA here - can anyone talking about the future cuts to come give more details please????
From what I have heard, no first year casualties. I'm a fan of the way they handled this I just hope the incoming associates have a job come Feb. Any word on the size of the stipend?
i've met plenty of katten associates who pad their hours. i don't blame them though... it's the lack of ethics that comes top down.
Unfortunate they let the para’s go, we’re all be doing para work to inch across that line. I’m sure the clients would love to see spent 2 hours placing docs in chron order or even better 3 hrs printing docs.
Comment removed by moderator.
How does this 20% cut (holdback?) work at KMZ? If you end up billing 2000 hours in FY09, you get the 20% added to your bonus? Wouldn't it then be taxed at a higher level? Bonuses don't get paid until March or so, so that would be a long wait for the cash.
94, they're not. That's the whole point. I fully support this policy of salary cuts. It's definitely preferable if it can decrease layoffs. I feel bad for my corporate brothers, but it simply makes no sense to pay people $160K+ when they're working less hours than minimum wage people. Even if through no
fault of their own. Even if the actual work is good.
$145K, $130K, even $115K is very appropriate for associates only working 100 hours a month. That's a generous estimate of what many are working too.
as others have pointed out, the emphasis on billable hours over everything else encourages padding. actually, it guarantees it ... it's hard to see how encouraging people take clients money without providing value is a good business model for this environment
amidst all the debris it is still not clear - but it has been suggested that the starting salary for 2009 will be lower than 160 - anyone have a number, a clue, or a hint? Maybe a 130 base that assumes new associates may be below budget .....Maybe 144 like McGuire Woods. Perhaps 135 with 10% at 1900 and 10% more at 2000? Sowing confusion through cowardice. That's manning up in the new millenium
178, "I feel bad for my corporate brothers, but it simply makes no sense to pay people $160K+ when they're working less hours than minimum wage people."
What if one of your corporate brothers billed 2200 or 2400 when times where flush, while you only billed 2000? (No idea what you billed obviously, but we're dealing in hypotheticals here.) Or people in other departments billed significantly less than that? That past production doesn't mean anything?
178, "I feel bad for my corporate brothers, but it simply makes no sense to pay people $160K+ when they're working less hours than minimum wage people."
What if one of your corporate brothers billed 2200 or 2400 when times where flush, while you only billed 2000? (No idea what you billed obviously, but we're dealing in hypotheticals here.) Or people in other departments billed significantly less than that? That past production doesn't mean anything?
178, I guess what I'm saying is that you (presumably) didn't have a problem with lockstep when it was working to your advantage (when other people were subsidizing you rather than vice versa).
Of course, maybe you billed 2400 every year. Again, I have no idea, but we're dealing in hypotheticals, starting with your post.
The pay cut to minimize layoffs--good policy--for me, the firm, the client?Firm had an opportunity to evalute its service offerings, strengthen profitable practice areas, jettisone non=performing partners and associates. ..Instead, the policy reads like a new government social welfare program to keep as many people employed as opposed to good business practice.
Sure I could still put food on the table, pay the bills, take care of the family, etc. My motivation is zapped and clients beware padding will be inevitable.
Laid off first years will be hired again. Everyone is aware of what's happening. Firms will happily use them them at a low salary when the time comes. There's no stigma. Just too many lawyers and not enough work. Nothing more than that.
Which firms are the best/safest in Chicago?
Katten is a dogshit lawfirm. Lest anyone forget, it is the cobbled together product of the old mediocre Katten firm and the collapsed, excrable Rosenman & Colin. The good news is that most of the Katten partners in New York (who are mostly Rosenman survivors) have experience with gutting a firm to eke out a barely subsistance existence. But if I was an associate or income partner I'd be looking over both shoulders right now.
Former Katten guy here, so my comments are based on how things were a number of years ago and from what I hear from people I still know at the firm.
That being said, working at Katten is like swimming with sharks. It is a big firm with a smaller firm eat what you kill mentality. Partners in different departments (or subsets of the same department i.e. white collar v. securities lit) will intentionally avoid giving work to a partner, even when that person is the most qualified, for fear of losing the client. There is very little teamwork with people outside your group. While there are always exceptions, most attorneys will do whatever they can to limit you having direct contact with "their" client. This is an important distinction, because in contrast to most larger firms Katten does not have real institutional clients. Generally clients are treated as a particular partner's client and not a "firm client". People are only out for #1 (which isnt always bad), but they will go through you, around you, or wherever they need to go to take care of themselves. Associates are treated no different than copiers, fax machines or any other piece of office equipment.
A couple people have asked how the offices outside of Chicago are percieved by the Chicago office. I dont know where that comment about them being "winners" comes from. Maybe that poster was being sarcastic? In fairness the LA office is considered decent, but at the end of the day Chicago looks down on the other offices, especially NY. That merger was a disaster from the start. It should be telling that for most significant matters attorneys from Chicago would fly to NY rather than have NY attorneys handle the work. Obviously there are some decent attorneys at the NY office, but those people arent the legacy Rosenman folks. My impression, which I think is spot on, is that the feeling in Chicago is if you want something done right you cant trust it to the NY office.
Anyway, just some thoughts.
188: I had a callback at Katten as a 2L and found the atmosphere you described to be almost palpable - even to a naive, know-nothing 2L. The two associates who took me to lunch literally seemed dead behind the eyes, and trying to coax a personality out of either of them was a truly strenuous intellectual task.
90--We outside lawyers--especially plaintiffs' lawyers who sue BigPharma--love dumbass/cheapass in-house lawyers like you who want the know nothing, most inexperienced outside counsel doing "first run document review" to determine which documents are significant and insignificant. Please keep up the good cost-saving work!
190 is either an idiot or an NSP/income partner trying to justify his inflated time sheets.
First run document review (relevance and privilege) is really, really easy and can be done by 1st and 2nd years without much, if any, hand holding. Particularly when you're spending days looking at pictures of people's cats.
-Signed a 2nd year reviewing documents.
190 is either an idiot or an NSP/income partner trying to justify his inflated time sheets.
First run document review (relevance and privilege) is really, really easy and can be done by 1st and 2nd years without much, if any, hand holding. Particularly when you're spending days looking at pictures of people's cats.
-Signed a 2nd year reviewing documents.
Comment removed by moderator.
193 - you don't know what you are talking about.
193, Interesting question. 194- I think he/she does.
What is new?
195 is not right
question remains: did cL get laid off?
191/192--Imagine, a dumbass 2nd year convinced he needs no hand holding--how novel. P.s., you only have to hit "Post Comment" once, genius.
-90
Is anyone troubled by the extreme paucity of didactically informed musical instruments?
191/192, here. I was sooooooooooooo distracted by all of these LOLcats pictures that I must have push send twice. Oops.
I guess this justifies having two income partners re-review these 1200 useless e-mails I read today that Mr. Meanie Bo Beanie Plaintiff's attorney will never, ever see since he failed to include LOL cat pictures, recipes, Jesus oriented forwards, and of course (my favorite) chain e-mail that must be forwarded to 1,000 people or some poor, poor little girl will just drop dead in their discovery requests.
Asshole.
Another former Katten associate here. 188's assessment is on target. And the non-Chicago offices are no more than an afterthought.
Anyone else see no change in their wage? I totally did not meet any criteria (unless there is an awesome criteria) and yet my wage went up slightly.
Maybe I won't leave.
No, I have dropped by over $800. Memo to firm - once things get better, and headhunters call, I am leaving, and so are most of my group. Also, I do not believe income partners have had any cuts in overal pay - explain that to me.