What is the word on Hunton and Williams?

Even the areas of practice directly related to the meltdown suck and will suck worse soon because there just isn't any money anymore.
Where does the money to pay for bankruptcies and foreclosures come from? Parties with the cash and will to buy the remains, and they're gone!
As for llitigation - good luck finding that endless funding for discovery - it's gone too...

Is it really possible that March could be going out like a lamb? I hope so...

Any female lawyer that goes barren working for biglaw on the weekend deserves it.

Note to editors: Posting Lawshucks early on Saturday is a good thing. It gives people something substantive to comment on, since the last Friday night post is usually something ridiculously frothy.

What's going on at Milbank?

P.S. Of course, it doesn't guarantee that the comments will be substantive. (5 = misogynist who's still drunk from last night.)

What is going on at Schiff Hardin? I saw a post saying that there have been stealth layoffs of 15-20% of associates.

Any news from Milbank?

Milbank: no mass layoffs, but incoming 1st years are going to get bumped. Originally just until Jan '10, but now the debate is whether they should push some to Jan '11 (hence the delay in a decision).

Any news from Schulte? Safest firm?

Big announcement from Milbank coming next week. Deferred incoming associates until March 2010.

Any layoffs planned at Milbank?

11 - How do you know this? Do you know when they will tell us? And how will they decide who to bump to Jan '11?

I can confirm the Schiff layoffs. The managing partner has been going around saying how disgusted he is by the layoffs being done by other big Chicago-based firms, while doing the same thing, but without acknowledging it publicly.

In fairness, it may be smart management, since absent a press release from a firm, layoffs seem to go unreported.

What is up with Fried Frank

Is the Milbank deferral thing true? PLEASE someone confirm or deny.

18 - yes, true. Heard it from a partner.

11 - Are summers going to be shortened?

19 - hear anything from your partner regarding layoffs at Milbank?

@20 -- Yes, they're going to cutoff the feet of anyone under 6', and anyone over 6' will have amputations below the knee. It's much quicker than giving everyone hunched backs by working them to death and depriving them of sunlight and good nutrition.

19 is full of shit. The partners at Milbank would never reveal that kind of info. From what I understand the incomings are to start in October as planned.

Ok -- the honest truth -- everyone at Milbank is in the dark and most thought we were going to get some sort of announcement this past Friday. My guess is that we'll hear something during the next week. What will be announced . . . who knows. My best guess is that Milbank will mimic its perceived "peers" (i.e., large NY based law firms) with no major layoffs and a deferral program.

Fuck well they should get on it already, because making us wait is just torture.

just rememberbig law is not for everyone. we can all pretend these are economic conditions layoffs; but don't we all know that producers are not standing on the curb?

just rememberbig law is not for everyone. we can all pretend these are economic conditions layoffs; but don't we all know that producers are not standing on the curb?

Have there been stealth layoffs at Milbank? Frankly, the firm is not as strong as the group which they consider peers and I can't imagine that the highly leveraged staffing levels are retainable.

LOL @ 23... keep drinking the kool-aid, bud. Lets others get a head start on their job search.

26/27 - shove it. As a fourth-year who's only ever done corporate work (M&A and securities offerings) for institutional clients (some of whom don't exist anymore, and most of the rest of whom are sitting on their cash), tell me how the hell I'm supposed to become a "producer"?

I did everything right: top law school; big firm job; active at the firm; gave up my nights, weekends and vacations on short notice to make life easier for my superiors; schmoozed with clients; entertained summers; published articles (of course, receiving credit less often than not, but such is par for the course). And what did I get? Laid-fucking-off.

I felt "in" at my firm, too. We were even explicitly told that there would not be layoffs as soon as 6 weeks before it finally happened.

I repeat: Shove it. There are lots of good people who did everything right who are now looking for work because they trusted the system that had mostly worked until now. It is despicable that firms are attributing any of these layoffs to performance.

Gibson LA did some attorney layoffs last year (it might have been only in slow transactional areas) -- I don't know why it has not made ATL. There are rumors regarding Irell, but I know they are now looking to hire laterals, so I don't know how credible they are.

"but don't we all know that producers are not standing on the curb?"

Prediction:

1. You consider yourself a "producer."

2. Like most associates, you're going to one day find yourself standing on the curb.

Not a prediction, but a basic fact:

Law firms are laying people off at a much greater rate than they have in years if not decades. They are doing this because, along with most other business in this economy, the amount of business they're getting sucks. To not call them "economic conditioned layoffs," is to rob the term of any meaning.

30--time to shift gears, take control of your situation, and seek and develop opportunities. You might wind up the better for it, as opposed to being a specialized minor cog in the biglaw machine. And before you lash out at me, I am doing this very thing and am happier overall.

33 - That's what I'm looking to do, thanks. Proving to be a bit easier said than done up until now, but I still have a bit more severance money to keep me going.

I didn't mind being a cog in the machine for the most part, but to think that anything is going to happen in the next 6 (?) months that we're all re-hired is crazy.

Good luck to all (even 26/27).

- 30

30/34 - you did "everything right?" Poor baby! Best of luck!

@30: You obviously still have a bit of growing up to do. Maybe you'll have more time for that now.

Tons of Dechert first-years laid off and already sent packing . . . what a week

"Things are either quieting down or it's just the calm before the storm. We suspect the latter."

And the needless fear mongering continues. It is definitely the former. Don't be a dumbass.

"It is definitely the former. Don't be a dumbass."

I'm not going to say the latter is based on any concrete evidence, but what is there that makes it "definitely the former"?

Amen, 30. You articulated what so many bright, ambitious, hard-working transactional attorneys are going through right now. Stay strong and ignore all the d-bags with their lame, negative posts. I'm sure that you will have the last laugh.

38 - Fact is, the worst is yet to come for the likes of ATL. It thrives in the boom, when bonuses and pay raises are all the rage, and in the bust, when layoffs threaten even the most secure. We're about to enter a long period where neither will be particularly newsworthy. And with it, ATL's pageviews are about to take an enormous dive.

While this is a bad time for everyone with a real job, it is boom time for legal blogs such as this. They see the gravy train coming to an end, and they've got nothing else to do but fear-monger.

40, if these transactional attorneys are so bright and ambitious (granted they're hard-working), why did they act like sheep and do the same thing everyone else was doing, every single step of the way?

42, not sure I get what you are suggesting that these associates should have done. Pray tell, why do you deem them "sheep"?

41 -
how can you possibly think we are now entering a long period where the number of jobs lost won't be "particularly newsworthy?"
Wow! You are quite the optimist, or, you know, just hate ATL, for whatever reason...

44 - I did not say we are entering it yet. I said we're about to. Layoffs will still be the word of the day for another month, maybe two, maybe a little more for the poorly managed firms.

But in all cases that's mostly because the law firm hiring model (the summer associate process) is such a poor one that it is very slow to react to changing market conditions, evidenced now in both boom and bust.

My point is this: What will ATL be covering a year from now? NY to 190? Of course not. Latham to dissolution? Of course not. Bonus season will be very meager this winter, and firms will be conservative in their summer programs and hiring practices. Once the bloodbath that is Fall 2009 OCI is over, ATL won't have anything newsworthy to keep up its pageviews.

MCGUIREWOODS REMAINS!

At least you guys had a couple of good years. We 3L's are doomed before we even get started. I know, I know, nobody cares about us right now, and we should be happy with whatever we get. It's amazing how quickly even first year associates forget that they too were once 3L's eager to start.

But I really don't know what to do with myself at this point.

39 -

38 here. You're right. "Definitely" was an exaggeration, but there is little indicating that some new storm is building. The storm was January through March.

43 - for example, not putting all their eggs in one basket, and developing their skills more deeply than the typical big firm transactional associate.

"I did everything right: top law school; big firm job; active at the firm; gave up my nights, weekends and vacations on short notice to make life easier for my superiors; schmoozed with clients; entertained summers; published articles (of course, receiving credit less often than not, but such is par for the course). And what did I get? Laid-fucking-off."

Is all of the above so unique? If not, it's not enough. You've seen the term "fungible" used a lot on this blog. For an attorney to be a competitor, rather than a fungible commodity, he needs to do something different than the majority. Attorneys who "did everything right, " like 30, are fungible. His sense of entitlement makes him out to be immature to boot.

-42

42, I'm just curious-- are you actually a working lawyer? Somehow I doubt it, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

I would be lying if I did not admit that it feels a bit... satisfying... to see laid-off former classmates who subjected the rest of us varying degrees of smug during law school. At the same time, I do know how it feels. It feels exactly like getting my first grade, when I realized that being smart and doing everything right was only going to put me in the middle of a pool where they ranked everyone, and then dumped the bottom 70%.

I had to learn that it's a stupid system the hard way. Now the ones who "won" in law school are learning the same lesson: Do NOT join something where there is a high probability of failure, and rewards go only to a few. It's a ponzi scheme, and it is reinforced by the same animal part of your brain that will try to convince you that one big night in Vegas means that gambling is a good way to make a living.

Any advice to suicidal 3L's?

I hate to say it, but, yeah, for the people recently laid off, you do have my sympathy, but for most of you -- there was a time when your attitude towards your classmates who didn't have a job was a lot closer to the people now complaining about you whining than you want to admit and you know it.

"Calm before the storm....we suspect it's the latter."

You really like the drama don't you MysTTTal?

52 -- Down the road, not across the street.

I got laid the fuck off by my firm. and surprise surprise, I'm a junior/midlevel corporate attorney, which means I'm a third year and completely useless and can't get an inhouse job to save my life and am about one in a million of the other qualified attorneys who were let go. yippeee!

So what should I do between now and the apocalypse? well, I started a blog. If you've been laid off, come and stop by and comment.

laidoffblog.wordpress.com

laidoffdiary.wordpress.com

changed the name...I guess I have time for it to actually document the random shit I do now...

52, things are not going to get any better for at least the rest of 2009.

But I'm assuming that you, as a 3L, at least have more flexibility than many associates with families and houses.

If so, look into a 6-month or year-long international contract gig working on a democratization or development project for a year. (NOT some make work assignment teaching English with the Peace Corps; that will only look ridiculous on your resume, no better than backpacking across Europe, and besides, the lead time is probably too long for you, anyway.)

Consider organizations like the OSCE, UN, USAID, etc., and NGOs like the International Rescue Committee, etc. I'm sure your career office can point you at a lot of websites with listings and provide you with alumni contacts. Ask the firm that dumped you for contacts at such organizations, too; in my experience, contacts are key at most of these organizations, BigLaw firms have them, and they owe you at least that much!

Such a gig probably won't pay much, but you may be able to save something from it, and more importantly, if you can get a job doing substantive work, it will look good on your resume and probably be the experience of a lifetime to boot.

53 got it.

You put your fried frank in.
You put your fried frank out.
You put your fried frank in.
And you shake it all about.
You do the hokey pokey.
And you turn yourself around.
That's what it's all about.

56, 3rd year corp here too. Laid off late last summer, they gave me 3 months where I even had to come in and sit at my desk. After three interviews the first two weeks nothing.

I ended going to the library and picking over various practice areas. I was reading variously. I had nothing to lose. I talked to people in practice areas that I thought could be done as a solo. Fuck them if they felt uncomfortable.

I used the library computer and a removable drive and downloaded 1000+ documents, briefs, regulatory filings, opinions, letters to clients in all kinds of practice areas. I took every online CLE course that had any interest, downloaded the materials, and printed them out on the firm's dime.

I am soloing now doing trademark, FDA, FCC, commercial foreclosure, bankruptcy and corporate work. By that I mean, that I have paying clients (some from the firm) from each of these areas. I might just make more than I made working for someone else.

Have heart.

Be strong. Be brave. If you are a boy, do not be afraid.

Don't expect layoffs from Winston & Strawn--- heard from more than one partner that the firm is absolutely capable of weathering this economic slump. Winston has *NO* long-term debt and has prepaid its lease in Chicago.

All incoming 3Ls axed from Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck.

Seyfarth is #1 in Toxic Torts.

Hopefully I'm preaching to the choir here, but, whether in a BigLaw job or anywhere else - spend much much much less than you earn.

Conceive of money not as a means to plasma tvs and sweet condos, but as a buffer against dependency on others (i.e., your bosses, government), events you can't control (e.g., disasters, illness, epic cratering of economy) and shit you don't want to put up with (i.e., being able to turn money down for ethics without starving your kids).

I know many of us have large fixed costs, by way of student loans. But, that doesn't change the basic fact that you need to spend much less money than you make to be secure (in any economy). It just makes it harder. By way of analogy, imagine a law student (or a lawyer) with lots of legitimate demands on their time (e.g., elderly parents, single mom or dad, etc.). If they want to succeed in law school (or practice), they're going to have to find the time to do so. Period. The fact they have other demands on their time doesn't change the fact that to pass the bar they have to devote a lot of time to studying. Period.

If you want a nest egg of emergency savings to buffer you through times like this, you need to find the savings. Period.

This is an issue of personal responsibility.

I'm a sr. associate in a transactional practice at a firm that has gone through 1 round of lay-offs. The experience sucked and still sucks, even though I came out the other side and am grateful for that. I never truly freaked out, though, because I've saved enough money in 7 years that, if push came to shove and I got college-style frugal, I don't need a cent of income for 2 to 3 years. My parents didn't pay for my undergrad or my law school and have certainly not helped me out since then. I've been frugal: a third of my income is taken by the govt in taxes, a third is saved by me and a third is spent. 80% of bonuses go to debt retirement or savings.

If anyone reads this, I fully expect someone to say, "But you don't understand!!! High tuition, cost of living, blah blah blah!!!!" My answer would be...

I don't care.

And, more importantly for you, pretty much the only folks who will care will be related to you. You need to watch your own back (and front, for that matter), because most other people are busy watching their own.

Regards.

63, Are you sure you got good information, or are you being sarcastic?

63, not that I would doubt you, as you seem so knowledgable, but do not expect the Winston Charlotte office to be there in 2010.

Ot the K&S office. Certainly not the Dechert office. We worry about the MB office as well as the KS office.

68,

Where are you getting your information, not that I have any reason to doubt you?

66 - excellent. You're not preaching to the choir, however. Most here feel entitled to plasma TVs, sweet condos, etc.

42/49 - You're an idiot.

By his own admission, the guy's a fourth year. He's basically still learning the practice of law, for christ's sake. Sounds like he just got caught in the wrong practice area.

52 - The suicide jokes are neither original nor funny.

61 - Well done. Though I'd be very careful about taking firm's work product. Obviously they can track your computer usage, and you're opening yourself up to an easy lawsuit, as well as possible ethics charges before the bar. I'm a litigator, but have started taking some CLEs (bankruptcy) and done some pro bono work (immigration) in areas outside my niche, but which might come in handy if the axe ever falls

61, I admire your initiative and sincerely wish you well. However, unless you wrote that post really quickly, your grammar indicates that you shouldn't be trusted to draft my cat's will.

Good luck.

66 - Good point, except for the fact that many of associates that have been tossed out on their asses have had all of several months to save up. But thanks for the advice anyway.

72 is the Yo-Yo Ma of douchebags.

I'm fucking wasted!!! And I hate my firm for deferring my ass.

Seyfarth Shaw may be #1 in toxic torts, but Don Barzini is #1 in masturbation forts.

holy crap, i'm drunk off my ass on a sunday morning and watching pbs 'thomas & friends', i feel like i'm tripping ftw

66 - how nice for you, but most aren't in your situation.

Is there any reliable follow-up, even anecdotal, on whether laid-off attorneys are finding new positions? While most Big Law firms took the low road and claimed that they were dumping deadwood, you would think that 1 or 2 would track their "alumni" and turn the negative to a selling point by pushing the positive message that "of the 100 we let go, X were promptly hired by other firms, confirming the value of the skills developed at our firm, blah, blah, blah." Or are the legions of dismissed lawyers dropping into the void?

73, I'm a 3rd who lives by the same philosophy. I could go 2 years on what I've saved from biglaw also. That excludes the money I've saved maxing out my 401k contributions during my years at the firm. With what we make in biglaw, it's not all that hard, even in places like NYC. For the naysayers, consider that the average and median salaries and household incomes will be multiples less than what we make as a first year in biglaw, no matter where you live.

80 again. I agree with 73 that this advice isn't as applicable to the 1st years and current law students who have been laid off/offer rescinded. I was just making the point that it doesn't take long to save yourself a cushion.

@71 -- Yes, he was in the wrong practice area, but whose fault is that? Don't put all of your eggs in one basket -- work in at least two practice areas as a starting associate. That's what I did. I'm still inmy 30's and have done lots of things in my career -- banking law, e-commerce law, government lobbying, and IP law. It's given me well-rounded skills, an ability to think across disciplines, exposure to international work, and allowed me to obtain a good in-house job that compensates at junior partner levels. Just like at craps, I spread my bets around.

82 - you can't have worked at a v 20 firm. Splitting between groups is simply not possible.

Although since you are in your 30s, things may have changed since when you started out. Now, because of the way partners are compensated, they really do not allow their associates to bill matters that don't generate revenue for their group.

80 - all of you need to stop lumping everyone into your situations. many people have mortgages, student loans, spouses, possibly children and private school tuition. unless you are single, rent, and live very cheaply, it is not going to be possible to save a 100k or so in just a few years, and it is mostly lower year associates getting laid off.

Many more layoffs will take place at McDermott Will & Emery in April/May.

Concur with 83: very hard to have multiple practice areas in most big firms, especially if you're taking about moving between transactional and litigation. That said, my firm, at least, is pretty fluid within the sections. One isn't assigned to say, the antitrust litigation group and therefore not able to work on securities cases. The exceptions are labor/employment and IP, but even them sometimes general litigators work on those matters. Sounds like 82 might be talking about different types of cases he's worked on as a litigator, as I doubt most firms have "e-commerce law" practice groups..

If you have options for picking firms (not freakin' likely right now), a factor to consider might be how fluid the sections are and how easy it is to get exposure to different cases.

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination.

Lawshucks- Could you give numbers on the total numbers of associates etc. in biglaw so we can know what is going on percentage-wise? Thanks.

83 - stop crying.

I have been unemployed since last May when I graduated from a TTT school.

I am happy to see all the massive layoff news. If I am fucked, I hope everyone else is fucked too. Yay!

82/89- you sound like bitches I fucked up the ass in my office, usually you all end up jerking your little dicks after I unload up your ass

91 - angry much?

ah, this doens't include all the stealth lay offs or "performance based" lay offs and doesn't include all the BigTex firms down there in the south (ahem, Bracewell, ahem VE) claiming they haven't laid anyone off. why do lawyers lie to other lawyers and think they can get away with it? aren't we taught to figure out what's really going on and piece evidence together?

The significance of a firm like Wolf Block folding in the first quarter cannot be overstated (I believe their year ends January 31). Their outlook must have been so bleak, that it was not worth it to those partners with books of business to try and ride out the storm.

For those who believe they are safe working in V5 or V10, my only response is that they should wait and see what's in store for them. If a firm with the bankruptcy practice of WGM is delaying start dates, you know it's bad. Oh, while I'm on the subject, anybody who believes that the deal tables are indicative of the strength of a firm's or individual attorney's practice is not very well informed. WGM sits at the top of the ladder in that area. No point in arguing about it. I am not at WGM.

The main reason for the financial dificulties that firms face is that firm collections have fallen off the table (an obvious but often overlooked point). Even in practice areas that are "billing" lots of time, the only thing that matters is what the firm is able to collect. As some have posted above, clients are cutting back on all manner of legal services, and they are trying to bring as much as they can in house. It really doesn't matter what area of the law we're talking about. And, even if the business is forced to look outside its walls for advice, clients are asking for what up until recently would have been seen as outrageous discounts. And, they're getting them.

Bottom line, Until the situation with the credit markets gets fixed--and I do not think it matters much what practice area you happen to be in--things are going to be extraordinarily difficult going forward. A lot of the more marginal firms in the AmLaw 200 may be going the way of Wolf Block, Heller, Thelen, etc.

94--

Don't forget one very important effect of bankruptcy on law firms is not only what it does to boost revenues; rather, it's also what it does for a firm's outstanding receivables. If a firm is not fortunate enough to have a retainer in place when one of its clients goes into the crapper, a firm may be stuck with a general unsecured claim. For the uninitiated, that generally means pennies on the dollar, years down the road--that is, if the firm recovers anything on the claim at all. Hats off to the 2005 Republican Congress and Administration for turning the bankruptcy law into manure. Now Obama's gotta scamble to get the shit back into the horse.

I cannot wait for Texas to become a blue state, but that day is coming.

--600 sq. ft. and a Kia in Texas.

Does anybody remember the days when you could visit the website of a firm like Skadden Arps (not to pick on them, just an example) and see dozens of job postings? Take a good look now.

For those who still think that the legal profession as a whole is immune from what's going on with the business world, you really need to rethink that position. I know. When times are tough, litigation picks up. But, as 3 has posted above, nobody has the money to pay for that kinda shit now. Contingency fees and other alternative billing arrangements are the order of the day.

85 - You got that right.

Fuck the haters. It's not "entitlement" when you expect to reap what you sow.--as in the hope that 7 years of education, loans, and opportunity costs eventually pay off. So now when it doesn't, well it just sucks because you are more screwed than you were to start with. Except of course if you are a senior associate with hundreds of thousands of dollars saved (as opposed to negative 6-figure net worth), have rich spouse/parents, or somehow start a solo practice (by the way, that guy is my hero).

So we should all agree that associates are getting their lives and careers screwed and yes we agree that others out there are too, from auto workers to investment bankers. The question is what to do now? I honestly would move back in with my parents, conserve cash, and wait it out.

Would people stop saying that Weil deferring start dates of incoming class is the ultimate sign that things must be abysmal at other firms? Although their BK practice is top notch, only a small percentage of Weil attorneys practice BK, and this is by far not their dominant practice group. In this economy, a booming counter-cyclical practice area only gets you so far – if the rest of the practice areas are in bad shape, the BK deals won’t carry the ship. Just put things into perspective and stop fear-mongering people because Weil did what it had to do.

QUINN REMAINS vigilant

Even if they allow it, no big law firm really wants associates to dabble in different practice areas because they don't build the kind of experience needed to justify billing rates that climb every year. In fact, firms will push you to specialize as much as possible (i.e., not just litigation, but bankruptcy litigation, ip litigation, etc.). Diversification of risk is supposed to be handled on a firmwide basis, not on an individual basis.

While this is good for the firms, we're now seeing how dangerous this can be for the associates. When firms were willing to carry slow practice groups through bad times, it worked for everybody. Now that they will axe people as soon as things turn south, the model is broken. If there is little added security in a full service firm, then there is really no reason for those to exist.

Best of luck to everybody.

john QUINN REMAINS an asshole

101--

94 here. My point is that there are quite a few large firms (roughly about 90-95) that do not have a bankruptcy practice on par with WGM that have problems similar to those you described at WGM. That's my point. Not fear mongering, just a fact of life.

--94

BIGLAW is crashing. We will have to revert to 1990 staffing levels to remain competitive. That means we cannot take on any new associates, which in turn means that there will be no 2009 incoming associate classes at any of the big firms. Sorry law students, but you are 100% fucked. Especially the 3L's.

Personally, I think anyone that took out 6 figure debt and doesn't have some family money to fall back on rode the short bus to and from their public elementary school. Oh wait, I get it... you thought as soon as you graduate law school they hand you your first 160k check and the keys to an SL500...not that I'm super cool, I moved back in w/ my parents too, but at least I live in the servants quarters, so I can listen to porn as loud as I want

Patrick Bateman

I mostly agree w/104. Biglaw will remain, but things may be very different in two years. Word is the next thing that may change is the associate salary structure.

There's nothing stealthy about a chimp layoff.

What is the consensus, re: firms that have already done a deep round of associate cuts in 2009? Can the remaining associates feel some security (at least until associate evaluations in late 2009) or will there be additional rounds of layoffs coming up?

As a 3L in limbo, I hate not knowing. Especially since my spouse and I are planning to relocate cross-country for my biglaw job. uncertain start dates really makes things complicated, especially since spouse doesn't have a new (non-law) job lined up yet, but has one here.

I'm afraid to sign a lease in new city -- what if I get laid off as a first year, and spouse has trouble finding a job? We never saw this coming when I accepted my offer; thought it would be smooth sailing.

The worst is not knowing... even if the worst happened, we could start doing something about it rather than remaining in limbo.

How will this affect my OCI prospects this fall?

- Bottom Half Cooley 1L Stud

109, I would reach out to your firm. Tell them that you have heard that a number of firms have delayed start dates until 2010 and that you want to know if your firm will be doing the same.

If your spouse has a paying job in your current location, it would be crazy for him/her to give notice and move cross country only to find out that you won't start pulling a paycheck for another 6 months. You should plan to stay with your spouse in your current location and then you move to your city right before your new job. Live in a sublet while you look for a place. Spend some time trying to figure out whether your firm and your job is secure before you lock yourself into a year lease and/or move your spouse to a city where he/she doesn't yet have a job. Yeah, it might suck to live apart for a few months, but lots of couples have done it and the stability/peace of mind that you aren't uprooting your life or compromising your spouse's income before you are on solid footing with your firm seems to me to be worth it.

That's my .02. Good luck.

I don't think it's fair to judge those people who don't have huge emergency funds saved up and have been laid off. Over the past few years most lawyers at big firms were living above their means. Probably about 80% of people still are now. The whole culture of the large firm is that you work hard but play hard (ie., spend lots of $$), live downtown or some other similarly expensive location, if you have kids hire nannies and send them to private school. No wonder most people are screwed now? Yes some people may have been able to save but I guarantee you they were either: 1) single; or 2) going against what everybody else at their firm was doing.

Also, 109, you are lucky that you have a spouse helping with the bills (married = potential to diversify household income streams. single = putting all eggs into one basket).

111- good advice. It is now time to buckle down, save and get out of debt so when those assholes come to tell you they don't like they way you parted your hair today and it's time to go you can say "kiss my fat ass".

Agreed 100% with 109. Not knowing about start dates is the worst. If my firm is going to defer, why the delay? They have had had weeks to decide a battle plan.

I expect I will hear next week.

63, what they say and what they do are two diferrent things. Yes, they may have no debt and prepaid lease, but I know for sure that there have been layoffs across the firm since January - affecting handfuls of people from each office - so it is under the official radar. Don't get too comfortable.

who has been laid off?

laidoffdiary.wordpress.com

come join my ranks... and share what you did today

109 - i would really try to look for a job in the city that you are currently in. I was supposed to start at Thelen last fall and have been unable to find a job. Even if the firm tells you that you are safe, i wouldn't trust it. I would try to find a job and if not you have the offer as a backup.

118 - the problem is that, because we don't know our status with our firms, it's hard to know what to say during interviews. For example, I was asked whether I planned on returning to the firm I summered at, and had no idea what to respond.

Again, the longer the firms wait, the harder they fuck their incoming associates over.

Like I always say, there's no "I" in team. There's a "me" though, if you jumble it up

LOL @ House

As a 2L who still hasn't find a job yet, should I just shot myself?

119 - just say that you decided you'd rather stay in the city where you currently live and that your wife has a really good job that she doesn't want to leave.

122,

First, don't joke about suicide.

Second, no one will believe that you're even in law school with that grammar and spelling.

If you actually do want advice, pose a coherent question, with reasonable context, and someone will answer it, as 111 did for 109.

109 -- Fascinating story. Did you think about adapting it to the stage?

66 here, circling back in response to a few comments.

General point - my original post was not meant as a judgment about anyone (I've got too many beams to remove before I can start pointing out others' motes). It was meant as a general observation of something that is economically true, true to the point of being as close to a law of physics in economics as exists: to have money to buffer against future uncertainty tomorrow, you must spend less than you earn today. This may not be convenient or fun or "fair", but it is true.

73 - excellent, and clearly accurate, clarification. Folks who've been laid-off early in their careers have not had an opportunity to save much and are disadvantaged by that. To broaden the point, no one who is out of work, at any age, can save anything. This means, among other things, that those of us who are lucky enough to have work need to be mindful that we may be called upon to help those in our family who don't. Meaning, save as much as you can so that you'll have something to give to your brother / friend / mother / neighbor.

78 - agreed on both of your points. I didn't get where I am by accident or by luck or without sacrifice. It's because I care about others that I'm bothering to spend my time encouraging folks to save in the first place. Best of luck (and use your skill, too, of course).

84 - I'm not assuming folks are like me. I'm doing the opposite. I'm assuming that the economic "law of physics" that you must save more than you earn to have a nest egg to buffer you against bad times applies to ALL folks regardless of how different their circumstances. This is not about casting judgment or assigning blame. It's about helping folks to do what they can on their own to protect themselves and those they love. As for the specific things that you mentioned (mortgages, loans, spouses, children, private school tuition for kids), all of these things are choices. Adding "sports car lease" or "country club membership" to the list would be a (large) difference of degree, but not of kind. I rent rather than own because it made no sense to buy, given the market, and the lack of job security this side of partnership. And I've taken intense professional and social heat over the decision. As for loans, I got into Yale for undergrad, but went to a state school due to money concerns. For law school, I got into Harvard, Chicago and NYU. And went to a state school due to money concerns. Children are expensive, for sure, but that just means you have to spend less on yourself when you have them. As for the spouse comment, I just don't know what to make of that. Whether he/she is in the private work force or is staying at home to keep the household hitting on all cylinders, I just don't see a spouse as being an expense or a liability on the balance sheet. I don't get this at all - I'd be fascinated by a follow-up explanation. See 112 below, too.

87 - laughed out loud. I wish you were right. I'd be happier if I couldn't imagine the stuff I want to spend money on, but haven't allowed myself to.

98 - laughed out loud when I read this, too. I'm guessing you don't have any farmers in your family? If you sow corn, you can't expect to reap soybeans. But, if you sow corn, you're not guaranteed a bumper crop of corn. Trust me. Expecting otherwise is expecting something of an entitlement. I agree with you on most points, though: (1) folks are having their lives and hopes severely messed with and (2) the question is: what do we do from here? Best of luck (and use your skill, too).

112 - I'm not judging anyone, as explained above. I have swum against the cultural current at my AmLaw100 firm because it made no sense to go with it. There have been lots of uncomfortable moments, but "so what"? The folks who imposed those uncomfortable moments on me are much more vulnerable to circumstance than I am. I'll take that deal. If you can't swim against the current of your institution enough to do what is in your self-interest, you need to grow a set. Did it ever occur to you that it's in management's interest to inculcate a mindset that would lead to golden handcuffs? You're an adult. I'm befuddled by the reference to a spouse as an economic liability and single-dom being "cheap". I'm single and drop mad cash on wooing. I personally can't imagine marrying a woman who would be a net negative economically?!? Would (truly) love a follow-up by you to know what you mean. But, to get back to the real point - at heart, I don't care. And neither do the laws of economic physics. To have a buffer against hard times, you need to spend much less than you earn while employed, regardless of whether you have a spouse or any other circumstance. Just like gravity applies to both the married and unmarried (funny, that).

120 - excellent work; please keep it up.

122 - no, you shouldn't; what you should do is hit the gym and work out a little bit. At the physical level, exercise stimulates the production of chemicals that make you feel better. At the mental / spiritual level, choosing to exercise is a choice of control over your destiny and a commitment to your future that is worthwhile. Set a goal. I'm partial to running, both because it's easy to do (roads are everywhere) and very social (you can find running groups easily, including those for beginners). A 5k is an accessible race to train for. Finding a group to do something with, whether running or knitting, will help, I hope. Finally, if you're offhandedly mentioning suicide here, you need to directly mention it to your best friend or closest family member. Try, "Pops, I'm having these thoughts and they keep coming back and I want to tell you, here they are, I'm thinking about suicide." If you're brave enough to kill yourself, you're brave enough to have that conversation with your Dad (or whomever).

I wish all of you the best of luck. And encourage you to use the formidable skills and intelligence that you have to get through this. With the "this" in question being a historic shitstorm of bad economic stuff and circumstance. If I were a betting man, and there was a market where I could bet, I'd put my money on you.

Regards.

126 -- I find your interest interesting.

126 has WAY too much time on his/her hands... wtf

126- That's called a vicodan interest high. Happens all the time. It's amazing what's not interesting when you're not high on vicodan.

84, life is about choices, including everything you mentioned and the choice to prioritize things (getting a house, having children before you are stable, sending kids to private school, taking on massive debt, etc.) over a safety net. Everyone on this board has made optional choices to get to where they are.

Everything's gonna be different when I paint my masterpiece.

- 66/126

ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?

126 - you said this:

" Attorneys who "did everything right, " like 30, are fungible. His sense of entitlement makes him out to be immature to boot."

I would just say that your advice regarding career-path choices seems wrong. All you can do is make the best decisions with the information you have--that's what he meant when he said he did everything "right". If this guy was climbing the biglaw ladder but got derailed by the economic collapse--sucks, but I wouldn't rub it in by saying he made stupid choices or seems entitled or immature. Nothing is certain, but doesn't mean you should be so risk averse that you don't try for risky goals. Trying to be a biglaw partner is a fine goal, and doing M&A and securities as a general matter was probably the best path for in-house positions as well so had a safe backup plan. I made the same decision (still have a job--at least for now) and although maybe should have become a patent litigator (or hell, a quant trader) instead, can't beat myself up about it.

Uh yeah 112. Is the gist of your post that it is unfair to judge people living above their means for not saving?

112 - what's so wrong with "going against what everybody else at their firm was doing" -- it's not like they weren't doing the work. They just weren't buying as much crap.

133,

I'm 66 and 126. Those posts (and this post, of course) are the only things I've thrown up here.

I didn't post what you attributed to me. Different dude or dude-ette said that. I don't tend to post here much, but maybe need to come up with a name to avoid this.

I agree with you, that one can only make the best decisions they can in the time they have to make them with the information then available (sounds sorta Rumsfield-ian). Corporate law at a big firm would be a pretty wise decision, at that moment in time. I made a similar decision not too long ago, in fact.

I didn't call 30 fungible. I'm basically him about 4 years down the road. I am, however, in my own judgment, somewhat fungible at work, and have recognized that and saved money because of it. I'm not in the least fungible in the facets of life that matter, though. I've spent WAY too much time and energy at work in the last 7 years (where I'm fungible) and not enough in other areas of life (where I'm not fungible). I'm personally taking a lesson from that and trying to adjust my behaviors and beliefs accordingly. It is hard. Harder than I would have thought. Maybe that's me though.

Regards.

Say hi to your mother for me alright?

- 66/126/136

66/126/136 - Refreshingly brilliant.

Kudos.

Billing guidelines of client/corporations have really gotten strict. You can't bill for this task or that task or can only bill .1 or .2 for specific activities that take twice as long or more. The worst is when clients refuse to pay for billable activities because in their opinions the tasks are clerical. Last year something was considered timekeeper work, this year the same task is secretarial.

109, you'd be an idiot to sign a lease before receiving your first paycheck in this economy, let alone to allow your spouse to leave a paying job unless you're both already at the firm and have a substantial savings cushion.

There are long term temporary housing places - plan to arrive for your new job, without your spouse, at one of those, and start looking for a place on the weekends while your SO continues to earn from the current location.

If and when (i) it seems clear that your situation at the firm is stable (including at the very least hitting billing targets for every month for several months upon arrival), and (ii) you have worked long enough or earned enough to be eligible for unemployment under the rules in the target jurisdiction, and preferably also saved at least 6 months at your realistic burn rate, then AND ONLY THEN can your spouse reasonably leave their job voluntarily in today's world.

Otherwise, you risk your spouse having quit voluntarily and not being eligible for unemployment, and you getting fired after a month or two and not being eligible for much or anything either, and thereby both being unemployed, ineligible for at least that component of public aid, and with a lease you can't pay. And when your landlord hits your credit, there go your future job prospects too.

Be smart, you can't always have what you want right this second - you can make it work long distance with the spouse for a little while, it'll suck but not nearly as bad as the possible outcomes of taking a stupid risk to avoid a little while apart. Remember, financial problems contribute heavily to or cause a huge percentage of divorces - be strong, don't take an enormous risk to avoid a little short term pain.

-- Saving 25% of take-home in SF (and not 66 either)

Hi folks. I'm an older attorney who has a solo corporate practice in New York. I worked at Big Law firms for 8 years and then in house. I don't really need to tell you this, but the things happening at big firms right now are unprecedented. These firms simply wouldn't be doing this stuff if they thought that business was going to snap back. It seems there is a big shift going on in the demand for the kind of legal services that big law has provided over the past decade. A lot of those services were based on the ready availability of cheap credit, and the willingness of everyone to accept a lot of leverage. It doesn't seem like that kind of credit, or acceptance of leverage, is coming back any time soon. I mention this not to throw salt into wounds, but to point out that young lawyers need to think about what kind of legal services are likely to be in demand going forward if, as it seems, we are moving into a different era. Also, one should give some thought to the kind of organization best suited to deliver those services. I think what's happening now in investment banking provides a guide to this. Many big IB firms are seeing talent moving off to smaller, advisory firms, where people provide financial services rather than leverage the firm's assets. I see big law firms moving into a decade where the demand for what they have done over the past 10 years is diminished. In its place will be demand for specialized advisory services. In particular, the need for financial regulatory attorneys will be huge.

109--leave your spouse in your present city. Throw your tent on your bike and bike across the country. You can either live in one of the tent cities springing up around the country or, if you want to live dangerously, rent a campsite for $8 or so a day.

When you find out that your start date has been pushed back to 2015, or maybe even 2020, and you will get a $2000 stipend to hold you over until then, you can pack up, bike back to your current city and rejoin your spouse. Maybe your spouse will have managed to save up a few bucks.....................

As for BigLaw--it will survive this current mess. The question is in what form. Well-diversified firms will retrench at a smaller level. Litigation-heavy firms will be the least touched, while those with an emphasis on transactional practice will take a bath. While I cannot predict which firms, more failures/dissolutions are imminent. In this case, those with good books of business, and their chosen cronies, will make out OK. Those in a practice group coveted by another firm will also come out in decent shape. Those in neither category will be totally screwed.

As for client, many of them are moving to smaller firms which chage much lower rates. With a handful of exceptions, a lot of these clients aren't going to jump back to paying $800 or more an hour anytime soon. BigLaw will have to retrench--i.e. cut partner and associate pay, even for the bigtime rainmakers who insist on holding onto their big paychecks right now--to survive this adjustment.

140 - How are you saving 25% of take-home in SF? I'm not saying that it's not possible, but I'm not doing it, and a rough inventory of work and law school friends indicates that they're not either (some still live it up like it's 2000/2005, some have a non-working spouse and kids, and others bought the most expensive condo that they could (which would now cost 33% less)).

Do you not have a car or a parking spot? Live in the TL, Outer Richmond or East Bay? No student loans? Just curious.

141 - Great points, thanks. If only I (and other class of 2004-2006ers) had known before diving head-first into M&A/PE work. Need an associate?

Listen up bitches. You only need two things to be a shit-faced-happy lawyer. 1) Have your own clients. 2) Spend less than you make.

If you have those things you will be bullet proof; and happy. It's lights out men but go to sleep thinking about our run in the morning. I've got a new drill tune and it goes like this:

This is my client (hoisting rifle)
This is my fund (grabbing wallet)

This is for fightin'
This ain't for fun

WILL BAD CREDIT COST ME MY OFFER? HOLY SHIT!!! I'VE BEEN LATE ON A FEW CC PAYMENTS@!!!!

There is much wisdom here by 136, 141, and 143. Oh, and of course 127.

I truly have been blessed with being able to find a great website that has so much information about Mesothelioma. Everyone hears about this deadly disease on the television but how many of us really know what it or how it was spread. That is why I strongly recommend anyone to check out the links below for a wonderfully detailed website that I have truly enjoyed reading.

Alabama Mesothelioma

Alaska Mesothelioma

Arizona Mesothelioma

Arkansas Mesothelioma

California Mesothelioma

Colorado Mesothelioma

Connecticut Mesothelioma

Delaware Mesothelioma

Florida Mesothelioma

Georgia Mesothelioma

Hawaii Mesothelioma

Idaho Mesothelioma

Illinois Mesothelioma

Indiana Mesothelioma

Iowa Mesothelioma

Kansas Mesothelioma

Kentucky Mesothelioma

Louisiana Mesothelioma

Maine Mesothelioma

Maryland Mesothelioma

Massachusetts Mesothelioma

Michigan Mesothelioma

Minnesota Mesothelioma

Mississippi Mesothelioma

Missouri Mesothelioma

Montana Mesothelioma

Nebraska Mesothelioma

Nevada Mesothelioma

New Hampshire Mesothelioma

New Jersey Mesothelioma

New Mexico Mesothelioma

New York Mesothelioma

North Carolina Mesothelioma

North Dakota Mesothelioma

Ohio Mesothelioma

Oklahoma Mesothelioma

Oregon Mesothelioma

Pennsylvania Mesothelioma

Rhode Island Mesothelioma

South Carolina Mesothelioma

South Dakota Mesothelioma

Tennessee Mesothelioma

Texas Mesothelioma

Utah Mesothelioma

Vermont Mesothelioma

Virginia Mesothelioma

Washington Mesothelioma

West Virginia Mesothelioma

Wisconsin Mesothelioma

Wyoming Mesothelioma

People really need to pay attention to what 139 is saying.

144 -- 25% of take-home is very realistic in any market. I'm in NYC and I save about 25% each month on average and that is with a family to support and we live very comfortably. Stop living high on the hog.

Gotta love Biglaw, it's 5am and I've spent my entire weekend at work. Where are the in-house jobs when you need one??

152 - Be thankful that you haven't been laid off. In-house openings are getting literally 100's of resumes right now.

I believe 146 said it best though.

109: I agree the worst part is not knowing. But what can you do. I graduated last May and had my start date pushed back to January. I have a spouse and a newborn and two-year old. We waited till the absolute last moment to move, as both of us were giving up jobs for the Biglaw salary. We were given the "sure, your job is absolutely safe. Come on down, here's money for the move, blah, blah, blah"

We took the risk and moved. Six weeks later...ka' boom...laid off with 60 other associates. Moral of story...believe nothing your firm says and, in this economy, assume the worse will happen. As other's have said, make sure your wife keeps her job and stays in the other city. Tell her to suck it up...its not an ideal situation, but neither is both of you moving and then neither of you having jobs. The firm is not thinking about your hardships right now...they are thinking about stemming the 20% drop in profits.

So though you would rather them tell you something about your start date, the point is that whatever they tell you is not really anything to bank on anyways. The reason they are not telling you is b/c they just don't know what to tell you. If you can find something right now with a firm that is hiring cognizant of current economic conditions, you're probably safer there. It might be at a salary that is $40k less, but remember that whatever they are paying is more than the $0 you'll get paid when the Biglaw Firm lays you off.

Hope it works out better for you than it did for me.

66/126 - Nice comments. Dave Ramsey would be proud. :)

The one good thing about this economy is that during the next boom time (that is if we don't go off the cliff into full blown socialism) people will actually save up for the rainy days because they WILL come again.

Those of you who think that everyone else owes them a living because of what school you graduated from or what career path you chose - will you be ready?

Substantial cuts coming at Gibson Dunn later this week - you heard it here first.

109, your situation is a hard one being faced by many incoming associates. I would echo others in saying that it is probably best not to move your family. Crash at a buddy's place in the new city for a month or two if necessary. Another option is to get a smaller rental off of Craig's list. Many people renting something on their own will be willing to give you a short lease or a month to month lease without you being on the wrong side of the concession game that the rental apartment buildings play.

I say this because you are looking at the situation from the outside with no real information. Get there and get a feel for how much work you, your classmates, and the current associates have (both within your specific practice group and within the office in general). Develop relationships with associates you have met before or new relationships. After you get to know each other, it will be easier for them to open up to you and give you their sense of the stability of the firm. Figure out if the firm has done layoffs, how many rounds, to what extent, severance packages, whether they have been above the board or stealth. All this is information that will help you made a more educated decision (though to be truthful none of this is a guarantee and you won't be able to get the inside information that management has, but making a decision off of some information is better than making the same decision off of no information or what recruiting/human resources tells you). Just be causal about feeling others at the firm out, not neurotic. Hope things work out for you.

All this layoff news makes me glad I'm a doctor.

61 - your message was great to read. I am preparing for the same situation and waiting around for my resume to rise to the top of another BIGLaw firm is not an option. Glad to see someone else is working in the plan I have for myself - definitely appreciate knowing that my Plan B can actually work. Thanks for posting (oh, and no, I am not 61 for the haters out there).

144 - Easy. I drive an 8 year old pickup truck with no car payment, have no credit card debt, and rent on the Peninsula rather than in the city (albeit 50 meters off the water - I could probably save almost another grand a month by moving a mile inland but even without living in the city, I consider my place splurging).

Living in the city is a luxury, and luxuries are fine, they're good, we have hard jobs and earn it, but if you're not saving substantially, you're spending more than you can afford to.

This is the key - you must not think of your entire income as the monthly wad. Put 25% of your take home (at least) in an emergency fund, and the rest is what you have to spend, period, no exceptions other than REAL emergencies. I've only come by this philosophy in the last couple of years, but I now have 6 months burn in the bank, without cutting back on lifestyle, so that if I got unexpectedly fired, I could cut back and turn that into a year. You can do it too, and having that cushion feels great.

Last

not last.

161 - i hope it's 25% in addition to any 401k contributions or any other retirement planning...also in addition to actual savings or amount put aside for buying a house, condo, etc. right?

163 - Aside from 401k, which gets another big chunk of gross, of course. But in addition to other "actual savings" from net as you put it, no.

I guess I'm feeling like that's just optics though - long before the housing market bottoms (absent hyperinflation caused by recent government stupidity, but that's another thread), I'll have way over a year or perhaps even two of burn in the rainy day fund and could pull from it for a down payment, while never allowing it to drop below 6 mos.

Are you suggesting that 25% plus 401k contributions is insufficient, and that I should really be saving, what, 40 or 50% of my take-home? (I know I *could* do even more, maybe 40% without drastic change, but I'm feeling like banking 25% beyond retirement funding already puts me in a better position than most, even most here, and WTF, if saving as much as the average American takes home every month, over and above maxing out a 401k, isn't enough to account for both buying a house and a rainy day fund, then we're all screwed...)

-- 140/161

haha. 163 here. no, i was just pushing it to the ridic. b/c if not, then we're all screwed. i do believe 25% + 401k is enough in the climate. however, once you have your 6-8 months (or more) of emergency funds, i do think you can put those funds away in regular savings (not the market!) for a housing purchase...yes, even in SF.