Second.

"The world of large law firms...has changed forever."

This is exactly what firms thought during the boom. Note to attorneys - the economy is cyclical, the economy will rebound and your services will once again be in demand. Jesus, the shortsightedness is unbelievable.

Whatever it takes to ensure partner profitability. Jerks.

Can't see the cutting edge? That's because it's at your throat.

One day notice? And I thouigh Kyle's mom was a b*tch. These guys are total assholes.

I just went from 6pm to midnight.

Another non-peer firm that has swallowed Obama's pill of change and hope. This non-peer firm at least realizes that the world of the legal profession has changed forever. Good riddance to the escalating costs of associate compensation and benefits. This change could not have happened at a better time. Every year I grew disenchanted about the quality of lawyers that law schools produce. For the past 10 years, the quality has been pure garbage. Our clients noticed as well. Today's lawyers and law students deserve nothing less than the effects of the changing economy that they embraced when voting for President Obama. As for this story, another 20 terminated personnel that are feeling the impact of Obama's stimulus package.

This firm is f#cked up!!!

Is that even a real law firm?

Wombat is the ultimate TTT firm (they hire summer associates from Charlotte Law School)

The memo sounds like it was written by a bad consultant with no sense of just how surreal this garbage sounds. "New world?" Really? Do they really think they can drop a load of crap on their employees and just pull some kind of jedi mind trick to make people think its all good?

Ohnoes a shitty firm is being shiTTY

PE STFU or shorten your posts. You're like a crappy novelist. No one cares about your thoughts on Obama's policy bro.

Go back to studying for that Con Law final. A55-Hat

Is this really necessary? Yeah, I feel nauseous.

The memo sounds like it was written by a bad consultant with no sense of just how surreal this garbage sounds. "New world?" Really? Do they really think they can drop a load of crap on their employees and just pull some kind of jedi mind trick to make people think its all good?

This is not good news for me.

Predictions on the first V50 to make salary cuts?

Layoffs at Skadden Mars...

Law school and the law profession is for suckers. If I had dropped out of high school 10 years ago and learned a trade, I'd be much better off. I'd have a house, savings, no debt, and maybe even my own business. Now all I have is debt--mountains of debt, lost opportunity, and no career prospects. See you guys bread line.

I trust that law schools will begin charging less tuition to reflect the lower expected salaries for graduates.

This shows very clearly that with salary cuts will come increased hours - they just won't be billable anymore.

Weebles Womble but they don't fall down.

Weebles Womble but they don't fall down.

20 - you would also beat your wife and huff paint on the weekends. Thank you parents for forcing you into a respectable profession - slap them for saddling you with the debt.

If I were a laid-off associate there, I would have to think about bringing a reliance action (ie, promise or estoppel) against the firm. It seems to me that if I could demonstrate, via Restatement 90, that I had reasonably relied on their representations for full employment, then I could probably recover some lost salary.

26 must be a 1L. Shut up 1L.

26 - Its called at will employment. Study that contracts outline harder.

I've never heard of this firm. But, yes, I do believe that this will be the model approach that many law firms I've never heard of will take.

I've never heard of this firm. But, yes, I do believe that this will be the model approach that many law firms I've never heard of will take.

Elie - a PNG would be such a better choice than a JPG. Womble? More like wobble. Letter wobble. Yeahhhh... ((Puts on sunglasses))

This is disgusting. Wombles are supposed to be helpful and tidy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ2mJPSccvo

When it mentions the "new world" I can't help thinking back to Lord of the Flys or Brave New World.

i've never heard of this firm. Are they a large firm such that they'd know if the world of large firms has changed?

Wombie's insinuation that young associates work at home is asinine. Most of us don't have homes, we rent.

The spare room was to be a dual purpose--an office and a bedroom. I would have finally invested in a hardwood desk. The top shelf of my beautiful horseshoe shaped desk structure would have been a perfect place for mock trial trophies, volumes of the law review that I worked on, and something else suitably whimsical--maybe my supreme court bobble-head collection.

I would not have minded working Sunday afternoons from home, with my new Bose Acoustic Wave II music system playing Josh Groban gently in the background.

--Still Renting for (at least) One More Year

Womble is unrivaled in the Carolinas (for what that's worth). So, I think their frankness can be summed up as, "Where else are you gonna go suckas? Go f*** yourself."

More with less? No, you do LESS with less. Don't these assholes watch the Wire? Or are they too busy making pointless cliched statements?

@ 21

I'm not holding my breath.

Retired partner here: Yes, children, please keep up your crying and ranting, but when you get tired and ready to take a nap, please keep in mind that the folks at Womble are saying exactly the same thing that all the other firms have been saying for the past year. With the global economy here to stay, it becomes increasing diffiucult for any industry or business to maintain bloated payrolls. Doing more with less is the only thing that works. This means that only the best of the best will be given a shot at making the big bucks and wearing long pants. Yes, the economy likely will recover down the road, but the global pressure to be more efficient and effective won't diminish. The days of easy money, wine and roses, and scented diapers is close to an end. Good luck, children, because you're going to need it.

Maybe if they didn't pay above-market in Greensboro and Winston-Salem, at or below market in Charlotte, and then below-market in DC and Atlanta (and who the heck knows what they pay in Delaware, or why they are even trying to expand into that market), then they wouldn't have to do this.

38 - you should, your breath smells of anus and Lean Pockets

Looks like goodwin just announced. Just noticed information on http://lawfirmchaos.blogspot.com

Not good! Cheaped out on the deferral stipend.

The salary cuts and layoffs apply to salaried members and associates, so everyone is feeling the brunt of this, FYI.

The salary cuts and layoffs apply to salaried members and associates, so everyone is feeling the brunt of this, FYI.

More with less means more profits per partner and less pay and fewer amenities for everyone else. Greedy bastards.

"So, I think their frankness can be summed up as, 'Where else are you gonna go suckas? Go f*** yourself.'"

Yes, that's it in a nutshell. To which I say, "What the fuck is a Womble, and why would I care what it does?"

Oh, and @ the 3L calling himself "Partner Emeritus":

You were a lot more fun when you just ranted about your Maybach and the good ol' days. Honestly, nobody cares what you think about Obama, and what little humor you have in your posts is getting drowned out by the political ranting.

Doing more with less? Does this mean that partner billing rates are going to come down or just bill less? Seriously, how are they going to retain their profits? You can only slash overhead to a point.

I'd never heard of Womble either, but now I've heard they are a bunch of idiotic pompous windbags.

39 - Just curious if you actually benefited in any way from the "easy money, wine and roses, and scented diapers." Let people bitch and whine. Up until a few months ago all these children had their hopes up a nice payoff for all their hard work throughout highschool, college, and law school. They have every right to bitch and moan. They'll get over it, but it's natural to be disappointed after getting your hopes up for something that does not actually happen.

This is excellent news for me.

Hey, you lawyers are supposed to be so smart, right? That guy, John Yoo, figured out a way around the Constitution so that I could lock away American citizens indefinitely without charges or a trial, torture high value detainees, listen in on all of your telephone calls, and read all your emails. How come you people couldn’t figure out a way so that I could’ve served a third term? Cheney couldn’t help me, that dumbass flunked out of Yale Law School. Rove flunked the LSATs. Harriet and Alberto were too much in lust with each other to care. Don't you people remember how well the financial sector was doing when I was President? Don't you remember that people lined up every day outside of auto showrooms to buy cars made by the Big 3? Don't you remember how the economy boomed when I turned that $500 billion surplus into a $1 trillion deficit? That Partner Emeritus guy has got it right, things were so much better when I was President.

Are they suggesting that associates need to work longer hours, in a more intense environment, and for less compensation? That's the distinct tone I got from the memo

And on be nice to a lawyer day no less ...

Partner Emeritus could be more concise. He'd probably be a more effective communicator that way.

Honestly, I think their candor is refreshing, given the obfuscating bullshit most firms have been spouting. Partners throughout Biglaw are, I'm sure, saying in private the exact contents of this memo. At least these guys had the balls to say it outright.

50, I guess I did benefit from the happy times, but that's not the point. The point is that times have changed. I'm free of it, but you new lawyers aren't. It's the world you must survive and prosper in if you want to have a decent life for yourselves and your families. Ok, bitch and moan for minute or two, but then get to work on finding a way to prosper in the new world you find yourself in. These law firms that are cutting your salaries and withdrawing offers are kings of the hill. You won't get anywhere by crying over what's gone. Find a way to get a job with the big firm, or better yet, find a smaller outfit where you can thrive. It's up to you.

53 - even a blind man can see that you are on the right path.

I think they got it right; and they're the only firm being honest about what needs to happen.

This looks like a cut and paste job from one of the thousands of articles discussing the "death" of biglaw. It all comes back to this: everyone overexpanded in the boom because of the ridiculous attrition rate (which I have observed being 50% per class year starting from 2nd year). Firms had to bring in many more associates than they could ever need, because they had to count on losing half of them per year. This bid up the starting salaries. Now we will see firms going back to a more reasonable hiring rate, and forcing attrition just like in years past. Starting salaries will stay the same until about 2020.

Womble's bonus structure is if you bill more than 60 hours a week you get entered into a drawing for a gift card to Barnes and Noble or some crappy chain restaurant. I didn't think Womble could get any worse, but they proved me wrong.

60 - so, if I get what you are saying, those that survive this mess in big law will be better situated when compared to the next decade of layers?

Its gonna do what it do . . .

60 - so, if I get what you are saying, those that survive this mess in big law will be better situated (financially) when compared to the next decade of layers?

Its gonna do what it do . . .

Wow, shocked... speechless ...

These jerks call this "entrepreneurial spirit" and "innovation" !

These and other BigLaw assholes should not have overbilled their clients to begin with. Am i the only one that sees something wrong with saying "now that the economy sucks, we'll work more efficiently" -- that's a joke!

I hope these assholes go under, and when things turn around, they're left so understaffed that they lose their best clients

57, I hope for your sake you're the useless law-student troll you appear to be because if you're actually a retired partner and this is what you do with your time then you're a sad little man.

Just another mediocre shit firm doing what mediocre shit firms do. Nothing to see here.

Garbage firms like Wombe Carlyle (or whatever it's called) are the law firm equivalent of the sub-$30,000 annual income guy with 10 credit cards and a Benz. When times are good they can scrape by and pretend to have made it, but as soon as things go south it's obvious they were pretending.

Like the poor guy with the Benz, crap firms like Wombo are going to be a thing of the past. Wait for their C-List clients to leave for other (less) crappy firms.

57 - Considering all that it takes to get in and through law school, take the bar, and qualify for biglaw position, I am sure everyone is bitching while simultaneously trying to figure out the best way to make the best of this situation.

66- well put, good analogy
- 64

more with less = work harder for less pay so we can slash billing rates but keep PPP steady

66 - interesting theory on 'faking success' but if that were true, wouldn't they have folded a long time ago? Perhaps when the economy first began contracting?

I'm not defending Womble or whatever I'm just thinking that they are using the downturn to make noise as being the most truthful firm in a time where Firms are increasingly hiding the ball (or the Axe). The move is bold.....blackberry bold.

63 - Yes. You may not see the level of associate leverage as before (associates are leverage - fixed costs that, in good times, are major profit generators); however, the legal profession will be better off after this correction. Unfortunately, it will only become more competitive to get into biglaw and to stay there. But frankly it hasn't been that hard, relatively speaking, to get into a big firm and to stay there for 5 years - even if you knew from day 1 you weren't making parther. I think bad fits will be attrited earlier than before. Starting with second or third year.

47 - I disagree with you; PE's smack has gotten fresher since he started baggin' on Barry.

68 - I agree with you, 66 was on point.

Finally, who the fuck is this firm and why does ATL think its readership will care about it?

72 = PE

71 - that makes a fair amount of sense. Its suprising that I would get that while having a stupid avatar and quoting the chitlin' circuit

So, that leads to my next question, what happens to the supply of lawyers, i.e., lawyer factories aka schools .

Seems truthful and honest, but they need to cut that "new world" jargon. It looks like they just escaped from a badly wriiten sci-fi novel with that shit.

72: He doesn't say anything either funny or insightful; he just blindly blames Obama's economic policies for all that's wrong with the world. Without either humor or analysis he's just a whiner.

- 47

I can't stop laughing over the "helpful and tidy Wombles." Thanks, 32.

I'm a contracts professor at a highly-ranked law school. It is clear to me that summer associates would have valid section 90 claims. Please see my detailed treatise regarding this theory of recovery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoppel#Promissory_estoppel

78 - You're an idiot. We're all lawyers in here. You think by saying "I'm a contracts professor at a highly-ranked law school." and citing a Wikipedia article we would believe you. Jesus. You have a better chance convincing us UPenn State is an Ivy

I hope all these laid off lawyers get their own thing going and undercut the shit out of these greedy ass-bags

particularly the ones who post on here about how we associates just need to stop whining

Face facts, your business model is a fucking dinosaur. Enjoy getting dumped by every client you have and your gold-digging wife moving on to the next schmuck

78, you've been posting that shit all day. Nobody's biting. Stop already.

it will be interesting in a year or two when this shit firm brags about how high their PPP is compared to peer firms. (Yes I know they are in North Carolina.)

They will brag about their PPP and how great they are, but they will neglect to report that in 2009 they cut associate salaries 10% across the board.

If they came out and stated that they have also cut partner draws by a substantial amount they would have some credibility.

79,

78 here. That is not merely a wikipedia article, but also my life's research on the topic of promissory estoppel. It is by far the best researched and comprehensive resource on this subject. I can state with unrebuttable authority that summer associates would prevail on a section 90 claim. Further, I also believe that a nuanced application of products liability doctrine could yield favorable results.

78-wikipedia? Really? You might as well say you learned contracts on twitter.

Honestly- I don't think firms have gone far enough. The next step is getting rid of lock-step. There should be only 2 or 3 tiers of associates. That way- promotions are actually meaningful.

Good luck to all let go today.

83 -

79 here. Start a class action and get certified then Dhole. Do something with your 'life's work' otherwise you just look like a lying cock juggling thunder cunt.

80 - The problem isn't that the model is a dinosaur, it is that it has been improperly applied for the last 20 years. Too much expansion for the sake of expansion. Too much focus on innovation instead of dedication to the practice of law. The problem isn't the hoard of underutilized associates at the bottom of the pyramid, it is the clique of $5 million-a-year rainmakers who, like the Goldman Bastards, think they deserve to make the same $5 million whether the firm posted a 25% gain in income or a 10% loss.

Wow, that was SO FIERCE!

And classless. Listen, I like people being honest to me and telling me the truth. But there is a place for class.

Womble basically is that moderately attractive girl/guy who turns you down in the bar and rolls his/her eyes while doing so. I think we all appreciate the classier "oh i already have a boyfriend/girlfriend" or the direct though humbly spoken 'no thanks'. Now I don't get rejected that often, but I have been a few times. And I've seen it a ton of times. What happens then and what Womble did here is NOT HOT! It's douchey, self-righteous, and self-aggrandizing. Womble, please get off your high-horse, stop speaking for "all of biglaw" (which you are barely part of), and simply follow the pattern of other firms' memos. Womble has a BADitude.

Seriously, Womble just queened out. It was fierce. It was like a diva after a 3 day bender who just found out she's out of cigarettes and has to perform in 5 minutes without getting her hair and makeup done. Honestly, I don't know who Womble got to write that, but Jesus. (Disclosure, I'm gay, so don't take this as gay bashing...all my gay and gay friendly peeps have seen a diva throw a fit or two).

Not to insult Womble, but it kind of seems that they can do this because their applicant market is pretty much locked in. Now, in places where there is a real competition (see NYC, Chicago, etc.) firms can't flame-out like this because the reputation cost would be far too devastating.

Just my thoughts.

Wow, that was SO FIERCE!

And classless. Listen, I like people being honest to me and telling me the truth. But there is a place for class.

Womble basically is that moderately attractive girl/guy who turns you down in the bar and rolls his/her eyes while doing so. I think we all appreciate the classier "oh i already have a boyfriend/girlfriend" or the direct though humbly spoken 'no thanks'. Now I don't get rejected that often, but I have been a few times. And I've seen it a ton of times. What happens then and what Womble did here is NOT HOT! It's douchey, self-righteous, and self-aggrandizing. Womble, please get off your high-horse, stop speaking for "all of biglaw" (which you are barely part of), and simply follow the pattern of other firms' memos. Womble has a BADitude.

Seriously, Womble just queened out. It was fierce. It was like a diva after a 3 day bender who just found out she's out of cigarettes and has to perform in 5 minutes without getting her hair and makeup done. Honestly, I don't know who Womble got to write that, but Jesus. (Disclosure, I'm gay, so don't take this as gay bashing...all my gay and gay friendly peeps have seen a diva throw a fit or two).

Not to insult Womble, but it kind of seems that they can do this because their applicant market is pretty much locked in. Now, in places where there is a real competition (see NYC, Chicago, etc.) firms can't flame-out like this because the reputation cost would be far too devastating.

Just my thoughts.

A bunch of you people are are clueless. Reality is clients don't want to pay huge rates anymore, add that to the fact that billings are down and clients are taking longer to pay and you get what womble and all other law firms are facing. Associate salaries (and salaried member salaries for that matter) are overblown. At least womble is one of the few places that paid a high salary, and still does, but isn't a sweatshop. Tough times and tough measures, and very unfortunate for the people affected but reading most of these comments makes me sad to be in the same profession as most of you.

87/88 - Thanks for posting that twice. I didn't understand most of it, but it get the sense that your post is what we would see if ATL were a show on E!

You are all horrible people.

88 - no need to say you are gay bro, we got that from line 1.

i can't say that the womble point of view is totally wrong. but i have to ask how many people will still practice law for less money??? i mean, for lots of lawyers, its the money that keeps them there. its long hours and painful assholes that you have to deal with are not intrinsically rewarding for vast numbers of people.

people stayed for the money or for the money because they have loans, but if law falls out of one of the highly compensated areas, i wonder if people will still decide to practice. hmmmm

89 - "At least womble is one of the few places that paid a high salary, and still does, but isn't a sweatshop."

This consistently amuses me. All of the most prestigious firms are generally "sweatshops." I wonder if anyone has ever thought that the more work you do, the better lawyer you are. Read "Talent is Overrated."

i can't say that the womble point of view is totally wrong. but i have to ask how many people will still practice law for less money??? i mean, for lots of lawyers, its the money that keeps them there. its long hours and painful assholes that you have to deal with are not intrinsically rewarding for vast numbers of people.

people stayed for the money or for the money because they have loans, but if law falls out of one of the highly compensated areas, i wonder if people will still decide to practice. hmmmm

The big firms like Womble wasted too much, paid salaries that were too much, raised rates to cover costs too much, and it has finally caught up with them when clients leave and go to small boutique firms that can actually perform "More for less!"

I laugh at the downfall. Pure hubris!

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings."

Cassius in
Julius Caesar (I, ii, 140-141)

I think you are all a bunch of out of work douche bags.

I think you are all a bunch of out of work douche bags.

95 - Noone should be in law for the money. It can be a good living, but if you chase wealth you will end up like Marc Drier.

99 = Pollyanna

Motherfkers, In the words of Partner Emertus, HANG A SHINGLE! HANG A SHINGLE.

94 -- >>89 - "At least womble is one of the few places that paid a high salary, and still does, but isn't a sweatshop."

This consistently amuses me. All of the most prestigious firms are generally "sweatshops." <<

Actually as a Womble associate I can say that 89 is pretty much right. Of course all depends on the particular partner you work for but mostly this place is a pretty good place to work. I billed 1800 last year and get paid what I consider a huge salary.

What truly is amusing is seeing all the people who post here who have a bone to pick with life. either you're unhappy that salaries aren't high enough and then you bitch that law firms are evil and they work you too hard. How about we admit that everyone is complicit. Associates are stupid enough to go to sweatshops just to make a quick buck even though they know what they're getting into. firms are stupid enough to raise salaries just because everyone else is doing it. And partners are greedy enough to think that they actually deserve $1.5 million a year (and FYI that's NOT what womble equity members make).

And what do you people do? You complain when a firm offers BS and you complain when a firm tells it straight. You complain no matter what...that said a hell of a lot more about YOU than the actions of any firm out there. A bunch of them are filled with greedy people who care more about money than practicing law, but not all firms are like that and the fact that you're all so busy being pissed off and "amused" to realize that is just plain too bad for you.

I think 93 is on to something. There's little doubt that this flat out sucks. That being said, for mid-level Associates (myself included), what's going on in the legal market is somewhat of a relief.

Follow me after the jump - and by jump, I mean hard return.

I'm actually concerned about becoming too acclimated to the salary I'm currently earning. That may sound like a shitty thing to say for a lot of people who have been laid off - and for that, I apologize.

But the fact that firms will be lowering compensation levels for the foreseeable future makes it a lot easier to entertain exit options, even though these options aren't exactly in abundance right now.

But exiting now probably won't entail such a huge salary hit. It seems that a lot of in-house (and even government) positions will be much more competitive with BigLaw.

Or am I just a douchebag? Given the length of the post, I'm going with douchebag.

102 -

94 here. Thanks for the southern charm. It is certainly true that anonymous posting brings out the worst in people. All I was saying is that calling a place a sweatshop is dumb. Bully for you that you bill 1800 hours and make a good salary. When I was an associate, I would go between 2300 and 2700 hours a year, making probably a little more than you but not much. But here is the rub. That extra 20% more time working means that I am 20% a better lawyer than you. So who is really greedy? You, who get paid more per hour than me? Or me, who makes a little more but works harder? Who is the better lawyer?

Wow - A Big Firm telling it like it is - Imagine that!

f**k you womble. i am so glad i chose SGR over you.

f**k you womble. i am so glad i chose SGR over you.

Haha - 104 you can't possibly be serious? You measure whether one lawyer is "better" than another based on hours billed? This really is a fallen profession.

what the hell is SGR?

108 - Why not? Assuming that the work isn't repetitive nonsense, why wouldn't a lawyer that practices 20-50% more per year be better? If you were to practice playing the piano 50% more than your colleague, wouldn't you be better?

C'mon, is no one going to recognize Elie? Fuck it, I will. Great post, dude. Had me laughing out loud in a couple of places.

104-"But here is the rub. That extra 20% more time working means that I am 20% a better lawyer than you. So who is really greedy? You, who get paid more per hour than me? Or me, who makes a little more but works harder? Who is the better lawyer?"

Actually the rub is that you're confusing being a good lawyer with being someone willing to work too much. I have no clue what quality lawyer you are, and you don't know that about me, and the hours we bill say absolutely nothing about that particular issue. Nor does billing 1800 vs. 2700 (are you insane?) mean that you're a harder worker necessarily, it just means you worked hard in an environment that apparently required it. I worked hard too, 1800 billable (not total) is hardly a walk in the park. We can both pat ourselves on the back. As to who is greedy... Well gee, I don't know, I took a pay cut today and sucked it up because I realize that I make more money than 95% of the people on this planet (didn't google that but probably not far off) and I work hard for it. I'd work for a lot less than this b/c I like my job but the system is such that associates get paid this insane money and partners make huge salaries. You took a job for a huge salary too. Please don't tell me that the fact that I work hard at a humane place while you've decided to kill yourself at an inhumane one makes ME greedy. There's an inference that can be made from the difference between us and the choices we have made but my being greedy by some perverse logic is not one of them. I suppose the associate who sits in the office next to you and for some reason billed 200 hours less than you is suddenly greedy too. And then next year when you bill 2000 I guess you will have become a greedier version of yourself too.

110 - depends on how much "practice" you need. i know plenty of people who are amazing lawyers that work less than most and i know just as many that are horrible that bill your 2700 hours. so, no, i don't agree.

110 - your assumption fails you.

nicely said 112

103: I agree. I have been with BigLaw for about 8 years now ... next step is non-equity partner (which, in my case, will be easy to make). However, just like associates, the non-equity (income) partners are getting squeezed. I anticipate that if compensation is reduced as some speculate, other fields and/or roles in the legal industry will become more appealing (whether such roles are going solo, in-house, government, education, or other industries). In some strange way, a reduction in salary will make it easier (psychologically) to exit this hellish place we call "BigLaw."

I suppose Womble was being honest about the labor market conditions for associate-level legal talent right now, but there was a VERY healthy dose of marketing nonsense thrown into the mix, which, IMO, more than outweighed the "straight-talk" tone of the sentiments.

how does that outweigh the straight talk? it's not like the "marketing" talk changes the substance of the message - i don't get what you are driving at 117

This may not be a great firm, but it is lightyears ahead of McKenna Long, the worsTTT firm in Atlanta.

What does it mean for a law firm to do more with less? For associates to perform various legal tasks in fewer hours? Does it mean the firm will lower its billable rates across the board? Does it mean the firm will lower billable rates for certain kinds of work? I really think if a firm wants to do more with less and be truly innovative, it should reconsider the billable hour, not just crush associates compensation.

112 - Just trying to give you a glimpse from the other side - from one of those firms that are "filled with greedy people who care more about making money than practicing law." Sorry you took a pay cut. Once this unpleasantness irons itself our I am sure you will be made whole again.

And, of course, many who bill 2700 hours a year are ... let's just say "rounding up." Not my definition of a "better lawyer."

HANG. A. SHINGLE.

Amazing that Womble talks about itself as having been unique and cutting edge in its approach, but the firm has completely failed to gain any serious traction in the big markets where it tries to compete. For example, its Atlanta office is a complete joke with no good business. If your client base is all mid-cap companies sending you unsophisticated, cookie-cutter work, not surprising that your firm has big-time fee pressure. This has no appilcation to the firms doing top-level work.

124 = bitter no-offered 3L

Implying "you are lucking to have a job" is foolish for any business. Like any profession, most lawyers are average at what they do, but there are some who are great lawyers. Those lawyers, the ones who produce and generate business, leave firms like this. They take their talent and the business they generate with them. Then you are left with a bunch of sheep who do average work and a law firm that is unable to compete in a down market. When everybody needs a lawyer, even idiots get to bill. In recessions, however, competitive advantages are all the more important. This firm is saying, we are cutting costs to offer a cheaper product, but unlike manufacturing, the product is the people. So reducing salaries with a big "fuck you, you're replaceable" is not the way to improve the product you produce. Either you paid associates more than you could afford, hired too many associates, or lost you best clients. Any which way you cut it, you fire people and reward those remaining. Otherwise, your innovation is going to fail. This action may give them some short term savings, but as soon as the market picks up, their best talent is out the door, assuming they ever had any.

Let's just hope that this does not start a race to the bottom. With most of the M&A (aside from distressed M&A), structured finance, private equity and general corporate work gone, litigation is slow, bankruptcies that are, for the most part, nothing more than liquidations through 363 sales, I fear that we may be closer to the end of the beginning than the beginning of the end.

124-"IIf your client base is all mid-cap companies sending you unsophisticated, cookie-cutter work, not surprising that your firm has big-time fee pressure. This has no appilcation to the firms doing top-level work."

I don't know what planet you're living on (apart from the high and mighty one) but you have no clue whatsoever about what kind of work womble, or any other firm for that matter, has if you're not in it. You really are living in dreamland if you think that fee pressures are arising only in instances of "cookie cutter" work. I guess you're one of the lucky ones who is so much smarter than everyone else and doing all this "high level" work that us mere mortals couldn't even touch. Why it must be amazing with clients giving you blank checks because of all your high level brilliance.

Wake up and smell reality.

all of you are turd burglars

106 - I am guessing you went to Mercer. SGR and Womble are both third tier Atlanta firms.

120--Completely agree. There are a bunch of firms out there, I think Womble is one of them (easier to do when you're mid market), that are making efforts to go beyond the billable hour that has created such distorted incentives and pressures.

"Why do I get the impression that "transformational changes" has nothing to do with having a significantly different vision of how much money law firm partners need to make in order to be satisfied?"

-

Question:

To anybody who feels that partners owe associates something, that they should be more altruistic, and that they should show loyalty towards you by taking a pay cut-

Exactly how much of a pay cut have you offered to take to prevent staff from being fired?

132: love it

103--where are you going to go? Burger & King? Long, John & Silvers? Pizza & Hut? You get my drift.

It sucks that associates are expected to work harder for stagnant pay, or even pay cuts. But this situation is hardly unique to law. As bad as the legal field has been hit, there are plenty of other areas of the economy that are really taking it on the chin.

While what Womble is saying isn't pleasant, and perhaps they could have been a bit more tactful in their memo, they are at least saying what everyone in the legal field has known for the past 6-9 months--for the forseeable future, BigLaw will need to change. It's almost refreshing to see any firm not sugarcoat layoffs, deferring incoming classes, salary cuts, etc. by saying it is a temporary measure and we will all be rolling in the big bucks again shortly.

Lean and mean - lower or flat billing rates, eliminate office services, attorneys more self-sufficient like entering their own time, outsource technology support, newest associates and paralegals in cubes, 3 or 4 attorneys to one secretary, paperless environment, don't paper files, don't overwork matters, prioritize matters and don't spend any time on the irrelevant, no out of town CLEs, don't pay for employee parking, only HSAs for medical insurance, fewer paid days off for staff.

136,

If biglaw does all that you suggest, then why would anyone with options put up with the stress of working in biglaw? I get that there aren't tons of options right now, but there will be options again sometime in the future. I know that I wouldn't have gone to law school and taken out tons of loans If biglaw was as shitty as the scenario you describe.

137 - biglaw is ALREADY all that. There aren't many perks left, and what there are are only for partners. Firms know all associates are in full-terror mode and will put up with anything, and are taking full advantage of it.

1. for those that believe womble was playing telling it like iit is in this memo, go fuck youselves. a bunch of consultant speak, pure and simple.

2. for all of you douchebags that can't imagine life without your biglaw salary...pity, you will always be middle class bitches. worry about what you make in your 40s, not what you make in your 20s and 30s. the coin you make now is chump change compared to what you can make if you're actually serious about being a LAWYER and not some monkey scribe going through yet another set of form docs.

3. to the dumb shithead who thinks he's 20% better lawyer because he worked 20% more than his ATL peer...seriously, put your hands up against the wall, spread your legs and squeeze hard. maybe, just maybe, your stupid fucking head will pop out of your ass.

hahhaahahhahahahahahahaahhaahhaahhahaahhaahhahahahahahaahahhaahahahhahahahahahahaaahhha... seriously though I'm sorry. Womble what? WTF is this piece of shit firm even doing on Above the Law? If you just got fired from here-- be happy for yourself. If you work at this place, please kill yourself now because you work for a joke no name firm. Seriously, Elie, come on. Did nothing happen in the news today?

Really though, what is this place? Is it made up? hahahah, I never thought I was a biglaw douchebag.. but I am, and Ive never been more proud of it now that I know that this sewer firm exists.

Thanks. I'm trying to figure out how to pay my student loans, mortgage and other bills on what I made four years ago while you tell me to kill myself because I work at Womble. Maybe I'll sell one of my kids. Thanks my fellow human being, you've been very helpful.

Wonder if the firms will now have to submit sealed bids for jobs?

Legal services (for corporations at least) are like anything else. When times are bad, you downgrade and pay attention to costs. When times are good, you focus on quality and results such that price is a secondary consideration.

If/when the economy bounces back, clients will stop paying such close attention to billing rates and more attention to the quality of the work they are getting - if the more expensive lawyer provides that, so be it. I don't see why everyone is acting like things have suddenly changed for good.

U gimme cheep kibble?
-Winston

Hey 135 -- I work at a larger, better firm than Womble. We already do that all the stuff you listed, except outsource technology support (we've consolidated many, many support functions in the home office), newest associates (no paralegals have offices) in cubes, and only HSAs for medical insurance. Pretty sure that nearly every big firm is doing a lot of those things too.

I wish Womble good luck, but I don't think cutting associate salaries is innovative and if they really want to be pioneers, they need to do something a lot more clever than that.

As a laid-off associate formerlly making $145k+, who also has since submitted a resume to Womble, I guess I'm one of the attorneys helping Womble realize there is good talent out there who would gladly take 10% less than whatever their former pay was. Sorry. But I would gladly take $117k a year right now.

Womble is not THE elite NC firm, unless you equate elite to having a lot of lawyers doing average work for below market pay in Charlotte.

Womble might be shooting a little more straight talk than most firms. But I guarantee they would not be talking this way unless they were in dire trouble.

Either way, these cost cutting measures had to be done. Womble could either sugar-coat it and be seen as a firm badly struggling, or they could apply the approach they took, and still be seen as struggling, but at least try to persuade its audience that its on the forefront of the "new law firm model." Regardless, womble is wobbly and the bull dog is sick.

Small firm partner here.

At this point I've read many, many resentful associate posts about layoffs and salary reductions. And I am certainly not here to defend Biglaw partners as =people=, given the high percentage of egotists, a-holes, and outright psychopaths among them.

But if you put aside for a moment the Orwellian rhetoric they put into their press releases about layoffs, and the general social ineptitude that characterizes how they inform their employees that they are going to lose their jobs, I think many of you have (or had) unfair economic expectations. Partners are business owners. They hire employees when they have lots of work, and need help getting it done. When the work dries up, they don't need so much help any more. And in this economy, clients are demanding lower fees for the work that is stil being done.

Given those pressures, the choices are lower wages or layoffs, or a combination of the two. While I would bet that in virtually every one of these firms the partners are taking a pretty big hit, I don't understand why many of you think they have a responsibility to do so. They =own= the business. Why isn't it their prerogative to have fewer people on the payroll to help them serve their customers, as in every other business?

It does seem cruel that so many people recently hired are being turned out on the streets, huge students loans and all. You can say the big firms planned rather poorly, hiring huge numbers of people before and now canning huge numbers. But i fairness, I don't think the magnitude and speed of what hit them was anticipated by anybody. A downturn in business, perhaps; a near-tsunami, no.

I departed Womble on my own terms several months ago. I'm sorry to see this, for the sake of the friends I left behind at the firm, but glad that I got while the getting was good.

Attorney salaries might be overinflated, but I can tell you from experience that they underpaid staff (shock!) and are probably quite happy to have an excuse to continue to do so. I also know for a fact that at least some of the people laid off were the same as they let go last spring - secretaries and other staff that had been with the firm for 20+ years and were close to retirement. I think that's despicable, but I'm sure they don't give a shit.

#12 - The memo reads so poorly because one of the people let go was the director of communications.

149: Most business owners, you among them, value the people they have hired, both as colleagues and friends. They take every possible step to make it through a downturn without letting go "their people." They understand the cost of bringing on a new employee, training them for their systems and educating them on their clients and business strategy. An owner, heaven forbid, might even see value in reducing their own profit in the short-term, in order to retain employees and reduce the down-the-road costs of hiring additional employees when the economy turns.

Most law firms are run by poor business people. They only see "the now." Womble is the exception, in that they appear to be doing everything, including cutting associate salaries, in order to reduce the number of layoffs necessary. Most law firms have not been doing this...they've been cutting, cutting, cutting. I understand that for some firms employee cuts are necessary to save the business. But that is different from cutting employees to maintain the owner's profit in the short term.

Womble is second tier, at best, in the Southeast. Nationally, Womble is barely a player at all. Seriously, when is the last time Womble handled any sophisticated transactional work. When is the last time Womble was selected as national litigation counsel for a major antitrust, securities, or mass tort case. Womble is a nice Carolina firm that has failed to succeed in any big market it has entered. Hardly a market leader -- and if you think other firms already have not started to reduce salaries and cut fees, you are crazy.

148- Agreed. Womble is in serious trouble. There are practice groups jumping ship in different offices. Womble is sinking and the frankness of this memo is even more proof of that

148-"Womble might be shooting a little more straight talk than most firms. But I guarantee they would not be talking this way unless they were in dire trouble."

Collections are down in all firms, that's a big DUH, but all you know about the actual financial situation of any of these places is...drum roll...squat.

153 "There are practice groups jumping ship in different offices."

Please enlighten all of us with your insider information.

A firm like this could either cut salaries (including for its best performing people) by 10%, or lay off one in ten people and keep salaries where they are. Deciding to hurt your best performers, and everyone across the board, rather than letting go your lower-performing people, is a bad business choice. Cutting salaries to everyone means that your best people will leave, and your worst people will stay. Having layoffs rather than salary cuts means that you get to pick your talent going forward. This firm made a poor decision.

Let's face it, we'd be bitching no matter what happened. If they had laid off 50 lawyers we'd be saying "oh my god, they laid 10% of their lawyers, that's horrible." If they had cut salaries for just some people we'd be saying "how terrible, they're screwing associates who can't help their situation. That's unfair." They minimize layoffs and cut salaries across the board, except for, apparently, a select few cream of the crop metrics-wise (not that they told us what those were), and we're now saying "they should have laid off more people." Am I the only one who thinks we're a bunch of idiots who have nothing better to do with our time than to rip apart any tidbits thrown our way?

What kind of firm announces to the world that its rates are too high? Any client who does not call them up this morning and demand a radically reduced and strictly MFN rate is a fool.

156-maybe its just greedy shits like you who would leave because earning $120K+++ is just not enough. If you're going to bitch about how lawyers are a bunch of greedy urchins, look in the mirror.

156 - Wrong. They did lay off some non-performers and people that were not needed thanks to consolidation, tech, etc. They then decided they wanted to keep the rest but cut costs, so they cut most, but not all, pay.

'Wombles are pointy-nosed furry creatures that live in burrows, where they help the environment by collecting and recycling rubbish in useful and ingenious ways."

"Their motto is "Make Good Use of Bad Rubbish."

I stopped there.

If you don't know about Womble, you should. They were one of the Big Tobacco firms that for years successfully stonewalled attempts to get the cigarette companies' research on how their products were killing the rest of us.

11 is dead-on correct. Womble is a shithole of a firm.

Any firm that hires people from CharloTTTe Law School over top-of-the-class at UNC and Duke (and I know at least one person they turned down from the top 10% of each) is criminally stupid and clearly unfit to run a business.

Womble is losing talent left and right because its basically run like a typical southern country club. They continue to hire non-fee generating former governors and congressman and cut he salaries of the disfavored. People who have a choice (i.e. their own business) are leaving or have left.

163 - Can you say "diversity"? Some people and some clients care (either unofficially or officially: I was shocked to hear that I client I was working for asked for what was basically a race report card of the deal team, which, not surprisingly, had consisted of almost all white males but suddenly some tokens were added as diligence bitches -- this was back when we had things called "deals").

I interviewed with Womble in DC. The best part was the cougar receptionist. Call me!

126 hit the nail on the head. Who would want to work for a firm who is this full of themselves?!?!? Those with options/ business will go elsewhere. And those who feel they are without options/ business will still be better off leaving a firm that clearly does not value them.

Apparently this place is the Latham of the South. The partners at Womble are looking their associates straight in the eye and saying "You made your choice and now you're stuck. So I'm going to turn you around, bend you over, f--- you in the ass, and slash up your back with a rusty butterknife while I'm doing it, and there's not a g-d damn thing you can do about it." Remember when the economy turns, Womble associates and law students. Remember.

Interesting thought - if they get paid on the 15th and the pay period is for the 1st to the 15th, isn't that attempting to cut pay retroactively for days already worked? (Elie makes it sound like the latter, but I won't assume that's actually the case.)

Were people's checks reduced on the 15th, or was it to be effective as of the following pay period?

An attempted retroactive pay cut, in effect a simple refusal to pay already earned salary, would be a flagrant violation of various labor laws - hopefully some of the laid off associates, or someone still there but ready to get the hell out of this sh-thole, would/will bring an action on this basis.

not retroactive

Good to hear 170. Still sounds like you guys are getting soundly f---ed though.

And now this:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202430012921
Can anyone say Titanic?

172-Old news.

SECOND-RATE FIRM CUTS ASSOCIATE SALARIES, ADMITS INFERIORITY, ACCEPTS FUTURE INABILITY TO RECRUIT TOP TALENT