McDermott Will & Emery stinks.

The wrath of an infirm economy continues to claim victims. Let us join in communal prayer and hope that the good Lord provides President Obama with the courage and wisdom to guide us out of this tsunami.

Does not look good for my start date!

FIRST - You MOFOs

Associates will be following shortly.

Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom is asking its City lawyers to take a one-year sabbatical on a reduced salary.

The US firm is offering its London associates a 12-month sabbatical on one-third of their usual pay, with those taking up the scheme guaranteed a job once the year is over.

We'll beat any advertised price or your mattress is FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!

As a corporate associate at K&E, I have averaged a 100 hrs/month in 2009 and I'm one of the top billers here! Suffice to say we are all shit-scared.

5 Dollars to anyone who can make a coherent, good faith argument that deferred incoming 3Ls will start in January, 2010 at $160k.

McDermott is nothing great, but Kirkland and its treatment of associates is truly an embarrassment to the profession. Trust me, I work with both firms all the time.

N. Wacker Stud

Doesn't an offer of termination require an acceptance in order to be a contract? Why don't the employees just refuse the offer?

"At least there will be more room for the staff that comes into work on Monday. " That was cruel to say. Fact is they used the staff help them move as I said they would do in previous comments on ATL and dumped them. That's just evil. They couldn't even wait til everyone moved over before they cut the staff. Evil.

Lay off the staff lay offs! Only lawyers matter.

@11, where do you work?

10,
Section 90.

10 - we won't be starting at all, let alone at 160k.

10 - They will start @160k - in India

...please send my $5 to me at 'guest'

22- your post is the most rediculous one on this board.

14 -- try to run a big law frim without staff and you'll see how much staff matters!

14 -- try to run a big law firm without staff and you'll see how much staff matters!

20 - Just move Milton's desk to the front.

yeah 22...wtf

K & E has probably gotten a whiff of Indian cooking.

I would never hire McDermott or Kirkland based on my experience with both firms.

best of luck to all of the affected. Hopefully you all land on your feet.

Remember when Partner Emeritus was funny?

13 -- had you been canned immediately after moving into the new digs, would that be less evil?

Kirkland is worse, trust me.

N. Wacker Stud

The "this round" link leads to a post about rumors that were never substantiated. Maybe the phrasing should be changed to "this actual round, instead of rumors like these we treated as fact."

28 - what I was trying to say love is that the did exactly that -- let the staff help the firm move and once they were moved in -- they axed them. That was evil! To clarify my other comment -- some of the people were left over at K&E on empty floors... the straglers... meaning not everyone was over there yet. So the evil is they let the staff move them over to 200 N. LaSalle and axed them. No less evil it is THE EVIL OF IT ALL.

TTT

If the economy keeps tanking like this, we'll have hookers at Logan circle again.

20 (and 21), my big law firm does just fine with no staff. Our first years do all the secretarial work, our second years handle the library and court filings, and our third years do PR, recruiting, etc. Every partner takes a turn at reception, usually once every few months, where they count their extra money in between greeting visitors and taking calls. All in all, it's a pretty good system.
--Dutiful in Detroit

what's TTT?

Geez, seems to me like Kirkland might be leaving themselves vulnerable to suit under reliance -- ie, promissory estoppel. The laid off staffers definitely have a great reliance argument here. Hasn't anyone at K & E ever read Section 90 of the Restatement?

31 - The straglers deserve to be axed. Stupid bastards lost their second g.

Does anyone think that partner emeritus is actually a 1L small section? Clearly its not all the same person. There is the afficionado of Tom Wolfe narrative stylings , there is the ranting right wing nutcase, the fashion advisor, and now the metaphor mixing prayer leader.

I think its also important to note that this guy would not, and could not, type.

Promissory estoppel? Huh? What did they promise them...that they'll get to work in a fancy new building? I hope you aren't a lawyer.

38 - Don't forget the leering homosexual parody. That personality had quite a run a few days ago.

9,

If you are billing 100 hours a month in corporate, you are not one of the top corporate billers at K&E. Are you delusional?

37 - the stragglers were attorneys, they are still there with their lost g.

More posts about Skadden please.

N. Wacker Summer Associate Stud

An asslobster says what?

39, read 36's statement more carefully - I think he is really onto something.

Is it true that if you work at Cravath for 8 years and leave to white & case , you wii become partner? after 2-3 years

Whoa, I just read section 90. There's some crazy shit in there! Those unfortunate enough to be losing their jobs as associates and staffers should definitely consider that promissory estoppel claim.

Is it true that if you work at Cravath for 8 years and leave to white & case , you wii become partner? after 2-3 years

Is it true that if you work at Cravath for 8 years and leave to white & case , you wii become partner? after 2-3 years

34, You joke, but that is basically how you get on without staff. We sacked a bunch of secretaries last month, so now my secretaries has to deal with two very cranky partners and 3 associates. So I have to do my own binders and line edits if I want to get them done in a timely fashion. If I'm doing that for a client, and it can't wait, I'm billing it. So now we are offering less "value" to the clients, or writing off more time: pound foolishness. Can't ask the paralegals, because OT is verboten, as it is for secretaries.

Yeah! Promissory estoppel will work wonders in this case, right!? I mean, all you need is for the firm to have created a reasonable expectation that the staffers relied on some promise to the staffer's detriment.

So where is (1) where is the promise, and (2) where is the detrimental reliance, 1L contracts boy?

Good luck with that argument. Maybe you should stop looking up ATL and focus on studying for your contracts final.

50, paying less in staff salary and billing more to the client. Sounds like a winning strategy to me. Where's Partner Emeritus when you need him?

rofl at 51.

-47

not the kirkland news I was hoping for today.

start dates. now. please, people.

So, this is the second or third round of layoffs at Kirkland?

@43 - I would advise you to pay less attention to what transpires here and more attention to your finals, son.

N. Wacker Stud, who may or may not be on the Summer Associate Committee

You should listen to that N. Wanker dude, maybe if you study hard onto graduation, you can collect a deferrment too.

Mandatory arbitration policy went into effect last year.

Regarding the issue of promissory estoppel, I can tell you that it has not gone unnoticed at the firm level. There are some potentially troublesome situations involving revoked offers and deferred start dates, but probably not at a level to support recovery in most circumstances. Nevertheless, it's been of sufficient concern (along with fraud in the inducement) to commission internal research for guidance. Clearly not an issue to reject simplistically or out of hand.

There is no theory in contract law which, when adapted by an Illinois court to the identity of the defendant, could defeat anything K&E has done or might in the future do to any employee or non-equity partner. PI is a little different: some acts against employees by K&E agents would have been considered tortious even by an Illinois judge, but where these acts have come to light the firm has found a way to make things go away very quickly.

wow. can someone please get the joke "Regarding the issue of promissory estoppel ..." New to these parts?

60, the comment by 59 was not intended to refer to K&E. It related more generally to the circumstances of firms with a presence in NY but offices in a number of other jurisdictions including NJ.

As an incoming associate at (what was once) a respectable firm, I am disgusted by the some of the comments from associates. You think that you are more deserving of a job (and a high salary) because you graduated 2-3 years earlier than me? I promise you, some of us are fully capable of hitting the ground running; we can learn how to do whatever it is you do within 2-3 weeks. So enough with the "3L's are useless" garbage. We are no more useless than you were 2-3 years ago. And some of us are better than you.

Firms need to come clean with their 3L's. This deferral shtick is just postponing the inevitable. They continue to sweep the issue under the rug. I am well aware that, in the 'new economy', there is simply not enough work for all of us. Some incoming associates will need to be cut. We are all very much aware of this fact. So why string us along for 6 months or a year if the end result will be the same -- some offers will have to be revoked.

Personally, I will jump at the first job that looks half-decent and will likely never join BIGLAW. I am just so bitter about the whole scheme, and this is before I even start. And yes, some of us will have options.

I truly believe that, after the economy recovers in 2015 or so, the best and brightest will no longer see BIGLAW as a good option. The firms will end up losing out on the best talent. Yes, I know (you fucking jackasses) that there will always be people willing to sell their soul for $160k. My point is simply that the best among us will not. The BIGLAW show is over.

So come on you asshole associates, lash out at me. I don't give a shit anymore.

Does anyone think a customs broker license would make a young associate more marketable?

3Ls are useless

49 white case is easy to become partner especially when you came from Cravath

Don't worry guys, all these layoffs will become a thing of the past once Barack Obama raises taxes on law firm partners. When the partners see that they're getting a smaller take-home paycheck, they naturally spend more money on salaries for associates. It makes perfect sense, you see.

Yes We Can!

49 white case is easy to become partner especially when you came from Cravath

61 and 62: Whatever the law might be in NY or NJ, or whatever it might appear to be in Illinois to someone who doesn't know who things work around here, K&E has long had a, uh, special presence in the state court system which has been quite valuable to its clients, no matter what they've done or to whom or what they've done it. Granted, the legendary Don Reuben is ancient history and K&E doesn't handle many local court matters these days. But K&E's power in the such precincts still exists, and would certainly crush any staff employee who might try to stand up to it on any grounds as puerile as promissory estoppel.

"We understand that no attorneys will be let go in *this round* of layoffs."

Do you mean "the only round of layoffs"? That link calls back to a post that fished for associate layoff news but never confirmed anything (no staff attorney layoffs, no associate layoffs). What gives?

67- Tax what? Besides, these partners will just keep the money made from their Indian subsidiaries offshore.

Are the Cravath offices nice?

3Ls are not useless. They are very entertaining.

63 I like your logic - so I can make partner in 8 weeks? Make sure you work at McDermott Will & Emery - I heard they made some 3rd years partner

71 @ 67

The new Kirkland offices leave a lot to be desired. Way to go guys, money well spent!

(=======<3

BC Law prestige > UVA's popped collars

Staffer = staff attorney or staffer = paralegal?

10 & 54:

There is no chance that all K&E 3L's/incoming associates will start in January 2010 at $160K / yr.

The times they are a changing.........

It would not surprise me at all if most V100 firms came out with a new salary structure for first years through third years. They will call it a special "training" salary scale and will no longer bill clients for work performed by first years.

New Salary Structure:

First Years: $120,000
Second Years: $150,000
Third Years: $180,000

If you make it through year three you will then undergo a thorough review and the firm will decide if you are future partner material. If so, you will be offered a job as an "Associate" and allowed to stay under the old (current) salary structure. If the firm decides that they are not sure if you are future partner material you may be offered a job as a "staff attorney" and allowed to stay at a salary of $150,000. If you distinguish yourself as a "staff attorney" you will be considered for an "Associate" position one more time in your career at the end of year five. If you don't cut it the your maximum salary will continue to be $150,000.

@79 -- I think you are on to something.

63-
Its true, you are not that much more useless than a 3rd year associate. They are also fucking useless. So no, I don't feel bad for 3L's. What you would realize, if you had any experience, is that most washouts of Biglaw never have any value, and learn everything at their new jobs.
So this best and brightest crap? Shove it. You are less valuable than my paralegal, and will be until you learn something, because at least she can file something in under 3 hours and doesnt have a goddamn air of entitlement chasing her around.

K&E Chicago
October Start
K&E NYC:
Restructuring: O

81:

Nailed It........ You are so right.

Nearly every first through third year Big Law Associate is less valuable than a second rate file clerk. The "air of entitlement" comment is bang on.

If the "new" salary structure under comment 79 took effect how many of you self entitled 3L's would whine like little babies that you would have to compete for a real position after year three?

I would see the post third year interview as the equivalent of undergoing oral exams in a "real" PhD Program. (Not a Multicultural Studies PhD program.)

If you survive the grueling one day of oral exams after year three and your work product is very good and your attitude is excellent and you have the skills necessary to bring work to the firm you will be allowed to stay as an "associate".

I am DISGUSTED by my (ostensible) fellow senior associates. You are probably useless yourselves. I have worked with plenty of top-notch junior associates, including first years. Whether they are worth what we bill them out at is another matter entirely. But that does not mean they're worthless.

82 - explain/source

I am DISGUSTED by my (ostensible) fellow senior associates. You are probably useless yourselves. I have worked with plenty of top-notch junior associates, including first years. Whether they are worth what we bill them out at is another matter entirely. But that does not mean they're worthless.

83: go complain to the bar. HTH.

Kirkland is a joke. I should have accepted at Sidley. I graduate in a month and have not been told anything

88:

Would you like to be told that you don't have a job?

They are probably evaluating whether or not they will defer incoming associates until 2011 or whether they will preemptively abort the associates before they start.

82 - could you be more clear?

85/90

I was going to make some guesses about start dates that varied by practice group. ATL did something weird submitted before I was done. Weird.

Anyhow, no real news or source, just wild, baseless speculation that got cut off mid keystroke.

79 - impressive.

I think you probably could even compress that scale such that you were at 150 for a third year -- 120 , 135, and 150, and if you fail your 3T year boards, you don't lose money, you just don't receive a raise.

I'm in Big Law now and I saw 1st year salaries go from 125 to 130 to 145 to 160 between the time that I interviewed for a 2L summer position and completed my first year. In reality, I would have accepted the 125.

ITE, 120 - 135 - 150 is great and you can start 4th years at 200K and keep it moving.

Sidley and Jenner both have Nov 09 start dates.

Kirkland will look very bad if it delays further than its Chicago competition.

89:

I would prefer to be told that, as oppose to "I'm not sure". That doesn't make me feel confident especially when they are letting first years go. K&E has been known to over extend offers just to keep face.

81: Suggestions on how we entitled 3L's can "learn something" so that we actually become valuable? Aside from losing the air of entitlement, obviously.

@79, if this deflation continues, 150k/year could be a lot of money...

72 look inside

95 is a racist

94, NO first years have been let go. That doesn't mean it won't happen. But it has NOT yet.

95-

Drop the Restatement of Contracts and read some briefs actually filed in real cases. They are all over westlaw and Lexis (if you live in Texas, they are probably in the dashboard, or in the driver side seat pocket ).

Figure out where you file something in your practice area.

Read local court rules.

Go observe a trial or 7.

Read about the clients in the practice area you are starting in. Before you start, not after you start (and say something stupid).

Ask the support staff how the copier works.

Be nice to said support staff, I may drink with them while I have you chained to your desk reading discovery. And yes, Im only drinking with them because Im trying to fuck them. Try not to talk about that where I can walk by and hear you.

Be creative and figure out what would make you worth something to me. If I have to tell you, well....

Wrong, 99. Some first years already have been cut in stealth layoffs

Wrong, 99. Some first years already have been cut in stealth layoffs

78, judging by the farewell e-mails, only secretaries were fired (not that it's any less terrible. Some assholes here will say it is). I don't know if that's a good indication, though. There were only 3 farewell e-mails.

Kirkland has not laid off attorneys. Kirkland did not freeze salaries. How many other firms can say even one of those?

Is it true that if you work at Cravath for 8 years and leave to white & case , you wii become partner? after 2-3 years

Wrong, 99. Some first years already have been cut in stealth layoffs

Wrong, 99. Some first years already have been cut in stealth layoffs

Wrong, 99. Some first years already have been cut in stealth layoffs

78, judging by the farewell e-mails, only secretaries were fired (not that it's any less terrible. Some assholes here will say it is). I don't know if that's a good indication, though. There were only 3 farewell e-mails.

100 - you're such a douchebag. Did you do these things while in law school? You've pretty much advocated that law students drop out and just start off as paralegals - FUCK YOU.

white and case partners get wii's?

NO New York first years have been cut. I can't speak to other offices. Maybe some first years in other offices have been 'stealth' laid off. But I doubt it.

104, you are a liar. There have been layoffs, just not public ones.

81: Thanks.

98: And?

-95

78, judging by the farewell e-mails, only secretaries were fired (not that this isn't still terrible. Some asshole's here will say it's not). But I'm not sure if this is a good indication. There were only 3 farewell e-mails.

98 -- You're right, my thinking revelas my racist tendencies. My apologies.

114 -- stop pretending to be me.

-95

110-
No, I did this shit before my start date post bar. Which explains why Im dicking around on the internet looking busy laughing at desperate fucks walking by my office looking for work while trying to not look like desperate fucks.

In the rare occurance I actually have some work to pass out in this shit ass economy, I sure as hell dont give it to people who suck.

Im going to go out on a limb and say you probably should do whatever it takes not to suck, unless you can live the rest of your life on the handouts you are getting for not starting on time.

117 is 110

I don't believe Kirkland has laid off any attorneys for non-performance reasons (I know a couple who were laid off for kegitimate performance reasons or egregious expense reimbursement abuses). I think the people claiming stealth layoffs are just Kirkland haters and trolls.

The only trolls, 119, are the naive ones who choose to bury their heads in the sand. I may be a Kirkland hater, but at least I'm not drunk on Kirkland whiskey.

120, no one has ever presented anything remotely credible with respect to Kirkland layoffs. It's not sticking your head in the sand. It just hasn't happened. You don't even work here. You know nothing.

does anyone have photos of the lesbian partner at kinky spalding ?

i really would like the ones that show here getting it on with the married lady partner who supposedly wears a strap on and a fake mustache during the action

does anyone have photos of the lesbian partner at kinky spalding ?

i really would like the ones that show here getting it on with the married lady partner who supposedly wears a strap on and a fake mustache during the action

I'm a first year in the NY office. I know my whole class is currently intact. I made the rounds to all the offices after these asshole commentators freaked me out...

121, you amaze me. It's fools like you who end up getting suckered. What you believe to be credible is purely up to you. I do work at KE, and likely know much more than you since I've put in my time here, but I'm not going to sit around offering up names and such to prove it. Say what you want. Your position reeks of desperation -- it's when people start saying stuff like "show me the proof" that you usually know they are getting worried.

125, you're obviously the one that's worried. I just think you're full of shit. Obviously no one is immune to this economy. I am personally hunkering down and doing good work. That's all anyone can do. Fortunately, I have good relationships, good hours, and am in a decently busy practice group. That helps too.

Man, 126, you are just plain stupid. I am a partner at KE. Fairly junior, but a hell of a lot more safe than you, I bet. I try to give you some inside advice, and you start being accusatory. Frankly, I wish I knew who you are, since from reading your inane logic on this blog, I'd advocate terminating you now. You have demonstrated zero logic, and are a walking liability.

Associate layoffs have already taken place - they are keeping it all under wraps. More to come in the next couple of weeks. My understanding is that associates in slow practice areas will be asked to work in other areas. Severance packages have been generous for both associates and staff. As far as the building - they should be ashamed on what they spent in this economy.

127, assuming you really are a K&E partner, how is what you gave 'advice' to 126 or any of your associates? What should we do with this information? Preemptively leave because there are so many options in this economy? Whether or not they believe there have been layoffs at the firm, no one actually is foolish to believe they are impossible. No one would be surprised if they happened. Your post did nothing but make people nervous. Everyone here is well aware of the prospect and is acting accordingly. Also a K&E associate but not 126, And what office and practice group are you anyway?

Recall that the issue was raised by suggestion that there were no stealth layoffs at KE. That is flatly wrong, and was the impetus of my post. My point only was to note that it is foolish to believe all that management is saying. I've worked here long enough to know. If folks are nervous, they should be. More is to come, and you can quote me on that.

I work in a very profitable practice group. Let's leave it at that.

130,
Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to quote you on your anonymous post.
When I first read it, I wasn't sure if you were credible.
But since you are offering us the opportunity to quote you on your anonymous post, I feel far more comfortable believing you now.
Thanks D-Bag!
ps: I'm not sure what you meant when you write "more is to come." But I'm guessing you meant more lay-offs, more problems, and/or more lies from management. If any of those are correct, then I have a hard time believing that you have worked at Kirkland "long enough to know," when you don't have the grammar skills to write "more ARE (not is) to come."
Thanks again D-Bag!

Kirkland Associates:

The economy is bad, no one is immune, yada yada yada. It's all true. But don't let some anonymous posters on a messageboard who claim to be 'in the know' get you all worked up. Just go about your lives and do the best you can.

130,

"Management" is not saying anything, I wish they were. You obviously do not work at K&E.

K&E Associate

133 is right. Managment is entirely mum. It's not like they're assuring us that everything's ok.

126 - you are uninformed. Your "good relationships" are not as good as you think. You are not aware of what has already happened and what will happen.

Layoffs are continuing. Last layoff date is July 17.

128, what exactly does generous mean?

Lol at 135

Of course everyone should be worried, some of their non-equity partners were laid off in February.
Management can never be trusted. They are not going to send out a memo stating layoffs are coming, be prepared.
. A couple of weeks ago they told the "staff" that in order to prevent layoffs, they wouldn't get a raise this year. HA!

All anyone can do is keep working and keep hoping you don't become another casualty of this economy.

So what percentage of Kirkland summers are getting offers this year?

95,

What practice area? Not that ATL message boards are the best place for advice, but if you want some, you need to be more specific. Most first-year work is mindless, but because things get so specialized in Biglaw so quickly, there's no one-size-fits-all advice.

so when does management plan to tell incoming 3Ls and clerks something....anything.... re: start dates???? If I'm going to be applying for food stamps, I'd like to know soon. :-D

33.476%

140,

100% of Kirkland summers will be getting offers this year. First, Kirkland has way fewer summers compared to the V10 firms that are still taking on 100+ summer classes in 600-800 attorney offices. So, even if K&E rather wouldn't, it can SHATTER THe MARKET by offering everyone in a down economy when only a handful of firms will do likewise.

Second, Kirkland and the V10 will still give out offers in order to save face, but many of those firms (and perhaps K&E too) will turn those offers into deferrals at this time a year from now. Firms that defer 3Ls this year AND took on comparable summer classes will either have to 1) no-offer a substantial portion of summers (frowny face), or 2) defer 3Ls next year (also frowny face, but delayed way past OCI 2009). The poor public opinion present value of a no offer summer is much greater than a 3L deferral in Spring 2010.

If any firm is in a position to make 100% offers this summer *and* defer this neither this nor next year's incoming 3Ls for more than a month or three, it's MARKET SHATTERING K&E. That doesn't mean, however, that they won't do/haven't done staff layoffs, staff attorney layoffs, and stealth layoffs. But those quiet numbers won't matter much to 2L talent come OCI 2009.

Smart 2009 summers will get clerkships, and their smart firms will take the smallest and most talented summer class in firm history (other than mine).

Out,

Kool-Aids

Douche.

127/130, if you are who I suspect you are, you'd be better off worrying about yourself.

60 secretaries were laid off today, with NO severance. The haters may not care, but clients are fed up with lawyers billing for secretarial work. Biglaw needs to wake up.

I love working at K&E. You haters are hilarious. So many people become attorneys for the wrong reasons.

So 120/125/127/130 is indirectly confirming K&E layoffs, talks about "fools" at K&E who are "suckered" into believing otherwise, says you can't trust management, and yet identifies himself as a "Jr." partner at the firm?

There is 0% chance that this person is a K&E partner. Probably a Sidley or Weil troll, judging by the high douce-baggery level and poor grammar.

p.s. Even though you are an idiot and a liar, I love the irony of your post in 127. Junior partners at K&E (known as "NSPs" to people who actually work there) can't terminate anyone, tough-guy; and if you really are a K&E partner (or employee) and any share partner at K&E knew who you were, you'd be fired immediately.

Two points.

First (and I hope some Kirkland partners read this), really bad form, Kirkland. Finding out about layoffs from Above the Law is NEVER the way to go. Just voicemail (to avoid your precious paper trail) the entire firm with a notice. Give some heads up. That's the classy thing to do. Some secretaries with 20+ years of experience were canned. The least you could do is show a little class and let the firm know what's going on, rather than letting everyone murmur about it.

By my rumors (who know how accurate they are), it was around 50 staff. And the rumors say there will be more. Of course, again, it's better to do it all at once, ripping off the band aid, rather than prolonging the experience slowly in stages. Particularly as summer associates start next month, and that would only make things really demoralizing.

I tend to agree, however, that Kirkland has waaay too many support staff. Yeah, they've got too many attorneys, too, right now, like everyone. But the support staffing is out of control.

Second (and I hope some commenters and haters read this), there have been NO associate layoffs. They COULD be super-duper-stealthy, I guess. But I comb the Web page on a frequent basis to see which names disappear. And over the last two months, there's been very little movement. Certainly nothing showing that any layoffs have taken place. No disappearances of names.

Will associate layoffs come? I highly doubt that any associate layoffs come in the next few months (from my sources, whatever THOSE may be worth). But past that, I wouldn't guarantee anything.

Hey 149, you sound familiar. Are you the guy who got beaten up by a girl while drunk at a summer associate event (in Chicago, 2007)?

I am a Kirkland secretary. It was 80 support staff in Chicago and 150 nationwide. As far as way too many support staff, every secretary that I know at Kirkland has at least 3 and sometimes as many as 5 attorneys to take care of. We all figured that other departments would be decimated, since they've "streamlined" so many departments in the new building that they won't need as many mailroom, copy center, etc. people. But stretching the secretarial staff any thinner does NOT seem like a great idea. At some point, it becomes a client issue when the secretary has so many assignments s/he can't do anything except answer phones and enter time. There's so much more to the job that is getting lost.

I am a Kirkland secretary. It was 80 support staff in Chicago and 150 nationwide. As far as way too many support staff, every secretary that I know at Kirkland has at least 3 and sometimes as many as 5 attorneys to take care of. We all figured that other departments would be decimated, since they've "streamlined" so many departments in the new building that they won't need as many mailroom, copy center, etc. people. But stretching the secretarial staff any thinner does NOT seem like a great idea. At some point, it becomes a client issue when the secretary has so many assignments s/he can't do anything except answer phones and enter time. There's so much more to the job that is getting lost.

Secretaries, IT and other staff members can still find jobs, hopefully away from law firms so they might actually be appreciated.

But where will all these laid off laywers go? All I can think of is...

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

So sorry. That was rude. What I really mean is hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Get rid of all secretaries who: (i) are older than 50, (ii) weigh more than 140lbs, or (iii) dress like a prude. All with giant tits and low or no morals should be kept.

What about west coast lay offs?? How many people were hit in LA, SF and PA?

79: If your comments are true, people will stop going into big law. First year associates (at least not good ones) will not work for $120,000. Why? Because $120,000 is not enough for associates to sacrifice their lives in NYC. Just look at the attrition rate at law firms to make my point.

The truth is that the $160,000 is a huge cut from what was essentially a $200,000 pay structure before bonuses got cut. If associate rates go deeper, big law will no longer be able to retain talent.

Since I work at Kirkland the layoffs were mean spirited. because of the way it was done, The support staff is just as important as the secretaries. But some them think they are more important then anyone else.. It's a shame when anyone gets laid off. The ones to blame is management ,which is done by ex- Arthur Anderson management.. We all know what happened to them.

Since I work at Kirkland the layoffs were mean spirited. because of the way it was done, The support staff is just as important as the secretaries. But some them think they are more important then anyone else.. It's a shame when anyone gets laid off. The ones to blame is management ,which is done by ex- Arthur Anderson management.. We all know what happened to them.

159 - Gary B? His management style needs to retire.

Kirkland - isn't that the brand of legal advice you can buy at Costco?

147, that's untrue. My secretary was unfortunately fired but indeed got severance.

I wonder if they fired the secretaries who were not busy. I'm not sure it's the number of assignments that matters. My secretary has four assignments but never seems very busy. I know I don't give her very much work because she's not very good at all. I still gave her a good review because I don't want her to get fired. As of now, she's still with us.

i

Unless you are a billing partner, you cannot speak with any sort of authority on what clients want. I am a billing partner and I can tell you that about 25% of my clients watch like hawks how first years are used. They take a view that you cannot use first years unless you can demonstrate why that particular attorneys fits the task. For example, you were a patent agent, a paralegal, an engineer, an accountant or something similar in a prior life, I can sell you as a first year because the client believes you have value. If you went straight through undergrad to laws school, many clients don't want to be billed. So you can choose not to believe that this happens or say it is stupid, but that does not change the reality that my realization goes down when I have to write off first year or any other billable time. If you don't know what you are doing, it hurts my comp.

Kirkland would be better off lopping off a couple of share partners and letting the staff situation shake out over time through natural attrition. At least in DC, while most are quite impressive, there are a few that leave most of us scratching our heads, i.e. "who the hell did he blow?" Getting rid of a few of these stunogs would allow the firm to hold onto all of these more worthy staff people while it rides out the recession.

One secretary called me in the afternoon from the Aon building and said she knew something was up when they wouldn't give her a key card for the new building. All of her prior assignments were given to someone else and she was to wait until last week to move with the corporate group that she was supposedly assigned to. Instead of moving, they called her in, said times are bad so here's the door. Before you go, you can talk the a psychologist we have on hand and go clean up your computer. That's what you get for 25 years of service at K&E. While over at the new building, all of the partners are leaving for the weekend for their lake houses and bragging about the new digs.

K&E Partners - If you want to go "lean" start looking at your Administrative Staff. You have more "Directors", "Associate Directors", "Managers", "Supervisors", "Specialists", and "Coordinators" then you need. How many of the above mentioned are friends, relatives or ex-Arthur Anderson employees. Cutting some of those positions would save the support staff jobs, MONEY and all the layers you have to go through to get the job done!

Is it 4/20 yet?

-Michael Phelps

RIGHT ON 168, RIGHT ON! If the share partners of K&E want to save some REAL money, get rid of the incompetent trio, DM, GB & BMQ. STOP hiring relatives of these three. STOP allowing them to CREATE unnecessary jobs for their friends who used to work at Arthur Anderson. STOP allowing them to run Kirkland like an accounting firm, a very flawed and failed accounting firm no less. Take back control from these three morons before it's too late.

The minimum annal (yes, annal, not annual) salary of a Kirkland share partner is $5 million+. Their values are no different than any other American millionaire. The $45 - 50k that they were paying the support staff was cutting into their millions so they let them go. Of course, not realizing that the very staff they're cutting are the consumers that keep their clients in business, who in turn pay them the ridiculous $1,000/hour billing rates.

What goes around...

The minimum annal (yes, annal, not annual) salary of a Kirkland share partner is $5 million+. Their values are no different than any other American millionaire. The $45 - 50k that they were paying the support staff was cutting into their million dollar salaries so they let them go. It's quite ridiculous, but the American way. Capitalism Gone Wild!!!

What goes around...

168 is so right. Kirkland actually has managers that "manage" one employee. At the same time, the truth is that there is a lot of dead weight at Kirkland, but most of it is due to an overabundance of useless management and what appears to be more partners than associates and staff put together. The place is poorly managed and staff morale was in the toilet when the economy was good due to all the so-called "managers" walking around with nothing to do but cover each other's back when they were called out for being poor managers. Sadly, of course, it will be the staff that goes first. Maybe then the "managers" will actually have to do some work. And it's true, those very managers did tell staff just two weeks ago that they would not receive raises in order to avoid layoffs--knowing that the layoffs would come after they used the staff to move them into their beautiful new building. How do they sleep at night? Okay, on the positive side, people did get to keep their jobs for a few weeks longer, but wouldn't it have been nice if Kirkland just came out and told them before the move that they were going to be laid off and offered them the option to stay and help with move? Too right for a law firm, huh? Okay, did they at least give them a severance package?

Lefty and Tanne, what's your "annal" salary? $10 million? $15 million? But you couldn't spare $45 or $55k for a few staff?

Shameful! Downright Shameful and Disgusting greed.

I don't think that $5 million statistic is right at all. There are equity partners that make considerably less than that. Won't disagree that some of the managers are pretty lousy, however, and some of them should certainly be cut.

You can easily say that Partners should take a cut to have kept the number of support staff we had. It's true that it would've been the generous thing to do. But it wouldn't have been keeping them around because they were needed. It would've been purely an issue of generosity. We had way too much staff for the level of business we have at the moment. We probably were overstaffed even in boomtimes, and that is also a symptom of quetionable management.

174, 175
If you are Partners why don't you do something about the incompetent management?

Is K&E going to be paying bonuses to the Administrative Staff that worked on the move? That would really be a slap in the face to the people that just lost their job.

start dates?

Number 175 is a pompus ass. If there was too much Why were they let go after the move? To march them in to a conference room and to let them know they aren't making the move is gutless. But I can tell honesty is not your strong point.

This sucks. Best of luck to everyone at Kirkland.

$5 million was much closer to the MAX take home for a share partner than it was to the minimum. Minimum was about $1 mil, and max was under $7 million.

157: Your analysis pre-dates the Lehamn collapse. This is a very different environment, and I pity any associate or law student who thinks that the legal market, as a whole, will return to the hiring bubble of 2007. Those halcyon days are gone, gone, gone.

And K&E is lizzname.

Yo, 177. You just don't get it. NO one cares about incoming first year associates. You people are WORTHLESS. The Kirkland staff that was cut was 100 times more valuable to the firm than you can ever hope to be. Read 165's comments.

Bet the people who got laid off wish they hadn't drank so much of the Kirkland whiskey. I won't say I told you so. They are a greedy bunch of bastards there.

What's your problem, 168? You don't think high school educated managers of the mail room and repro dept. should now be called and paid as "Associate Directors"? Many of the "Directors," "Associated Directors" and "Managers" probably had to pay someone off to graduate high school because they're dumb as dirt. When it comes to K&E management, the only degree one needs is a Ph.D. is ass kissing. Unlike the partners who USED to run the firm before Arthur Andersen castoffs took over, management has no appreciation at all for brains or education. They want dimwitted hacks who will dumbly follow instructions without questions.

Davis Polk already announced start dates (last week - where was the coverage on ATL?). That leaves Kirkland as the only V10 firm yet to announce. If anyone at the firm is reading, we'd much appreciate a speedy decision.

Okay, K&E: the secretaries have now taken their "hits" and the ranks have been thinned. Let's focus now on the obscene number of "middle managers," which has been for years and remains utterly indefensible. For example, one office has a department consisting of (1) "firmwide" manager, (1) manager, (1) one "coordinator" and only (2) actual "assistants" who seem to be doing the work, NONE of which is client-billable. Come on folks, this ain't rocket science.

Word is that associates and legal assistants in the corporate group (mainly in the NY office) are the next ones one the chopping block. All 5th yr and higher associates are said to be secure in their jobs. Most likely the firm will use the LIFO method to determine who gets dismissed.

You're right, 186. Look in the latest K&E directory: under "Technology Administration" (p. 5 behind the "Firmwide Services" tab): We have one Chief Information Officer, one Senior Director, 5 Directors, 9 Associate Directors and 1 Manager -- not a single assistant to be found. And that's just the tip of the clusterfuck. When you have a moment, check out how many Senior Directors, Directors, Associate Directors, Managers, Supervisors, Coordinators, etc., we have in Human Resources, Secretarial Services and Training and Development. Some of them even have the exact same titles. Why do we need all these people, when most of their jobs have been outsourced or reassigned to the secretarial staff? Secretarial Services doesn't even provide secretarial coverage for vacations any more, for God's sake. What on earth do these people do, aside from collecting fat paychecks and kissing up to Doug M.?

ATTENTION, K&E PARTNERS: If you actually want to slow the bleeding out of your profitability, you might look at the cast of hundreds in our Administrative area. They're not billable, you know.

188: not only are they not client-billable, very few of them even have client contact. I can understand cutting some secretaries to "tighten up" assignments, but don't keep the focus there. The main problem with the administrative staff at K&E is that they're all just trying to protect themselves. Ergo, the secretaries are usually the first of the sacrificial lambs.

189 is actually a Kirkland attorney - I know because 189 used the word "ergo"

Are they going to keep Madonna?

Man, there are a lot of angry secretaries and LAs from K&E posting on here.

The bottom line is there were too many people to keep on, given the current level of transactions/cases. Yes, it sucks that they had to let people go. Yes, its a crappy economy to be looking for work in. But its a law firm, not a charity. The partners are going to do what makes business sense for them. They don't owe you a job. You can look around and say why me and why not other administrative areas, but you can be sure they will eventually get around to them. This is just the beginning.

And 172 has no idea what they are talking about w/r/t share partner comp.

I don't disagree with you, 192. What some of us are saying, though, is K&E can cut a lot of LARGE salaries (not crappy little mailroom and secretary salaries) by eliminating the "professional administrators" who serve no function whatsoever, and there are a lot of them. So-called management is overstaffed by a factor of 2 or 3, and the reason is most of them are relatives, friends or former co-workers of the people calling the shots. K&E shouldn't be a charity for these folks anymore than it should for the worker bees.

192, you may be right - some of the posts may be from "angry" secretaries & LAs. But there is no denying that there are far too many coordinators/supervisors/managers/directors collecting larger paychecks (usually MUCH larger) than the secretaries and LAs with very little tangible evidence of what, exactly, they're coordinating/supervising/managing/directing.

My suspicion is that many/most of the admin staff that keep hanging on at K&E do so because they "know where the bodies are buried."

Kirkland SUCKS - they can't pay for the new building now they have to lay off staff - thanks a lot - it was probably your corporate attorneys who help with the economic mess can you define CDO?? Good luck renting out the top floors!

I work for K&E - don't knock Arthur Andersen - at least they treated us like professionals - I'd be first in line with an updated resume, if Andersen came back - law firms like K&E are the worst.

197 - If Kirkland is the worst then LEAVE and save someone's job who actually deserves to work at Kirkland. It seems to me that perhaps you were respected at Arthur Andersen because you deserved and were qualified for your job. That is NOT the case at Kirkland. You and the rest of the Arthur Andersen detritus got jobs at Kirkland ONLY because you are related to someone at Kirkland (more than likely the incompetent trio running the place) or you are on your knees performing sex acts. The unqualified, unnecessary and useless Arthur Andersen trash that has infiltrated Kirkland will be its downfall.