salaray advance they dont have to pay = stipend

stoopid.

VE, Fulbright, BB, Akin, Locke have all taken steps to cut costs "in this economy." Is the rest of Texas now screwed?

2 is right. Elie, honestly. You are an educated man. Act like it.

salary advance that you don't have to repay?

Any news about Andrews Kurth?

Ugliest goddamn logo I have ever seen.

Vinson & Elkins promises not to lay people off ... after they've already laid people off!?!?! This is an interesting new method.

I know someone who was laid off in their NYC office a couple of months ago...

More proof that Texas > NY

Maybe down in Texas calling a salary advance makes it repayable in the event someone gets a job elsewhere.

But I heard they already laid off folks....

But I heard they already laid off folks. Maybe it's just rumor-mongering...

But I heard they already laid off folks. Maybe it's just rumor-mongering...

After reading this story I came to the conclusion that if I were 26 again, I would rather be a recently terminated associate from a peer firm than an employed associate at this non-peer firm. V&E has made assurances that it will not terminate associates as a result of the CURRENT storm. What will happen when by the end of this month, the storm will have picked up by a few knots? This firm is only delaying the inevitable and an employed associate at this firm in April does not equate to an employed associate at that firm come May. I predict that most firms will reduce their staff by about another 35 to 40% before the economy recovers. There will be many hiring freezes in effect, which means many of you will have a cold future. Try to keep warm, professional pneumonia can be quite lethal.

10 is probably correct. Also, 2, 4, 5, etc. are stupid to blame Elie. He was quoting a Texas Lawyer article that mentioned the 'salary advance'... if you want to trash on someone, blame them.

Man, cricitiizng the gmarmar on this bolg neevr gtes old!

Get a life, grammarazzi.

The questionable point about a salary advance that need not be repaid was presumbably made by the tipster, not Elie, as it appears in the blue box.

I wonder if there are salary reductions in the offing. Wouldn't be surprised, there's a lot you can hide as "eliminating the deferred comp"

My 3500 sq. ft. wife will have mixed emotions about this.

I just received a notice of foreclosure on my 3500 sq ft wife.

Locke Lord 3rd year

Thank God--I need a way to make the payments on my Lexis.

This is nothing. Latham gave a "no layoff" promise over a year ago.

Thank God--I need a way to make the payments on my Lexis.

The quotes should have been around the word "promise."

Elie,
The proper way to quote Texas Lawyer is:

"...a $10,000 salary advance the associates will not have to repay [ed. it's called a stipend, stupid]."

Didn't Latham (no layoffs promise) and Fried Frank (we don't do layoffs) make similar statements?

I can't believe I'm doing this, but....

In defense of Elie:

The blip about "salary advance that you don't have to repay" was written by Texas Lawyer, not ATL.

cut the salaries already. people will stop worrying then.

V&E sucks. Why do we care what they do?

How can these firms defer start dates but promise no layoffs? Nobody that is deferred will EVER start with their respective firms. Getting deferred is basically a polite way of saying PFO.

Sorry this is a little off topic, but it looks like I have to go to Akron for an arbitration. I don't know anything about the restaurant scene there. Anyone know of anything good?
--Askin' re Akron

The salary advance is paid to all incoming V&E associates, regardless of start date. Before any of this occurred, all incoming associates would have to repay the salary advance. Now, the incoming associates who choose to start in January will not have to repay the salary advance; it will act as a (small) incentive to defer.

Any word on Baker Botts pushing back start dates to Jan.?

Cole me on the panny sty

What's the difference between an advance that need not be paid back and a bonus/other form of compensation?
I'm sure some d*ckless twitt is going to get all sandy over this question, but I think it's legit.

What's the difference between an advance that need not be paid back and a bonus/other form of compensation?
I'm sure some d*ckless twitt is going to get all sandy over this question, but I think it's legit.

What's the difference between an advance that need not be paid back and a bonus/other form of compensation?
I'm sure some d*ckless twitt is going to get all sandy over this question, but I think it's legit.

Texas Lawyer might have played fast and loose with the language, but it's not the same as a stipend. A stipend is in addition to whatever total base salary an incoming associate can expect to make. A salary advance comes out of their first year salary--not in addition to it.

33-I know a guy going to Baker Botts in Dallas. His start date is Nov right now.

#37, stop being such an asshole.

40:
?

40:
?
-37

40:
?
-37

Not a real firm, didn't read.

No word on Baker Botts pushing back start dates. But I did here in the rumor mill that BB managing partner Whalep Enisp Rick is considering stepping down.

They didn't even address the number of summer associate offers they have quietly rescinded. There are multiple 2Ls who have been cut

See, there's three kinds of people: dicks, pussies, and assholes.

Baker Botts - Those are the new characters from Transformers 2 starring Shia LeBoef right?

And Vinson & Elkins sounds like a hunting lodge in Nebraska.

10 - By definition, a salary advance, unless specified as non-refunable, is always subject to recapture. D'oh!

14 - Do you expect them to say "We won't do layoffs on the basis of future economic downturn"? What mystical predictive powers are you suggesting they have? D'oh!

PFO? WTF does that mean? Peace F Out?

V&E has been conducting steal layoffs for a while. This is their attempt to soften the news to the poor 3Ls who won't have a job in January of 2010.

May paychecks wont be any lower Elie. Get your facts straight. Deferred compensation = compensation that is deferred. Thus May's paycheck will = April's paycheck. The only thing that may change is the deferred portion which doesnt get paid until you reach 2000 hours.

When you take the liberty to input your two cents at least do it accurately.

Der terk er jerbs!

I Peaced the Fucked Out of the Bitch!

48 - Vinson & Elkins is not a hunting lodge in Nebraska. Vinson & Elkins is a hunting lodge in Houston.

Baker Botts deferred to January - phone call came today.

Where is this Venison & Elk? West VA.?

46 - What's the word on rescinding offers? I haven't heard anything about that but would be interested to know.

I think Baker Botts only deferred incoming dorks. So no one will be starting on time.

where's the story about morgan lewis stealing fred fielding away from his old firm?

46, 57 - no offers have been rescinded.

Elie, is that another f'in typo in the title of all places. There is a difference between ' and " - PROOFREAD, that is what us lawyers do. If we can proof a 100 page document at least you can proof a 100 word post.

55-- What office? Are they providing a stipend?

58 - 'incoming dorks'? How very 3rd grade of you. Boy, i'm glad those dorks aren't showing up sooner, what with their poopy-faced coodies and such.

I thought Dick Cheney shot V&E in the face.

"It doesn't appear that Mr. Dilg told everybody that V&E has "no debt," which is probably encouraging."

Why is this encouraging?

64 - bc no debt = quicker dissolution

I just found out I've got some M&A due diligence to do in Prague for the next four days. Anyway, I heard this rumor that they have good beer in prague, so my interest was piqued. Can anyone recommend any good beers to drink while i am there?

Thanks.

Piqued in Prague

This is 31. Nothing re restaurants in Akron? If something comes to you later and you can't remember the post in which I asked this question, just feel free to put your comment under any later post. I'll be reading them all.
--Askin' re Akron

60 - yes, the offers were not "rescinded" per se. But what's the difference between that and telling a summer who was scheduled to start in July that the firm could not allow summers to stay beyond July 17th? This seems to apply only to summers who had first-half splits somewhere besides V&E. Unless those summers were at very accommodating first-half firms, their offer at V&E was effectively rescinded.

This is further proof that the class of 2010 are the ones that are really going to be screwed in this economy.

V&E also cancelled its summer retreat a while back.

60,
I believe that you used a dash ("-") where you meant to use an em-dash ("—"). But feel free to continue mocking others' grammatical shortcomings.

60 has a mangina

I'm an incoming BB Associate and I haven't heard anything in over two months. When will BB pick up the phone and give an update? My guess is very soon now that V&E has stepped up to the plate. . .

What about the 77 summer associates in the Houston office? What's up with that?

73, no news is bad news. Start thinking second career. Maybe the DA's office is hiring.

73 - you didn't want to work for BB anyways. they're assholes.

I really liked that comment from an earlier thread: "PTFO" = peace the fuck out.

good for a giggle.

i look straight across the street into BB's offices and those jagoffs don't seem to do a whole lot. always sitting at their desks surfing porn.

31 - try Ken Stuarts on Market Street. Piato is located downtown and isn't bad. Diamond Grill is also very close to downtown and serves some of the best steaks in the country (better than Sparks, Keans, etc. in Manhattan). Be aware that Diamond Grill is cash only.

"Joe Dilg said there could be major changes to the associate compensation structure. They want to get rid of the deferred compensation structure and change bonuses so they are more aligned with firm performance rather than individual hours."

Ummm....

1) Didn't V&E just recently (say, within the last 2 years) institute the deferred compensation structure, and wasn't that done in response to the NYC salary increases?

2) Changing the bonus structure so that it tracks "firm performance" instead of an individual's billable hours is just another way for the firm to screw over its associates.

Seeing as how associates have no real control over "firm performance," and that "firm performance" can be whatever the firm wants it to be (say, to justify the disbursement of certain bonus amounts, or not), I fail to see how such a change provides any incentive to an associate to do anything beyond the bare minimum.

After all, if you won't make partner (and the odds are that you won't), why work your rear off and bill more than you have to if you aren't going to get anything for it in the near (or, for that matter, the long) term?

77: what kind of porn?

77--

So, which BH atty are you. I'd guess Olson. Hi-Yo!

77--

So, which BH atty are you. I'd guess Olson. Hi-Yo!

68--the 2Ls who have been "rescinded" knew the first-half stance of VE from the very beginning. The late summer options were granted on an ad hoc basis, mainly to returning 2Ls. But they always knew the firm's strong preference for early attendance and had the option to join the rest of the class in going to the firm in May-June. Don't feel sorry for 2Ls who are still taking some other firm's money in May/June/early July just because VE finally decided not pay them $2700 a week to surf the internet in July and August when no other summer associates are there, only to have them accept offers from the firm they spent the beginning of the summer with.

I can't believe there are people out there that don't know of this very old and highly regarded firm. (Yes, I agree, they could update the logo and get some new energy behind marketing and business development initiatives.) Still, this firm has some of the smartest transactional attorneys on the planet. (Yeah, I know - they were Enron's counsel but you can't say they weren't brilliant in what they set up there and they survived the collaspe much better than Andersen.) This firm is dedicated to excellent client service and boasts helping a consortium win one of the highest damage claims ever awarded on a railway case.

78, thanks a lot! Are there any good Thai or Indian places, in case I feel like that?
--Askin' re Akron

84: V&E recruiter.

82,

You are hilarious. And accurate.

Where are all the obnoxious yankee asshats making unoriginal jokes about TTTexas and 3500 sq ft wives?

I wonder what this means for the summer associates. Most offices seem to have normal numbers but Houston has something like 77 summers.

83 -- is that true? Returning 1Ls were given "the option" to renege on their split firm and work at v&e in May-July?

.

Suck it, yankees.

- A double-wide, a big-haired wife in acid wash jeans, and a gently pre-owned Chevy pickup in Texas.

83: why would they necessarily accept offers from the other firms?

65: doesn't no debt also mean less reason to dissolve?

(just curious)

-64

Yeah, good luck with that. Let us know how it turns out.

- former Latham associate.

Not 83, but because something like 75% of summer associates who split accept at the firm they worked at for the first half of the summer. That is why most firms insist that people work for them for the first half.

78- please stop feeding the Akron/Des Moines/Buffalo/other smaller city's restaurant recommendations troll.

95 -- that's not the case if you're a returning 2L (someone who worked at v&e as a 1L and is now splitting as a 2L).

6: Regarding Andrews Kurth: they got to choose their start dates, with the only requirement being that they start BEFORE Mid October. They haven't heard anything to the contrary, so I assume they are still scheduled to start on time.

VE is imploding. Former VE partner and the last President of the State Bar of Texas Gib Walton recently left to open the Houston office of Hogan and Hartson.

82...Gardere actually.

99 - if they depended that much on a single partner, they were imploding well before good ol' Gib left.

V&E has a very good track record with respect to paying bonuses based on firm performance, so I am sure associates there are not worried.

THESE PRETZELS ARE MAKING ME THIRSTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

so no summer associate retreat? weren't there 2 trips last summer?

Yeah, I believe so. I haven't heard that they canceled the all clerk weekend retreat yet but wouldn't be suprised if they had. That has always been an expensive weekend.

Anybody know if V&E is still trying to expand their NYC office? The size of their summer class there still seems pretty small. I think it is something like 12.

Good for V&E!!!! Handling the layoffs with integrity and treating their associates like valuable professionals. There needs to be more of this "share the pain" mentality.

I hope that clients see the difference between a firm like V&E, who have their priorities straight, and firms like White and Case, Sidley, etc., who obviously could care less about their people.

When there are literally hundreds of law firms to choose from--at much the same rate--why shouldn't GCs consider the way a firm treats its people into account when passing out business?

What does this mean:

It doesn't appear that Mr. Dilg told everybody that V&E has "no debt," which is probably encouraging.

Is this a typo because otherwise this sentence makes no sense.

107 -- we'll how this works out when partners start lateraling b/c ppp is being crushed. Except of course for those Martian partners who don't care about $$$.

Don't forget -- v&e is not cravath/dpw, with no or few laterals, a lockstep structure, and other "sticky" policies that keep partners at the firm. It can become real easy real fast for firms like skadden and even latham to start poaching top partners (those who might tolerate lower ppp in general b/c they like the firm, but whose inst'l loyalties become very strained once their checks get smaller and smaller b/c of a no-layoff policy).

and since when do GCs give a damn about how firms treat associates?

how a firm treats its associates should give a clue as to how they will treat their clients

"What does this mean:

It doesn't appear that Mr. Dilg told everybody that V&E has "no debt," which is probably encouraging.

Is this a typo because otherwise this sentence makes no sense."

It is not a typo. The thinking is that law firm leaders trot out the "no debt" statement in a half hearted attempt to convince everyone that their firm's finances are sound when in reality they are not. The firms in question often then dissolve or get acquired.

all firms technically "have debt." the partners insist on a minimum amnt of compensation -- just like debtholders. Partners are not "residual claimaints" like stockholders, who might forgo dividends for years in hopes of share appreciation later. Partners are not gonna acept 0 or minimal income in hopes of appreciation later -- they will lateral!

Dilg knows this. I agree that it's creepy/desperate to bring up the no debt thing. For all intents and purposes, firms have lots of debt -- in the form of star partners who insist on getting PAID every year, just like any bondholder.

read this: http://www.bmacewen.com/blog/archives/2009/03/the_profit_imperative.html

106, I believe the firm is still going after its plan in NYC. Obviously, there are some problems in the economy right now that prevent them from expanding as fast as they would like.

If you are headed to New York I would be happy with the size of that class. From the people I know up there that is the size they wanted considering the economy, expansion, etc. They're still in a position to give all of those people offers.

109, 107 here--I think you are correct that any firm that takes V&E's approach takes the risk of losing revenue generators because of falling PPP. But, at the same time, a firm like White and Case takes a risk that they will lose all their up and coming stars once this downturn ends.

I mean, really, if you are a 5th year associate at White, are you going to turn down a chance to lateral once this ends? You have seen how your partners treat people when times are tough and everyone goes through a few tough times in their career.

It is much easier in the short term to layoff 100 associates to keep PPP up. The more difficult (and honorable) thing to do is recognize that a firm is only as good as its reputation and do everything possible to keep that reputation pristine.

You forget that many inside counsel are associates that didn't make partner, they can empathize. I am not saying they will take it into consideration, but maybe they should.

why would anyone believe a firm when they say no layoffs? Latham and Orrick and others said it and then laid off associates when ppp looked down. wake up. just keep billing as much as possible and hope you are safe.

99- You're flat wrong. The Houston office of Hogan Hartson was around over a year before Walton joined (admittedly only 6 or so people, but it was started by former Pillsbury guys). And according to Walton, he left VE because of the retirement age requirement; which HH does not have.

112: Why does that imply that a firm can't both pay partners at a lower rate, requiring some capital investment from each partner (some portion of the profits being reinvested in the firm rather than being paid out)?

It seems odd to me that firms would be so averse to that.

83 - Let me get this straight. V&E agrees, in September and October, to allow some 2Ls an exception to their July 17th cutoff on an "ad-hoc" basis. The future 2L SAs then go about planning their split summer based on V&E telling them that they could, in fact, come second-half/late-summer. Then, in April, V&E tells the same 2Ls that, in fact, due to their longstanding preference for first-half (which firm doesn't?) and despite their earlier assurances that the second-half split was fine, that the 2Ls could only still work at V&E this summer if they come first-half and back out on their original first-half firm.

How is that not, like 68 said, effectively rescinding offers? At the very least the firm is reneging on previously made offers in a very unclassy way. How does this not reflect poorly on V&E? If they had such a strong preference for first-half (which they've never showed before this year) why not just say upfront that they're first-half only? There are plenty of firms (in Texas) that do just that. Why make an exception for a 2L only to take it away so close to the summer? And why act like you're giving them a real choice when you give them the option of working for V&E or withdrawing from their first-half program? That choice should have been forced on them back in the Fall--not now. And if V&E has been bringing in late-summer SAs to surf the 'net, that is V&E's problem.

FYI V&E pays $3,077/wk to summers, not $2700.

Also, V&E pays a $3100 bonus if you clerk with them for the first half of the summer.

118,

I'm not 83, but I'd like to address a few of the points you made.

While I do think it reflects "poorly" on V&E to now enforce the hard cutoff of July 17, I think that most everything the law firms are doing now reflects "poorly" on them. So the question becomes whether or not it reflects poorly enough to make it not worth their while, and in this case I don't think it does. The 2L's that now won't have a chance to work there will still get offers (presumably), so all they're really missing out on is a few weeks of extra pay. In normal times, I think V&E assumed that the cost of paying them was worth it in order to have the small chance they might accept. In this market, however, I think they realize that those kinds of costs simply aren't justified.

Also, while I will agree that this is essentially an offer rescission, one must ask how this is truly hurting the 2L as compared to forcing them to make this decision earlier. Would the 2L have picked a different firm for the first half? Doubtful. And if they would have picked V&E, they still can. The only thing that really affects the 2L is the fewer number of weeks they get paid this summer - but they're in no different a position than if V&E had a strict first half program months ago (as the vast majority of their peer firms had).

I'm really happy that I'll be working for VE this summer. I could not care less about going on retreats or going out for fancy dinners. I want a JOB so that I can do WORK (and make a living, of course.) I'm glad they're scaling back perks instead of tossing out dozens of associates like they're garbage.

118 - they are lopping the back end of the summer associate program for *all* summer associates, including non-splitters by two weeks I think. So the splitters would effectively be coming in for one week - just enough time for computer training and introductions. Might (or might not) be worth it for the splitter, but certainly not worth it for the firm.

Anyone who thinks a company can promise no lay offs or no method to thin the ranks is a fool and will be working for a company that has no business sense in this market.

120,

"The 2L's that now won't have a chance to work there will still get offers (presumably)"

You are a fool (presumably).

"[H]ow this is truly hurting the 2L as compared to forcing them to make this decision earlier[?]"

Um, a summer associate who splits with two firms may have two offers at the end of the summer. A summer associate who works for one firm will have one offer at most.

Fail.

Anyone who thinks a company can promise no lay offs or no method to thin the ranks is a fool and will be working for a company that has no business sense in this market. There has never been true job security at any business. That is a myth.

121, 100% agree with you. I'll be at V&E this summer and don't care if they scale things back dramatically. I'm just excited for the opportunity to clerk this summer and hopefully get an offer at the end.

jizz munchers.

124-

There's no need to be an ass.

1. The 2L's who were supposed to come at the end of the summer have been told they will get offers based on their work as a 1L. Considering it only applies to roughly 5 people, its not as if no-offering these individuals really helps their bottom line, so I would be willing to be every one of these 2L's gets an offer letter at the end of the summer.

2. "Um, a summer associate who splits with two firms may have two offers at the end of the summer. A summer associate who works for one firm will have one offer at most." Obviously, you didn't understand what I was saying. I was making the point that if they had been forced to make this decision at the beginning of the summer, they'd be in the same exact position they are in now. Its not as if they chose V&E over another three week firm at the end of the summer. And its highly unlikely that they would have picked V&E over their current first half firm. Arguably, if they had would have done so and now feel like they can't because it would be awkward to, then, yes, they are in a worse position.

Why don't you grow up instead of trying to ridicule people online (unsuccessfully, at that) to make yourself feel better?

128 here. The end of point 1 should read "... willing to *bet"

128 --

118 actually understates the problem. v&e didn't make any "ad-hoc exceptions" to returning 2Ls!!! That's BS! They never had a hard stop on july 17th until now!!! i know people who were originally gonna work there till aug 7. Based on what friends told me, last fall, returning 2Ls were told that they could come back whenever the hell they wanted, and for only 4 weeks, as long as it didn't spill into august too much. Also...

1. If this move only affects five people, why in the hell do it at all??? Do the math -- by screwing over supposedly only 5 people who were gonna work 4 weeks, they save like 65k, across 230+ equity partners = like $270 per partner!!!! So they rescinded (or whatever euphemism you wanna use) offers to these 5 people to save $270 per partner. Things much be pretty bad out in Texas! This reeks of a panicked, desperate move not commensurate with what was considered a proud, classy firm. I wouldn't bet on no layoffs if they're making moves to save 65k. I know it adds up, but this is a big PR hit to them -- they would have been better off canceling coffee or something to save 65k!

2. My hunch is that this is affecting a lot more than 5 people. V&E had many 1L summers last year, most of whom presumably are splitting. So by enforcing this hard stop on July 17, these returning 2Ls are either only coming back for a week or two, or not at all.

3. However, I do agree that it probably doesn't make sense to no-offer the prior 1L summers who can't work b/c of the july 17 hard stop. That would really hurt their reputation on campus.

-- a Happy B&B 2L

119 - so do all of the other Texas firms still offering second-half programs.

120 - correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm not being sarcastic, I really don't know for sure), but aren't most of V&E's "peer firms" continuing to offer second-half programs? Unless you are considering TK and Jackson Walker as peers?

131 -- yes BB and f&j are offering second half summers to returning 2Ls.

v&e was/is much more transactional focused compared to BB. Even in energy, transactional work is DEAD.

130- The number of people who now cannot work at VE at all this summer is 5 2L's. However, this is not the total number of people affected, as many 2L's had planned to stay longer than July 17 - they are affected as well, just not any more than 2L's at most other law firms that have scaled back to 10 weeks. (And let's not forget that VE pays a $3100 bonus to people working at VE first).

131- Most of VE's peer firms are first half only. Haynes and Boone has a small second half mostly reserved for returning 1L's. Bracewell has sort of a middle half program worked out which starts 3 weeks into the summer and lasts for 10 weeks so that people could at either a first half or second half firm and still do Bracewell. And AK is a second half only firm I believe. But firms like BB (VE's only real "peer" firm in terms of prestige), Fulbright, TK, KL Gates, JW, Akin all have first half only programs. The only firms besides AK offering real second half programs are lit boutiques. Also, you are mistaken about the number of firms in Texas still offering first-half bonuses. I don't know of any paying that bonus besides VE (doesn't mean there aren't any, but if there are some, there aren't that many).

133 here. I didn't include BB and FJ's second half programs, because they aren't true second half programs since no one is able to participate in them that hadn't worked at the firm before. HB is essentially the same thing except that a couple of the second halfers are new to the firm.

120 - to clarify what 130 mentioned: V&E generally waived the July 17th cutoff if a 2L was splitting with a firm in a different market than the V&E office in question. Thus, it seems possible given last year's large 1L summer class and the fact that V&E's incoming summer class is not much different in size than 2008's that more than five current 2Ls were impacted by this decision. Those summers who sought to split within Texas generally had to work around the July 17th cutoff (with a few exceptions, and there always are). Either way, it's not clear (especially for returning summers) that picking V&E second-half indicates a latent desire to go somewhere else given many other firms shifting to first-half only. For a lot of summers, it was the only way to get a split.

132 - thanks for the confirmation. Couldn't find info anywhere listing Texas firms still offering second-half programs, and I'm well out of law student loop.

I've heard so many rumors about what's going on V&E (including directly from V&E associates and partners) that I don't know what to believe. I've heard theyre slow in every practice group, and I've heard theyre busier than ever. I've heard about big time stealth layoffs and I've heard it's only limited cutting of dead weight. Gotta give V&E credit for doing whatever it is theyre really doing w/out attracting a lot of official attention, but not sure if that's the best strategy in the current climate 'cause it just fuels all the rumors.

135, I know it might make sense that there would be more than 5 2L's affected. But V&E strongly pushed for even the returning 2L's to spend their first half there, and the vast majority of them did (including nearly all of the Texas splitters). And like most Texas firms do, VE tried to select 1L's that were interested in Texas. However, I know of several VE 1L's that went to a different market and didn't even try to split with VE. So, out of the large 1L class they had, there are basically three groups: 1L's who want to split with another Texas firm (almost all of whom do VE first), 1L's who choose not to return at all, and 1L's who want to split with an out of state firm and then tried to do VE at the end of the summer. I don't think its implausible that only 5 of them chose the latter option. Unless I was misinformed, there were only 5 returning 2L's that were coming at the end of the summer.

Furthermore, I think 130 is exaggerating the nature of this horrible "PR hit." I doubt any 1L is going to care about this come OCI next year.

133 -- 5 people might be the number NOW that won't be able to work at all at v&e b/c of the hard stop, but i bet it gets bigger, for the following reason.

say a returning 2L is splitting a going to BB first. her plan was to work for 8 weeks at Skadden and then return to v&e for 4 weeks. Now, b/c of the july 17 deadline, she can only work at v&e for 2 weeks. Why would she leave skadden and work for only 2 weeks, when she can STAY at skadden and work 4 more weeks? especially since v&e will supposedly still give her an offer based on her 1L work.

once she figures this out and gets permission from skadden to work for 12 weeks, she will tell v&e that she rather not work at all than only work for 2 weeks, which is silly.

138, fair point. I just don't think that applies to too many people. But perhaps it does.

133 - "Also, you are mistaken about the number of firms in Texas still offering first-half bonuses. I don't know of any paying that bonus besides VE (doesn't mean there aren't any, but if there are some, there aren't that many)."

Ok, I'm confused, are we talking about historically or this 2009 summer? Is V&E still offering the first-half bonus if they canceled their second-half program? To my knowledge, in the last 3-5 years at least, most decently sized Texas firms offered both halves, and summers were always offered a first-half bonus.

I think the comments about "PR hits" are ridiculous. These are unprecedented times, the likes of which folks practicing for less than 10 years have never seen. Law review editors in chief and their ilk will probably have tons of firms fighting over them, but for the rest, come on. And even next year's class has options, how are those kids going to discriminate? "VE slashed its summer dates, but BB laid people off, but Fulbright froze, but Weil pushed back start dates 10 years, but Latham did ABC, but HayBoo did XYZ, but Locke did this" *head explodes*

It sucks right now. Hopefully, we can make people remember firms that did massive layoffs and lied that they were "performance based" but I doubt it. There is simply too much going on for all but the most horrific to stand out. And again, smaller summer classes = fewer options.

141 -- firms play a dangerous game by screwing over summer associates (or returning summer associates). These summers are on campus, talk to their friends, bad mouth the firms that treated them badly, etc. In contrast, you're right that laying off associates is sort of abstract to law students -- almost everyone is doing it, and law students lose track.

But screwing over summers is more"personal" and "close to home" on campus. If I were one of the summers that got screwed over by v&e, you better believe i'd be telling all of my 1L friends (eg, the ones on my journal), to go w/ BB, who hasn't done anything to their summers.

It's just irrational for v&e -- how much are they really saving by shortening their summer by 2 weeks?

Um...I know several people who were laid off in their Houston office and I even know how many months they received of severance.

I also know they froze salaries for a certain section in the Austin and/or DC office.

I don't even work at V&E and I know this for sure. How can the associates at V&E be so blind, ignorant, or gullible to believe that no one has been laid off in their Houston/Texas offices?

Who does dilg think he is fooling? incredible!

and it amuses me but also saddens me to see some of these comments praising V&E for making this false statement. Sure, V&E would be a great firm for saying this...if it were true. but it's not. I have more respect for White & Case (hell, even cadwaladar and clifford chance) for admitting to lay offs.

I just hope that the clients see how V&E treats its associates. I'm sure clients have been noticing that "staffing" has been changing on their deals. I'm sure they have their doubts about V&E and Dilg is just hurting the firms reputation not only with the legal community and law students, but also with their own clients.

When a firm starts stubbornly lying when so many people know the truth, you know it's in trouble.

143 -- that's really weird about the cutting salaries only for certain practice areas! which ones? my guess is IP (since you said austin) or maybe environmental. that sucks. good luck getting people to join those groups.

also, why do clients have "their doubts" about v&e?

144 -- Maybe because they've been raising rates like it's 1999 and, uh, it ain't 1999.

--not 143

To all those mocking the "5 returning 2Ls":

There were quite a few of us V&E 1Ls returning for the second half of the summer this year. I know of more than 5 myself who at least anticipated working past mid-July (if not exclusively), and that is only in one (and not even the biggest) office.

Irrespective of what their official cut-off policy is (which, by the way, was not mentioned at all when they were giving us the "hard sell" in the fall), we all relied on their promise of second-half summer employment. In fact, I turned down other offers (at much higher-ranked firms) to split my summer because I was impressed by their flexibility and commitment to us, not to mention their strong energy practice.

Some of us skipped out on full rides to top 10 schools in order to attend the very best we could get into (with a corresponding $0 in scholarship money from our chosen "very top" school). Unlike many with silver spoons in their mouths, I was relying on this extra money to help finance my 3L year - now I will have to take out extra loans, at a (now higher because of the shitty market) interest rate. Awesome.

This on top of the fact that I now have no desire to work at V&E, which was not the case before this week. Even if they were to give me an offer at the end of the summer (which I actually doubt will happen), why would I trust a place that lied to me once? Would you trust a boyfriend/girlfriend that cheated on you? I wouldn't - I'd toss 'em to the curb.

When you wait until April to tell returning 2Ls that there is no place for you (and this, after not returning emails or calls and delaying for months to set exact summer dates), you ought to offer a token bit of compensation or a couple of weeks of work. Of course, they don't have to do that, but then I don't have to shut my mouth when 1Ls ask me about my experience at V&E.

These comments that clients ought to switch to V&E because V&E supposedly takes care of its people have to be posted by some desperate V&E partner. Instead of praising V&E for that, perhaps some GCs of V&E's biggest clients need to ask themselves why V&E apparently had substandard lawyers billing away on their projects for years. I know several people who were terminated that did plenty of substantive work for what V&E refers to as its biggest and most important clients - yet during the review process, they were suddenly informed that they were essentially not intelligent enough to be attorneys period, let alone attorneys for V&E. One would hope that if these people were really that bad, V&E would have terminated them well before they spent 5-7 years at the firm and not let them spend time working for important clients (and yes, they were doing plenty of substantive work - it wasn't just low level due diligence, document review, etc). Perhaps clients need to ask themselves why V&E isn't providing them with its "A team" and switch to a firm that will.

Personally, I have a lot more respect for a firm like White & Case that will admit that the economy is hurting them - just like everyone else - and that they need to reduce headcount because of it. Every time V&E makes a public announcement that they don't need to do layoffs, they make it that much harder for the many associates that were terminated to move on. Yes, perhaps these associates weren't complete superstars, but it doesn't mean that they weren't good lawyers - and they certainly deserve a chance to start their career over somewhere else. Very few people end up as firm superstars, and a lot of the time, it doesn't have a lot to do with the quality of legal work that person produces. And trust me, most of the associates still working at V&E don't fit the "superstar" definition either.

I too can confirm at least 5 layoffs - all transactional. These were good lawyers who gave their lives to the firm. Same thing happened in 2003 - Dilg lied then and he is lying now. To young associates - don't forget you are just a number - save as much money as you can and keep your career flexible for new opportunities that may arise, as for 95% of you, the V&E trip is a short one.

146 - I'm sorry, summer associate, that you are cut out of a couple of weeks of pay. V&E is shortening its entire summer program out of necessity (like many other firms, including my former firm). The firm also previously "promised" associates a September starting date; these associates are foregoing a lot more than a couple of weeks' salary. (Note: the hiring partner said "either Nov or Jan is fine", but the consensus that I've heard among my V&E friends is the partnership "strongly suggested" that the associates start in Jan"). Apparently, they are also laying people off.

In sum, everyone is being affected by their respective firm's cost cutting, and I know your case feels special to you-but its not. So stop your sniveling.

- laid off associate from another TX firm with 150k debt and no job prospects.

Comment removed by moderator.

ATL is so negative. Here's a big firm with a good report -- and ATL says May paychecks will go down. Just stirring the pot. And the guy (14) that would rather be laid off than at VE? Whatever, dude. Seriously. So glad to be in Texas.

I also think that people are wildly overestimating the effect this will have on VE's future recruiting. VE's pitch has pretty much always been that they're one of the two most prestigious firms in Houston and their firm isn't filled with socially awkward losers like Baker Botts. Those are both still true. And seeing as they got 77 summers this year, my guess is they wouldn't mind if a few less people accept their offers next year. Baker Botts only has 29 summers, and a huge part of that is because all of the top students at Texas knew that BB no-offered half their UT class last year. That's much worse for publicity than trimming a summer program during a recession.

150 - there was only one 1L in the NY office last year. Also, how is it that "at least two" out of a grand total of FIVE affected 2Ls are friends of yours such that you would write such a emotionally-charged screed (see paragraph three)?

150 is full of crap. I don't buy for a second that these returning 1L students altered their plans just to fit V&E in their summers. Its not as if they had a choice between Wachtell and another firm, with only the other firm allowing the VE split so they chose the latter option. And also I highly doubt that if they now went back to their first half firm that that firm would now say they can't work more weeks (assuming they have more weeks in their summer program and they could have signed up for more weeks had they not tried to split with V&E). Now maybe, just maybe they were choosing between two relatively equal firms, one of which had a shorter program and they chose the firm with a shorter program in order to make it easier to split with VE. But that would be a highly particular circumstance.

153 -- don't know what to tell you. the person i was referring to split with NY and a TX office. I also doubt i would know 2 of the 5 (despite being in Texas). thus, i, pretty sure this is affecting more than 5 people!

152 -- there are many big name firms beefing up their TX offices and moving in on v&e -- weil, skadden, etc. Weil is in Band 1 in Texas corporate/m&a. Top students who wanna be in TX will give a serious look to such firms. Don't pretend like v&e only competes w/ BB.

Interested to hear anyone's thoughts on the NYC office... (summer program in particular, state of the office in general)...

These splitting 2Ls, who were once 1L SAs, sound incredibly whiny. These kids got handed over 30K as 1Ls to eat foie gras at Che Shwank and surf the internet, and now they're whining about a couple weeks less pay?

Hardly any firms allow for a second-half split, so I doubt 146 turned down other such offers. In fact, the only reason firms usually allow 2L summers to do a second-half split is b/c they were there as 1L SAs the previous year. The worst case scenario is that his first-half firm would have allowed him to stay for more weeks than he will now ultimately get paid for, but given that most firms are cutting back, it's unlikely or insignificant. Especially given the fact V&E paid you over 30K last year for being a 1L!

I just hope the other firm 146 is splitting with is not my firm. If we gave him an offer and he comes on as an associate, I can just hear it now: "You promised me a collegial environment but someone just yelled at me - waaaaaa waaaaaa."

150, you should be more careful in what you write on an anonymous message board with that attitude. While you stay anonymous you just completely outed the person that you are talking about with regards to NY. There was only one summer associate in NYC affected by this and if I was that person I would not want to be associated with your juvenile response.

158 -- if that' v&e attitude, then don't freakin bother hiring 1Ls at ALL!! people who summered at biglaw as 1Ls are usually at the top of their classes and had other opptys as 1Ls. they chose v&e (versus other 1L offers) under the following assumptions:

1. they'd likely be asked back as 2Ls

2. they'd only have to work 4 weeks as 2Ls

3. those 4 weeks could be done ANYTIME, as long as they were during the summer program (which spills into august)

4. and yes, many 2L firms allow you to split, b/c they they only require you to do 8 weeks. so you can do 8 weeks at that firm, and then go to v&e with plenty of time elft over in your summer.

you can spin this all you want, but don't blame this on the 1Ls. they went with v&e under certain assumptions, and v&e CHANGED those expectations in freakin april. all to save nickles and dimes . meanwhile, law students are expected to follow the NALP rules come hell or high water, with their 45 day deadline BS, etc.

people had plans, leases, other opptys, etc. fortunately, i'll be in Houston the whole summer, so it doesn't affect me, but i can imagine why others would be upset if they were changing cities.

bottom line: if v&e doesn't like "whiny" 1Ls, then don't hire them. but don't take them on, give them certain expectations, and then renege -- and then say, "oh well, you 1Ls were lucky to even have a job last summer."

160, well V&E didn't hire many 1L's this year.

Also, why don't you take a step back and take a breather. Laid off associates also have leases and everything that you mentioned so it's not like you are the only one. Appreciate the opportunities that are given to you and go from there.

161 -- do you think that the houston office will genuinely consider (for full time offers) 1Ls who can't come back or can only come back for 2 weeks? or are they pretty much no-offered for all intents and purposes?

161:

wait a sec -- i thought v&e didn't lay anyone off!

162, I think that they will be considered and whether or not they receive an offer or not I have no idea. One reason is I have no idea how many offers the Houston office plans on giving out with 77 summer associates. That is a huge class. It'll be interesting to see what happens in V&E Houston come the end of the summer. My guess is that most people will end up with an offer and they dramatically reduce the amount of 1L recruiting that they do this year.

With regards to other offices other than Houston I would imagine most would be considered and most receive an offer. Seems that other offices are pretty happy with the size of the class they have this summer and don't think they are too big or too small.

163, V&E didn't lay anybody off. They certainly did get rid of people for performance based reasons. Their not going to stop doing that simply because the economy is bad and whether you want to classify that as a "stealth layoff" to make yourself feel better then that is your prerogative.

I was talking about the thousands of other lawyers being laid off across the country. You don't have a contract to be a summer associate and bitch all you want about it but be grateful for the opportunity that you are going to have this summer and last summer and move forward from there.

160-
Your situation is no different than other 2L SAs who got their summers shortened at many firms across the country. 2Ls accepted those firms with the expectation that they would be there for a certain number of weeks, and that got CHANGED by being scaled back. That's the economy today. A lot of other people have lost a lot more than a couple weeks pay. Suck it up.

I'm an 2L incoming SA and I got my summer shortened, and I would be pissed to find out that someone is coming in after me to get a total of 14 weeks pay (7 from each firm) when I committed to the firm full time to the place and I only get 10.

146-
You are a whiney little biotch. V&E is a class act. You are not.

150 and/or 160-

With respect to these leases people supposedly have for the time they would have been with VE, why were these 2L's signing leases that they can't get out of 3 months in advance? Most every temporary lease I looked at you had to give 30 days notice to get all of your money back.

167 -- reneging offers to save 65k ($250 per partner) = classy. hope that Nintendo Wii is fun.

163 - I think he was talking about Biglaw lawyers in general. And he's got a point - everyone had "different options" at certain points in the their careers.
I'm sure many of the laid-off first/second years at places like Latham could have gone to Skadden and still have a job right now, etc. The economy is putting people in a much worse predicament than yours.

160-
Are you a f*****g idiot? This isn't about V&E reneging. This is about the economy being the worst in many decades. Nickels and dimes add up. I am thankful to be summering at V&E which still seems to be a relatively healthy firm. Take your entitlement and stuff it in a sack.

160 - I totally know right? I went NYU, paid sticker price for it, too! I worked my ass off for good grades, got a great job at a V20 firm. Upon arrival in September, I was ready to work my fingers to the bone. One problem - there was no work to be done. I scoured the office, did as much pro bono as possible, but was still let go in the February blood bath. Now I have a current $2,000 lease to pay, my severance is almost up, and I have 1800/mo loan payments. I had so many other opportunities during 2L recruiting. But I chose. I chose THEM. Those fuckers totally OWE ME! I will now besmirch them to anyone who will listen because they couldn't afford to keep me on. I'm TOTALLY with you.

Oh, wait a second. My position is worse than yours by orders of MAGNITUDE.

172 - sorry to hear, good luck to you.

172, it could always be worse. At least you have a good education to fall back on.

I'm sorry, but I really can't believe some of this whining, especially on the part of some of the 2Ls on here (146, I'm looking at you).
From what I can tell, V&E had not resorted to the more draconian decisions that many, many other firms have been forced into in this economy. I would be really thankful to have any summer job at this point, let alone an opportunity at a relatively un-leveraged firm that so far has not conducted mass-layoffs.
All this whining about "reliance" and other 1L contracts ideas are totally off the mark. Consider yourself extremely lucky that the firm hasn't totally cut you off, as will surely happen to less fortunate students summering elsewhere.
Moreover, on an unrelated note, somebody above, commenting on the general health of the firm, mentioned PPP being "crushed" and partners being attracted by other firms - I don't think we're speaking about the same V&E, because the V&E that I know reported a 10% increase in PPP for 2008, and moreover, prides itself on its home-grown character. These are people who grew up with V&E, so to speak, the culture runs in their veins. I would be shocked if many partners were seriously contemplating leaving.

146 is dead on. As I'm sure everyone remembers from OCI. many of the firms start looking the same after awhile. So any little tid-bit about a firm can make a big difference and tilt the scales. And the returning 2Ls that were screwed over (many of whom are likely on law review, top journals, moot court, other orgs) will be HAPPY to not recommend v&e to their fellow students who are trying to decide where to go (and likely scrambling to make a decision b/c of nalp's lovely 45 day rule).

Sure, those who are set on TX will always give v&e a serious look. But I'm going to recommend Weil, Skadden, GDC, and even BB. Word of mouth and rep around campus is a powerful thing -- why do you think firms spend so much money developing and protecting it?

It's a shame that lawyers are such awful managers. They spend a gazillion dollars cultivating a reputation (hiring 1Ls, recruiting events/retreats, etc), and then piss it all away for $200k or whatever their saving with this "hard stop" summer move. They will spend 10x that to rebuild their rep when the "war for talent" heats up again. And it will (the dow is up 3% today).

HEY BAKER BOTTS: Are you going to "one-up" V&E (like usual after they announce something) and leave start dates in Oct.-Nov. like you said, or are you going to be a lemming and push back to January?

165: If you still work at V&E, and you can't tell the difference between "their" and "they're" and you honestly believe the laid off attorneys were let go because of performance based reasons, then why are *you* still there? Seems to me like your work product can't be that good if you write like someone in junior high.

Saying stealth lay offs are based on performance to make yourself feel better, but it's just a plain lie and don't you ever forget that your head is on the chopping block.

Baker Botts always follows V&E. They will make it look good and start you a month before just to say they are better. The truth is they can't do anything without V&E acting first.

177 - Nice try. Baker Botts is not going to start you earlier just because you tempt them to one-up V&E. January here you come.

Everyone whining about V&E lying about not firing people needs a reality check. Dilg never said they didn't fire people, he said they don't plan on using the same mass firings that other firms have as means of cutting costs to survive the current down turn. They will find other ways to limit costs. As a V&E employee, I am grateful to hear that. Does that mean I don't have friends who were let go following their January review? No. It means I don't have to work in fear that out of the blue I will be scheduled to meet with someone from HR in a conference room.

146, you can recommend whoever you want. Its not as if, a) people will listen to you, or b) Skadden, Weil, GDC, etc. has room to take all of those summers you convince to avoid VE like the plague.

As it stands, Skadden, Weil, and GDC all have very good reputations (except Weil Houston), and do very well in recruiting. VE/BB also do well, but they offer something different (both offer large offices, being in the headquarters of a firm, top quality legal work, VE offers a laid back enjoyable firm culture, BB offers a socially awkward, nerdy, uptight firm culture). Some people want to work at a large Texas firm, and some don't. You and all of your pissed off Law Review law school hot shots can trash VE all you want, but what is the point. There will be plenty of others who had great experiences to counteract what you say.

Bottom line: VE cutting their summer back to 10 weeks is hardly a dealbreaker for potential summer associates in this economy, especially when they find out that VE even gave offers to the five affected 2L's.

181 - the article above states "...Dilg assured associates that the firm would not resort to layoffs." But you claim "Dilg never said they didn't fire people..." I guess I am confused with the semantics - what exactly did Dilg say? The people who I heard were let go had never received negative feedback in a review, but suddenly (and coincidentally in connection with the economic downturn) they are given negative feedback and 3 months to find something else. So whatever Dilg's statement was regarding layoffs, it seems a bit misleading to "assure that the firm would not resort to layoffs" when layoffs have already occurred.

In February, in the Texas Lawyer, Dilg said that V&E has not laid anyone off...after V&E laid people off. (I know several people who were laid off.)

http://texaslawyer.typepad.com/texas_lawyer_blog/2009/02/the-dreaded-layoff-question.html

Now Dilg is saying they will not resort to lay offs. Does this mean that V&E is admitted to past lay offs and that they will not lay off anyone in the future? Or is this just a continuation of the bullshit that V&E is claiming that they never laid anyone off and never will?

Either way that firm is squirly and not telling the truth. I wouldn't trust Dilg (or anyone at the firm) and anything he, or the crazy people in AEO, say.

V&E is definitely desperately trying to hide something. Much like they did during the Enron years...but that caught up with them and so will this.

White & Case, Latham, etc. are at least honest they are laying people off. These are excellent top tier firms that will not have a problem finding law students and quality laterals when the market picks up. If V&E admits to lay offs being a second tier firm, they are screwed in the future. Also, who knows what their financial position is. There might be deeper problems than just reputation concerns.

At least V&E gave a stipend. King & Spalding didn't give a thing and they pushed back start dates clear into January. So much for trying to stay competitive in the Texas market. It goes to show that you don't want to go to an office that is controlled by the mother ship three or four states away.

This firm sucks, sucks, sucks and is rotten to the core. The amount of posts on thread is incredible. Why would so many people really think that this firm is so terrible and why would there be such strong feelings that this is a 'class act' firm? I feel that some of these defensive comments are from weird V&E employment people who feel its there job or weird, non-busy, non-revenue creating partners who are terrified of their future (non) revenue. There's something going on here and its insidious and deep. They've laid off people, everyone knows that. They will lay off more people, people in the know know that and they should have folded after their unethical Enron behavior (wait, didn't they have their heads in the sands then, or where they neck deep?) and we ALL KNOW THAT.

186- You're dead on. V&E is a disgusting cesspool of a firm - they've managed to create artificially high PPP for 70 years in a row now, but this year its all going to come tumbling down. And boy are you going to look smart when they do. If only they had given you a callback so you could have gone to work there and taught them how to REALLY run a firm. Those poor bastards aren't going to know what hit them....

V&E stopped short? That's my move!

Mr. Constanza.

185 - Another reason why Sutherland is so much better than King & Spalding. Whether we are talking Houston or Atlanta, Sutherland rocks!

148-- Not all 5 associates "sacrificed their lives" for V&E. At least one spent all of her time traveling and none of her time billing and made it abundantly clear she didn't care about her job. Another hasn't done anything but pro bono since August and was clearly at the firm for a paycheck. There may be economic factors in the layoffs, but you'll always cut the lowest performers. Sorry, 5 low performers.

190: um, where do we get 5 transactional associates? I know way more than 5 that were laid off.

Also, at firms like V&E that aren't that busy and don't get that much work, the people who get work or bill the most aren't always the best attorneys. They're attorneys with boob "augmentations" or whose dad is someone or who is one of the "good ol' boys". Some of your top billers are total dickheads who schmooze well with the dickhead partners, unlike at my firm where the top billers are top billers because they're the best lawyers.

At firms like White & Case or Latham, if you're willing to work, you get work. At V&E, when you guys are second tier but pretend you're first and don't have that much for the bloated junior associate class, I would have just said "F- it" and traveled too (or looked for another job before the market tanked).

Also, at least WC and Latham admit to lay offs. You guys are just second tier cowards.

also to 190-

what's wrong with pro bono? if there's no work to do at VE, then maybe that associate was forced to do pro bono. If he (or she) was a total slacker, then he (or she) wouldn't even do pro bono. Maybe your firm sucks and he (or she) couldn't get any other work besides pro bono and at least wanted to do something or bill something.

true slackers wouldn't even do pro bono. And I've handled some as a transaction lawyer. Having to retool and figure out how to go to court is not for
slackers.

-not 191

"um"... I also know of more than 5 people that were laid off but the bottom line is that the firm is a business. If someone isn't billing alot, then they should be let go. If they arent' billing enough because the firm culture sucks or they don't have breast augmentations, that's unfortunate. It's not right, but it still means that person isn't bringing in as much money as the woman who got a boob job. But that firm culture that cultivates women with boob jobs over smarter (and flat chested) women just means that the firm will stay in the minor leagues so in a sense, there is justice.

You might get canned but you probably didnt want to stay at a firm like VE anyway. and VE is low on the totem pole because they prefer good ol' boys or large chested women over smarter, more qualified lawyers.

btw, I know someone who was laid off that billed well over 2000 hours last year. How do you justify that?

189--Do you know much of anything about Sutherland? They're not better than K&S. They're really not better than...well, anybody.

I heard VE was cutting 10% associates this year and started the lay offs in February.

No one got laid off that billed 2000+ hours. The people to whom you are referring (two ladies?) did not get laid off, stealthily or otherwise. They both chose to leave. They were considered rockstars in their practice groups.

No one got laid off that billed 2000+ hours. The people to whom you are referring (two ladies?) did not get laid off, stealthily or otherwise. They both chose to leave. They were considered rockstars in their practice groups.

hm...what does that say about VE if two women who were "rockstars" chose to leave the firm? Doesn't reflect very well on VE. You guys can't even keep your good lawyers and have a plethora of subpar lawyers (according to you) that you had to let go for performance reasons (again, according to you).

Here's a reality check to all of you who think that V&E hasn't laid off anyone but has simply eliminated the deadweight. You're wrong. For the past three years, they have been steadily shedding hard working employees from all levels of the firm. Long-time partners, senior associates, two to three year associates and many of its staff. In fact, the litigation section, which had been one of the largest sections in the Houston office three years ago, is now almost non-existent. It has dwindled to roughly one-fifth of its size within the last three years. The Management Committee has steadily been working toward revamping what was once Houston's largest law firm into a "boutique" international firm. To classify as a "boutique" firm, a firm must, by definition, be "SMALL." In the late '90's and early 2000's, with more than 400 attorneys in its home office, it absolutely could not be defined as SMALL. End result - to be a boutique firm, many (perhaps 50% or more) of its workforce, must go. Period. How can I state this with such absolute certainty? From personal experience. I was one of the hard working employees with more than 20 years of loyal service who was let go on a V&E defined "Lay-off." I received a severance package. I was not terminated due to non-performance. Neither were the majority of my former co-workers. Further, they have outpriced themselves out of the legal field by charging exorbitant hourly fees, fees that perhaps could be commanded by top-notch firms in New York but certainly not in the Houston market. Many partners were deeply concerned that the fees the management committee insisted they charge would be detrimental to their business. However, the management committee overrode the concerns and insisted on the fee hikes. The end result justified the partners' concerns because many clients took their business elsewhere. Clearly, the management committee has cut the throats of the very partners they claim to want to protect and nuture within the "hallowed halls" of the V&E establishment. Bottom line - management at V&E has lied and continues to lie to the legal community about what truly is occurring at the firm. Its business has taken a drastic turn and is spiraling downward due to its poor management decisions.

whatever! joe dilg is my best buddy! he's a stand up kind of guy, even though he approved stealth lay offs and under the table pay freezes.

Joe Dilg had a meeting with the BUSI section and told us that all our jobs were safe when Enron went bust. One week later, 40 associates were gone. For performance reasons, of course.