First! Lifelong ambition accomplished.

@2 haha....tool

I have to mine gold all day and I get paid nothing.

Yes, Master.

I have to mine gold all day and I get paid nothing.

Yes, Master.

Good move by Bryan Cave. Sucks to take a paycut, especially if you're still billing crazy hours, but definitely beats a layoff or watching your friends get laid off.

First to say Kansas City fucking blows! Nevertheless, 100K there will buy you a wife of substantial square footage and some sort of luxury automobile. The same can't be said for most other locales.

"Here's a safety tip, do not go to a highly ranked, expensive, private law school and end up in Bryan Cave Kansas City. Your creditors are not going to be happy with that choice."

How are your creditors liking your "choice" to leave BigLaw altogether and be a crappy blogger.

Another condescending post from a freaking lazy blogger who couldn't cut it in the actual legal world.

#6 has it right. Any firm with a modicum of class will at least attempt a mdest salary cut before laying off its people (unless the lay-offs are actually legit performance based). Sadly, class is sorely lacking in the V100.

6 = 10 = Don Lents

So let me get this straight: salaries are being cut during a severe economic downturn. Also, from now on, associate salaries will be based more on performance than other factors, such as seniority.

Seems pretty logical and normal to me. Why is this such big news to lawyers? Is it because most lawyers have no clue when it comes to running a business?

The memo, in other words:

"We've decided that current 'market realities' give us sufficient cover to cut our associates' salaries across the board. We realize that a mere 10% across-the-board cut will not be sufficient to make up for the business we've lost, but it will allow us to keep at least a few partners at our desired PPP. So suck it.

Oh and also, we've decided to make our compensation-setting process entirely 'subjective.' By this we mean 'arbitrary' and 'political.' We decided that minorities and women were simply catching up too quickly; this adjustment to our compensation structure will allow us to allow our implicit biases to operate more freely. We also decided that the free-market approach to internal firm operations was just too merit-based. We felt that this new system will allow us to bring back the old-boys club in a new, disguised form.

Don't worry; this new shady compensation policy will be matched by a similarly murky billing structure. We will now be able to both confuse our clients and cover for discriminatory employment practices by coding your worth to the firm in your billing rate. If we don't like you, in other words, expect your billing rate to be low in class, even if you bust your balls and turn in excellent work product.

Welcome to the new 'market reality!'"

This policy really sucks for second year associates who are being billed higher than first year associates, but receiving the same pay.

6,

That's why I love working at Thompson Hine. At my firm, you can get a hefty pay cut AND watch your friends get laid off.

Partners utilizing "subjective factors" and "progress (no definition)" ---> arbitrary decisions, nepotism, and unequal treatment of similarly situated associates based on who your partner is.

I'm not the world's biggest fan of lockstep, but if the criteria aren't reasonably objective, laid out clearly for associates, and capable of independent confirmation, then it is a screw job giving partners more power to abuse.

Now we're not even supposed to be judged by objective criteria?

A move like this is complete bullshit. Therefore, I anticipate these compensation "criteria" will be adopted at TTThompson Hine immediately.

(note to the partners - Fuck you! (like I said, not feeling clever today. But still, fuck you!))

how much will they pay "non-existing" associates?

Has history proven me to be a great President yet?

Bryan Cave to associates: DING! Fag.

If I got an email saying my Biglaw was cutting my salary 10%, I'd just laugh. So I make 180K instead of 200K. Anything not to be thrown out in this market. I went to a TTT and am old.

NYC to 190K! Asses.

Paul Hastings is next. According to a source in LA who I trust, PH is getting close to a covenant default on their line of credit. Seems that the partners borrowed against one yr of receivables during the boom times and immediately distributed the cash. If PH's cash flow does not significantly increase over the next two quarters, they will be in default. Any default will cause the creditor to ask for personal guarantees from the partnership.

Nice! Another firm with a major Atlanta presence follows Atlanta's WorsTTT Law Firm® McKenna Long & Aldridge straight down the tubes!

Howrey should totally be suing vault.com for not yet updating their website and slipping them into that now-empty 78 spot. If they tell people their firm is number 78 on Vault.com, is that sort of like the 21-year associate who recently got stripped of his license for saying he was a senior counselor?

This is another example of the fraud of Big Law. On ET's homeworld, salaries only go UP, they never go DOWN. Big Law ex-associates have no meaningful skills and are only fit for the document review mines under their former firms. Its only a matter of time before toileteers rule you all.

17,

Obama administration has been in office for an entire 5 months.

Therefore, everything wrong in the country is now their fault and not due to your 8 years of mismanagement. Congratulations!

Sorry 14, it is tough for me to feel sorry for anyone making over 150K in this economy.

This is so racist. Minorities represent a higher percentage of associates at this firm than partners. Man, will the racism stop!

11 nails it.

6=10=partner or some other firm admin schmuck.

Why should everyone get cut across the board, particularly when they've ALREADY had layoffs? End the lockstep. Pay performers top of market, and others less. Law should be the same as any other business.

28,

Nope. I'm a first-year associate in NY.

6 (and not 10).

28,

If we do away with lockstep (quite possibly a good idea), don't you agree that associates should be judged based on clearly laid out objective criteria?

Performance is something that can be objectively observed. "Progress" and "subjective criteria" are bullshit invitations for partners to make arbitrary and political decisions.

Do away with lockstep? Perhaps.

Replace it with "subjective criteria" and "progress"? Utter bullshit.

Louis Ziccareli is a better dresser than any one of you.

29 = first-year associate = scared shitless that he's about to lose his job = exactly what allows firm management to pull off stunts like across-the-board salary cuts (coupled with promises to make compensation more personalized).

21 - stop trolling. No one believes you.

10 here.
To 28:

In terms of conventional business wisdom, you're right. In terms of running a BigLaw shop, you're dead wrong. The kind of "eat what you kill" system you're describing inevitably results in a firm turning into a cutthroat chop-shop ( a la Dechert) where noone works as a team and associate morale is always low. And, the eat what you kills typically don't do any better performance-wise than their lock-step peers.
The problem is not lock-step. Lock-step worked fine for decades, and it will work again. The problem is/was V100 firms that way overleveraged themselves through over-expansion and/or "keeping up with the Smiths" salary raises, and this little thing called a recession. You understand that there is a disease, you just have no idea what caused it.

30, not sure it matters. In lockstep, they can say you are are not "keeping up with your class" on some subjective criteria like leadership ability (other associates are leading paralegals on cite-checking like Alex the Great) . On "objective" ones, like writing, the only feedback you receive is if you do a delta view of the filing against your last draft. The non-lockstep just allows them to basically hold you back a year, which firms have been doing to associates in this recession, whether they are "moving away from lockstep" or not.

Who the fuck is Louis Ziccareli? Am I missing something? I feel like I am taking crazy pills!

This firm will never be able to get those top talent law students again. Just wait until next year when they try to interview and no one bids with them. These firms should really be a lot more concerned with the opinions of law students and how they perceive the firm.

Hey 22, since PoGo never raised salaries up to 145K, the "new" Atlanta salary is the same Atlanta salary they've been paying for years.
At the time, PoGo and SGR were the only medium-large Atlanta firms that didn't raise.

30 -- I absolutely agree. I don't understand why some people seem so excited about abandoning lockstep. "Subjective" considerations will either turn into a focus on hours (because it is easy to evaluate) -- which is already the case with bonuses at most places -- or it will become very political -- wait for the knives to come out. Plus, those people who think that they will start earning significantly more in a non-lockstep firm, take a look at firms that do bonuses on a non-lockstep basis. I work at a large firm that has more subjective critera for bonuses. The very highest bonuses were at best market compared to other large firms. Getting rid of lockstep will only make salaries less transparent, and most associates will be worse off (the same pool of $ will not be distributed to associates -- partners will almost certainly pay less overall). If lockstep does go away, the new system should still be transparent and objective, not subjective and political.

Dimwit,

You're better off with the $100k in Kansas than the $145k in DC, NY or SanFran. Of course, you would be living in KC but your creditors will be just fine.

32,

I'm not saying you're wrong... but it sounds like you're blaming the first-years. I know, I know, we know nothing and have no value and are pathetic, entitled whiners, blah blah blah (unlike any of you, who instantly became 5th years right out of lawschool)......

Can you really argue with the statement that a paycut is better than a layoff or watching a friend get laid off?

6/29

At "Breaking Back Into a Large Law Firm," someone needs to ask John Cannon of Shearman & Sterling why he fired all of the firm's second-years and then hired first-years to replace them, and if he thought that was ethical, moral, or human.

At "Breaking Back Into a Large Law Firm," someone needs to ask John Cannon of Shearman & Sterling why he fired all of the firm's second-years and then hired first-years to replace them, and if he thought that was ethical, moral, or human.

Dimwit,

You're better off with the $100k in Kansas than the $145k in DC, NY or SanFran. Of course, you would be living in KC but your creditors will be just fine.

Maybe this firm should not have offices in Missouri. A lot of these "Biglaw" firms in places where nobody does any business and is a drain on profits.

Anyone notice that this downturn is hittng Biglaw firms with a lot of offices in random places harder than highly concentrated NY and DC firms?

The obsession with “lockstep” and other such minutiae is indicative of the slave mentality that is rampant among the drones of Big Law. Once upon at time, ET too worked in private practice but could not stand the stench of the scut work, billable hours and the continual competition among the other drones for more scut work. ET freed himself, but the other drones were too afraid to leave. You are their heirs and are paying the consequences for refusing to think for your selves.

42/43,

Would it be any less ethical, moral or human to rescind offers to all of the incoming first-years?

The immoral aspect of the move is that he laid-off/hired whole classes without any regard for merit. It would have been better to cut the poor-performing 2nd years and replace them with the most-qualified 1st years.

45: the first and head office is in Missouri. Unlikely to get rid of that one.

Seems to me that those demanding "market" pay have misunderstood the meaning carried by this term.
"What the market will bear" is not what you were paid last year.
small law here, eat what I kill

Actually 45, you're full of shit. NYC and Chicago are getting hit much harder than the rest of the country.

18 FTW

ZUG ZUG

"Here's a safety tip, do not go to a highly ranked, expensive, private law school and end up in Bryan Cave Kansas City. Your creditors are not going to be happy with that choice."

Do you ever consider how arrogant and clueless you are? Do you ever consider how some people may choose to go to a particular city? What do your creditors think about the fact that you crapped out of Biglaw and are now working as a blogger making likely less than 1/4 your previous salary?

46:

42/43 here. Best of all would have been John Cannon and other Shearman partners accepting only a $1.3 million PPP instead of $1.6 million, and letting their junior attorneys keep their jobs.

Partners no longer expect that they have to withstand hard times, too, and partners feel no responsibility for educating and bringing along new members of the profession.

These days, law is not a colleagial profession.

46:

42/43 here. Best of all would have been John Cannon and other Shearman partners accepting only a $1.3 million PPP instead of $1.6 million, and letting their junior attorneys keep their jobs.

Partners no longer expect that they have to withstand hard times, too, and partners feel no responsibility for educating and bringing along new members of the profession.

These days, law is not a colleagial profession.

6/29/41 - Sure, perhaps better than layoffs, but who is saying that layoffs aren't in store down the line??? I also can't argue with the statement that getting punched is better than getting shot, but that means nothing when the person who punched you is still pointing a gun in your direction. And nobody's blaming you, but, as a 1st year in NY, you are affected by this relatively less than, say, a 5th year in StL, which is why no one wants to hear you defend this move.

45 - The Missouri offices are among the most profitable of all BC's offices.

30/39 (and partial 34) - I hear you, it's all about execution and ending lockstep means firms have to be thoughtful and honest (with themselves and their attorneys) when it comes to deciding and assessing criteria? But how is that different than any other business, except, perhaps, pure sales or product managers who have a very clear objective standard to look at? I'm not stupid enough to think firms will be good at implementing, but eventually, those who do well will become known for it, and others either will be known as poor payers, or just stay with lockstep where everyone slides.

Me? I'm offended by the notion that how far I am out of law school dictates my pay? I happen to have done a lot before law school, and if I act like a 5th year in my 3rd, why not get paid like it? That is, both as to hours and quality. No one has to believe me, but then don't pay me. At least let it be an option.

Not 28 (but I understand)

Sounds like the Atlanta salary adjustment slide is about to begin

44 is dead on, Elie is seriously misinformed about the basic principles of economics. Due to many obvious factors, 100k in KC=228k in Manhattan and 145k in Manhattan is a measly 64k in KC. Pull your head out of your ass!!!!!!!

"1.3 million PPP instead of $1.6 million, and letting their junior attorneys keep their jobs."

Where's the bottom line reached for partners? Should partners accept $1 million PPP and keep associates who are not busy when business keeps on declining?

Should partners passively accept $750,000 PPP and keep associates who are not busy while business keeps on declining?

Your assumptions are without merit. After all, those second homes in Patchogue or Quogue will not pay for themselves and college tuition, especially Ivy League, keep on ratcheting upwards.

And mistresses are expensive.

Partners accepting downward pressure on their PPP is about as true as unicorns prancing down Broadway and fairies granting you wishes.

38: You got bad info. PoGo/Bryan Cave did raise to $145k in Atl. for 1st years in 2008. Ask any of the unfortunate 1st years still working there - and now making $130k (ok...that's still pretty good in this economy)

Quote from wonderful memo - "In addition, our longstanding recognition of the importance of associate training is reflected by our existing policy that minimum hours expectations do not apply to associates in their first year of practice at Bryan Cave. That policy will continue."

I might be gullible enough to believe you if you didn't already lay-off first-years back in February. But if it makes you feel better by lying to yourself and your associates, by all means, go ahead...

So an associate can make $145k in NY or $140 in Dallas or Charlotte? I would expect NY associates to begin lateraling to Bryan Cave at historic levels.

21 - LMAO! Maybe they can pledge their vacation mansions on the South Fork!

We are working on a methodology to rank the V100 firms based on their reaction to the financial crisis. If you want to provide input, go to http://lawfirmchaos.blogspot.com/

Date of Conversation: 12/31/09
Participants: Don Lents and first-year associates graduating to second-year associates on 01/01/10

DL: I'd like to thank you for your valuable contributions to the firm during your first year of service to us. I hope you have learned a great deal and begun to make lasting relationships with the great partners of this firm. You will be rewarded for your year of hard work.

Associate: Mr. Lents, you froze and cut my salary during my first year of service.

DL: As you know, we are scheduled to bring aboard some new first-year associates in January. I ask that you embrace them with open arms, since you were just recently in their position.

Associates: Mr. Lents, why are they going to make the same salary as me when I've worked here for a year and given you everything I have for that time.

DL: Oh, don't worry, your subjective review is coming up in January.

Associate: So, you're saying there is a good chance you will reduce my salary again and I will actually be making less than the arriving first-years.

DL: I think this has been a productive conversation.

There will be some creamy asses after I'm done with them!!!!

21

Well NY is pretty quiet. Hope the other offices are busier.

Did summer associates take a pay cut or are they now making more than the first and second year associates?

Get rid of the CMO, divide his salary up and spread it around. Should solve half the problem. Right, Mark??

Pretty much knew this was coming when Husch Blackwell Sanders cut its salaries

17 -

Get your own shtick.
This one's taken.
Don't mess with Texas!

The ship be sinking...

Nice how they lay off a bunch of people and then decide maybe a first year with zero experience isn't worth $150k a year. Wow, what a concept.

-Bitter former PoGo associate.

Nice how they lay off a bunch of people and then decide maybe a first year with zero experience isn't worth $150k a year. Wow, what a concept.

-Bitter former PoGo associate.

ugh, 56 is nontrad scum

68 - Nope, summers are being paid as usual. So yes, they will be making more than 1st and 2nd year associates. But don't worry, it's okay, because "any of them would be happy to trade places" with one of those associates.

Missouri has a lot of caves. And caverns. Jesse James was from Missouri. This firm was named after "Bryan Cave", a cave located in the Ozark wilderness.

67: LA is quiet too.

70 - Husch didn't cut associates across the board like this, they just decreased starting associate comp. They didn't even defer fall start dates. I bet their incoming associates are happy - who cares if you make $10K less, you have a job and a start date. That's about the best any of us fall associates can hope for these days. Wish my firm would have done that. I still don't know when I'll start, and I can't find any kind of temporary gig in the meantime.

79: You have valid points and sound like you got your head on straight, with one exception. You better start thinking not about "when" you'll start, but "if" you'll start. And I'd be looking for "permanent" gigs not "temporary" gigs. Calling yourself a "fall associate" might also be presumptuous...maybe a "winter associate."

Face those realities now and you'll be a lot happier later on. I been there.

Note to Bryan Cave:

There are 58 attorneys (we used to work for you until Feb 09) that wish you would have tried this first. I know, I know...that would have been too attorney friendly.

81 ==> they just got rid of the 58 worst performers first. After off-loading the very worst, they decided that the rest were worth retaining via salary reductions. Nothing personal, strictly business.

^^^ Nice theory and all, ,but when 1st and 2nd years are affected, that line of thinking doesn't float

How about thread on firms that have not frozen salaries. Even Baker Botts hasn't frozen. Yet ATL sensationalizes the news and makes it seems that every firm is cutting or freezing salaries thereby encouraging other firms to do likewise.

Great job! (sarcasm) When associates look back in a few years, ATL is going to get some of the blame for helping to kill Biglaw for associates.

SHOOK REMAINS

82=d bag

82=d bag

Buying Pogo anchor is a stunning lack of business judgement

Elie, you have to let go of this Vault rankings obsession. Beyond a certain level attributing anything to a prestige rank is stupid.

88 This is just another "outstanding" decision by Don Lents. I wonder how many consultants he hired to make the decision for him and of course Frank Wolfe signed off on it.

BC= a ship shinking fast so to all other associates...RUN fast.

To 90

That's the problem, when a ship is sinking, there is no where to "run." You can try swimming, but in this economy, you'll likely be eaten by sharks.

DLA Piper, Baker McKenzie (ranked in the 40s) and Nixon Peabody have all cut salaries too

As an attorney in the South East, I have to disagree with you 88. PoGo may have had some leadership that, shall we say, was a little lacking, but they have some very talented attorneys. Bryan Cave needed a foothold in the South East (St. Louis isn't exactly a legal hotbed), and I think the acquisition was a good mood.

Now are Don Lents and the rest of his cronies a joke, I would tend to agree. But where Bryan Cave went wrong was when they forgot that their most valuable asset was their people who they were so quick to throw out in February. When Bryan Cave stops trying to act like a firm that cares more about its prestige than its people, it may be able to re-gain some of the qualities that made it a pleasant firm to work with in the first place.

88--

Anchor? More like a submarine-busting depth charge.

72--

If you're talking about their Atlanta office, what ship? They've disembarked the plane and are desperately holding on to their seat cushions.

21--

I call bullshit! If revenues don't improve over the next two quarters...are you fucking kidding me? The same thing could be said about 1/5 to 1/3 of the AmLaw 100--at least that many firms. What the hell kind of "inside" information is that? Please stop wasting people's time with that shit. Where is Captain Obvious when you need him?

90 here...and 93 is correct. Once those layoffs happened in February the firm lost their best place to work slogan they want everyone to believe.

When the dump Lents and company and get some leadership without their heads up their asses the better off we'll be.

90 here...and 93 is correct. Once those layoffs happened in February the firm lost their best place to work slogan they want everyone to believe.

When they dump Lents and company and get some leadership without their heads up their asses the better off we'll be.

41--

Don't take this the wrong way, but you sound incredibly naive. Firms don't give a shit...period. If they can get away with it, they will do both. But, in fairness to big firms, try to think about from their perspective. What you would see is that top performers can still make moves, even in this market. Yes, they can leave...trust me.

If you cut the pay of top performers, they will look for greener pastures. Admittedly, those are harder to find these days, but they and top performers seem to have a way of finding and sustaining each other. That is one of the main reasons why BigLaw generally prefers to lay off associates, counsel and, if bank covenants permit, zombie partners.

Another reason why firms prefer layoffs to paycuts is that the former can always be justified on bullshit performance grounds, while the latter generally indicates that the firm is in weak financial condition. Paycuts send a pretty clear signal to the market that the firm is having trouble financially. It could be problems with billables, collections, debt service, etc., but there are definitely problems.

The mistake a lot of you youngins are making is that you think that the partners in BigLaw are doing this in order to pad their purses and wallets. Wrong. They are doing this to keep their firms from imploding through the loss of major rainmakers. And before you ask if the firm would really throw associates, counsel and zombie partners out on the street in order for a few rainmakers to make a few more bucks, well, the fact that you have to ask that question means you have a lot to learn.

To paraphrase Chris Rock, walk up to a mirror, point to yourself and repeat the following; Fuck you! Fuck your hopes, fuck your dreams, fuck you! Then, you will understand how BigLaw really sees most of the associates, counsel and zombie partners who work there.

HTH

70 and 79,

Husch will probably be the next firm in KC to cut associate salaries firmwide. 79 is right, only first years are affected now, but the rest of us see it looming on the horizon. At least Bryan Cave sent out a firm email. We found out about the first year associate salary cuts and the lay-offs on Above the Law. Nice way to boost morale Fenley!!!

You discover what your firm's management is made of when they believe they have their associates by the balls.

At least BC's cut wasn't as deep as Sonnenshit's rediculous 15% cut.

At least BC isn't compressing the salaries of more experienced associates while maintaining 1st years at a 10% cut = a sleezy attempt to fool law students (?) into believing that Sonnenschein pay is top of market.

At least BC directly confronts their associates with respect, that is, without a rediculously convoluted, disingenuous 5 page full of crap memo. (I skipped right to the last page and still haven't read that slap in the face crap.)

Ah yes! I love working in the cave.

I bet all of the STL associates are happy to see a pay cut down to 100K while their billable hours remain on par with the New York and Chicago offices. Nothing like a flagship at (nearly) the bottom of the firm's pay scale.

Most firms are taking advtantage of the bad economy and this is what the do and they will and are getting away with it for now. They know that the job market is bad and they do have their associates by balls. They can very well lower their top performers salary by 10% and know that these associates do not have anywhere to run to. However, some may be lucky enough to find a better job and go. This is the chance these firms will take. They will win for now only because the state of economy and the down job market. What they fail to forget is that when things pick up, even if is two years from now, the bitterness that they leave their best performers with will remains. Those top performers will screw them royally right back.

Bottom line, it is all about the money and PPP. This move will save the firm a lot of money for the second half of the year. When they laid off in February, the numbers were down, now they will be near or at what they originally projected. Don't be so stupid. It is certainly better than being laid off, however, layoffs may be coming as well. Eyes open BC people.

Best of luck to all.

sonnenschein is the worst firm in missouri -- without question. high-value associates will be exiting asap. people taking those jobs will do so because they have nothing better = bottom barrel.