The Am Law A-List Isn’t Kind to Laid Off Associates
American Lawyer has released its A-List for 2009. The rankings try to measure the qualities that make an elite law firm:
This list, which we launched in 2003, aims to measure and quantify the qualities that define an elite law firm, making an effort to look beyond profits. We examine four factors: revenue per lawyer, commitment to pro bono, diversity among lawyers, and associate training and satisfaction. Our formula gives more weight to the first two factors; we double a firm’s scores for revenue per lawyer and pro bono, and then add scores for diversity and associate satisfaction.
This year’s A-List? The elite of the elite? The top three firms are:
1. Munger, Tolles & Olson
2. Hughes Hubbard & Reed
3. Latham & Watkins
I’ll pause to give laid off Latham associates an opportunity to finish screaming. Please return after the jump.
Here’s how American Lawyer explains the inclusion of firms that have had massive layoffs:
We should note that the associate survey we use to compute satisfaction was sent out in the spring of 2008, before the waves of layoffs, deferments, and salary cuts hit The Am Law 200. After those surveys came back, four of the firms on our list—Latham & Watkins, Morrison & Foerster, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe—gave pink slips to lots of lawyers.
But according to the publication, laying off associates can make the remaining associates happier!
But as it turns out, the attorneys that are left may be happier. The preliminary results of our 2009 midlevel associates survey (which will appear in our August issue) show that Milbank and Orrick actually did better than in their prelayoff days. It could be that the remaining lawyers are very grateful to have jobs, or that layoffs swept out a lot of malcontents, or a little of both. Latham and MoFo, however, have taken hits in associate satisfaction this year.
I feel like I am taking crazy pills.
There are 20 firms on the official A-list. Can’t we find 20 firms that didn’t lay people off or cut salaries? I know we’re in the middle of a global financial meltdown. But we can’t find 20 firms that managed themselves during the good times so as to not have to lay off workers when the economy hit the wall?
Does a list like this essentially justify the aggressive layoffs undertaken by certain firms? As much as some people will emphasize that the list is based on information complied before the realities of the global recession hit home, do you think such caveats will show up in the A-List firms’ recruiting materials? I imagine that some firms on this list will say “we’re an A-List firm — despite our layoffs. We Rock,” as opposed to “we’re an A-List firm, based on information compiled before we laid off 10% of our associates.”
Maybe the 2010 A-List will give extra points for firms that are so committed to pro bono work they gave incoming associates a whole year off to work for a non-profit organization.
Power Shift [American Lawyer]
The A-List 2009 [American Lawyer] (subscription)
(88) Comments
Comments
first!
Mystal is getting funnier........not.
Bring back the Goatherder's photo!
Latham is managed by a Syracuse Law Alum- Go Orange!
The american laywer magazine always tries to make up stuff....this ranking that ranking...what a load of hooey
FART!
FART!
FART!
I stepped in some Munger, once.
Elie, it's up to ATL to step in. Give us a list of 20 firms who have not made any layoffs. You'll be doing a big favor to the Class of '11.
4th year at one of the aforementioned firms that did big layoffs in 2008
happy to have a job but also realize layoffs were important
when there was a lot of work to go around, you could use associates to do general/routine work and use the star associates to do the complicated deals
now, with less work, you just have the stars remaining to do all the work
seems like good management to me - but would like to hear counter arguements
That list sounds about right. I believe virtually everything I read, and I think that is what makes me more of a selective human than someone who doesn't believe anything.
Personally, I don't understand how Latham did so well in associate surveys long before these layoffs. Everyone I ever knew who worked there was miserable, at least in the New York office. I think they've long been rigged. ATL, do some digging and report on a real story.
Conference rooms booked all day again in Sidley's Chicago office. Word is: pressure on low-billing practice groups to lop off more heads.
queue the latham troll who's too much of a pussy to rent the inflatable rat
11, it's the place for law students who were never cool in high school and college, but discovered their inner frattiness and "coolness" in law school and wished to perpetuate it for a few more years.
What's amazing is that Latham was the most popular law firm by far among associates in 2008. Work hard, play hard!
http://abovethelaw.com/2008/04/featured_job_survey_and_your_f.php
Cravath's offices are much nicer than Munger's.
"I feel like I am taking crazy pills."
They are called twinkies, and no, they are not pills.
Latham caused Iraq War
16, twinkies are pills if you can down them with water in a single swallow.
Ditto 11. Figure out who at Am Law actually does these lists and what their interest is. Firms that do mass layoffs should not be at the good end of any list relevant to associates.
Obviously, Latham has been getting a bad rap. Yes, like many other firms, they laid some folks off but they stepped up and paid excellent severance. The deadweight they got rid of should simply move on. And now, please cue those still unhinged by Latham's retention of the BFPS (Bar Failing Partner's Son) as they will doubtless want to continue tilting at the "life isn't fair" windmill.
can someone with a subscription post the list?
16: very nice. cruel, but at least with edge.
8 - you're an idiot. that list would be worthless. as this economy continues in the toilet, who do you think will be laying off next? perhaps most on that list of 20? no where to go but down.
16 scores a TD. 18 gets the extra point.
MysTTTal
Good post.
This would never happen at Latham.
-LATHAM SECURE
There is no way that Munger's offices could be considered nicer than Cravath's. Cravath NYC is one of the nicest offices I have ever seen, on either coast.
good point 20. LW was the first firm to do layoffs first and everyone freaked out. Today, basically every firm of note has had to do the same thing. At least Latham had the balls to get in front of the situation and do something about it so laid off attorneys could move on and incoming associates could plan their lives for the next year or so. I have friends going to other top 100 firms who still don't know their start date or what their salary is. That sucks.
sweet post, brah
20, I saw BFPS last night in the second floor bar of the NYAC. He was with a smoking hot chick who was spilling out of her dress. I think he is not bothered by his detractors on this site.
I'll be a monkey's uncle if I let you ruin this for me, MysTTTal!
-J. Mugatu
When are we all going to give up on the whole "pro bono is an important factor in determining how great a law firm is?" Because yes, pro bono is TWICE as important as associate satisfaction and INFINITELY more important than client satisfaction or number of deals or winning percentage in court.
Elite does not mean what The American Lawyer thinks that it means. I'm not a prestige whore, but it's simply not credible to say that Munger and HHR are elite firms. I have never worked with either one and that's true of very few major firms. Munger is only big in California, but HHR is all over, it's just that they're not involved in anything big.
12,
Couldn't those Sidley conference rooms just be for the normal associate review process that is going on?
9 - convenient rationale since it makes you a "star" for having survived the cuts. Way to make self-aggrandizement sound "reasonable."
Law school frat dorks (when it's too late to get laid)
Mung-er? I don't even know her!!!
Dear Kash: Your ass lobster is famous! http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ass%20lobster
It's sad that discrimination (a/k/a "diversity") is considered a plus.
The ship be sinking...
Locke Lord Houston is not even in the same league as Munger.
Former Thacher partners keep calling me from Latham and saying...things. Angry, sexual things.
Wow, just wow.
Two of the four factors -- "diversity of lawyers" and "committment to pro bono"
That's what makes a firm great, ha ...
Former Thacher partners keep calling me from Latham and saying...things. Angry, sexual things.
HHR-no layoffs, no pay cuts, paid above market bonuses, great place to work.
39 - HAHAHAHAHA
Sure, Latham may have laid off a lot of people, but does anyone know if Latham ever did something really egregiously unfair, like keeping on only a partner's son who failed the bar exam?
"Can't we find 20 firms that didn't lay people off or cut salaries?"
Elie, if you want such a list, make one yourself. This is something Lat would have done - make original content. Try it sometime!
The criteria aren't even internally consistent. Pro bono is inversely related to satisfaction and revenue -- associates with high pro bono hours are finding out that they haven't billed enough "real" hours to keep their salaries. Or to keep their jobs.
This is just another worthless list. It's like those "best places to live" lists that are full of bullshit gated suburbs in Texas or some other dump that nobody would ever actually live in by choice.
2 - did you use the same United States Humor Coach as Borat?
Mystal, do you use a loofah?
When do the Vault rankings come out?
9 - Sounds like firms made layoff decisions based on the respective talent/performance of each associate.
Latham stepped up and gave big-time severance. That's more than can be said for a lot of other firms.
A-LisTTT
i don't understand this constant assumption that layoffs are bad for a firm (or that it's somehow preferable to not do layoffs but do a salary freeze or eliminate bonuses). gettting rid of unproductive associates is MUCH better than cutting salaries and bonuses of associates who are still making their hours. so yes, layoffs can make associates who are left much happier. not doing layoffs and cutting costs elsewhere makes everyone less happy.
shocking...the remaining associates are happier????
@31, BFPS is married and I've seen his wife. No.
everybody knows that the AmLaw "A-List" means JACK... i mean come on... "diversity" and "associate satisfaction' (which is barely comparable across firms) has nothing to do with how elite a firm is.
if anything, the more "diversity" initiatives a firm has, the less selective they are... and the more happy an associate is at their firm, the less work they have-- not elite. not saying that it's a good thing to be elite-- but the list is meaningless.
The dearly departed (i.e. bankrupt and dissolved) Heller Ehrman was ranked in the top 10 on this list a few years ago.
Anyone know where the rest of the V10 fell on the rankings?
As always, Elie Mystal and others are too marrowly minded and cannot accept the fact that associates are in many cases happier in West coast firms.
35-It would be nice to think that (about the Sidley conference rooms) but the word is they are for all-day long meetings between partners and heads of various practice groups. The practice groups that didn't already cut (or cut significantly) during the big layoffs. They may be forced to wield the knife finally. Fingers crossed for all.
20 = BFPS
Latham laid off 33 out of 62 FIRST YEARS in NY.
Fair?
62 just to go to show you that the list is garbage:
Cravath, Skadden, Simpson are in the lower 30's or 40s of the list
Wachtell didnt even MAKE the list
davis and weil are in the top 10.... but they've fired people too
67-that's the point. cravath and simpson used to be on the list. due to their decrease in rpl, they missed the boat. thanks for validating the list.
hey 69-- Cravath's decrease in RPL had NOTHING to do with not being on the list.
Especially conisdering Cravath's RPL remained the third best of every single firm (behind S&C and Wachtell as usual Wachtell not even on the lisT)
It decreased in Pro Bono and Diversity (mostly Diversity because Am Law changed its rules for diversity)
but whatever, my even sparring with you validates this list, which it shouldnt.
have fun getting fired at davis or weil
Echoing a previous poster, when do Vault rankings come out?
Apparently no on told AmLaw that Latham's IP practice has imploded.
HHR is a great place to work & no layoffs or deferrals.
71- echoing everyone with a brain- why the hell do you give a shit about Vault?
The Vault rankings mean NOTHING.. do you even know how they are calculated.
63 is right.
"This year's top 20 rankings might be seen as further evidence that these are hard times for New York-based firms. All the firms that fell off are based in Manhattan; those that replaced them are headquartered elsewhere."
63 is right.
"This year's top 20 rankings might be seen as further evidence that these are hard times for New York-based firms. All the firms that fell off are based in Manhattan; those that replaced them are headquartered elsewhere."
66 ==> you mean life's not "fair"? Say it ain't so. If that's the worst thing that ever happens to them, those first years will live a life that is beyond charmed. Grow up.
49 for the win!
Anyone who decides to work for Orrick is a FOOL. Ralph Baxter is an idiot and the firm just generally sucks.
are you people retarded?? NY falling??
Wachtell, Cravath, Sullivan, Skadden, Cleary, Davis Polk, Willkie---- ALL NEW YORK FIRMS-- that YES, took big hits, but STILL remain the most profitable and highest RPL firms out there.
Losers
Latham, Orrick, OMelveny HAHAHAHHAHA--- FIRED PEOPLE DOUCHES
This nonsense that NY was hardest hit is silly.
57: Latham laid off a ton of people AND froze (cut) the remaining people's salaries.
Maybe PE's "tough love" package is what associates want.
Elite of the elite? No. The "A-List " has no credibility. It is a failed experiment. The selection criteria are arbitrary. There is a lack of transparency - how do you prove RPL and pro-bono numbers. Are they cooked?At some firms associates are "encouraged" to say nice things. The fact that changes in the "associate satisfaction" metric can cause wild swings year on year suggests the evaluation process is flawed. Are the diversity scores based on the recent MLJ scores?
Does anyone know whether Sidley has done layoffs in Chicago this year?
s&c and davis polk laid off a bunch of asian faces quietly during the past several months
69, no, that is incorrect, Simpson dropped because of a drop in associate satisfaction
I quote the article:
A couple of firms took a steep fall off the A-List. Simpson Thacher fell the most: dropping 23 places, to 37th place. The firm slipped in every category, but the drop was particularly acute in associate satisfaction, where its score fell from 102 to 75. Cravath, which shared 14th place with Simpson last year, also tumbled, coming in 33rd.
@60
Maybe we should rebrand it as the "jAck -list".
U r right, nobody gives JACK. It is another money spinner for American Lawyer. Expoiting the egos of pompous lawyers. Their all busy now updating their websites with jAck list "press" releases and links. Ordering expensive reprints that they will then send to their clients who will use them as JACK wipes.
aren't these based on surveys from spring of 2008? i believe Bob and Dave were making their no layoffs promise around that time
LaTTTham apprently spent the money it saved on laid-off associates and staff to buy a lot of AM-LAW publications...