I am a journalist working on a piece about online avatars that are used on blogs and other websites that address issues relating to the economic downturn. I am particularly interested in those alter egos that have established large and passionate followings (whether positive or negative). Recent media coverage of this website (NY Times, etc.) indicates that this blog is fertile territory. Can someone suggest some names for me? Thanks in advance.

Check out the post (January?) for the award for best 2008 poster. You may want to look up Partner Emeritus, Frat Stud, Nervous t10 1L (before he left), the Count, etc.

2. If you are for real -- and it's not at all clear that you are -- send me an email. (elie@abovethelaw.com). I'm happy to help.
And if you are not for real ... well, thanks at least for not RickRolling me. I hate when that happens.
--Elie

What a BS position -- and a waste of WH resources. Firms need to get rid of these worthless clowns, not hire them.

So he's a glorified HR dolt?

Is the CLT Officer like the CLT Commander?

Associate Oboarding.... sounds an awful lot like "waterboarding".

Me likey.

-Dick Cheney

I thought Ellie fell out of a plane?

associate "onboarding" sounds a lot like associate "waterboarding"

who comes up with this asinine corporate lingo?

The attorney life cycle at Big Law... what is that, like a human sized hamster wheel?

2,

Look up and find "old partner dood LLB '58"

Never really understood what he did at Weil when he was there. I think he was supposed to have something to do with raising morale. I always thought it would raise morale more if they took his salary and gave it to us. I think the WilmerHale folks will probably feel the same way - especially in this economy.

Gotta love the reference to the "attorney lifecycle"... yeah, we'll work you to death for 6 years, then show you the door.

Associate onboarding? What about associate WATERBOARDING?????

Associate onboarding? What about associate WATERBOARDING?????

Associate onboarding? What about associate WATERBOARDING?????

Smykowski: They're gonna downsize Initech."
Samir: "Now, what are you talking about, Tom? Now, how do you know that?"
Smykowski: "How do I know? They're bringing in a consultant, that's how I know. That's what this staff meeting is all about. It happened a Initrode last year. You have to interview with this consultant. They call them 'efficiency experts'. But what you're really doing is interviewing for your own job."

Riiiight. I'm going to go ahead and have to disagree, there. Did you know Peter has been consistently having trouble with his TPS reports?

Nicely played, 7.

I nominate the Asslobster, as avatar of the decade.

Mooky Wilson

IBM calls it "onboarding" and I see that the guy is a former IBMer. So that explains that.

2 - the "eliemystttalspeaks" guy has a great following

more info here:
http://eliemystttalspeaks.ytmnd.com/

They call it "onboarding" at a million corporate places, just not so much law firms.

this guy is one of the bobs from office space.

"So, what exactly do you do here?"

...and Samir Naga, Naga, Not-gonna-work-here-anymore.

I've never worked at a big firm- but I think it downright ODD that a lawyer starts as an associate then wants to "leave a year" to go be a CLERK, then come back.

Wtf? How common can that be? I did my (state appellate) clerking before starting, no one at my regional firm has ever left to be a clerk and come back.

Fill me in, o great T1s.

26, actually very common. But the majority do it to escape their old firms, although this is becomming more difficult to do in this environment.

Comment removed by moderator.

26, actually very common. But the majority do it to escape their old firms, although this is becoming more difficult to do in this environment.

Maybe they hired this guy to fire all the non-lockstep counsel they've been "counseling" out of the firm. I hear up to 100 of them could be told to leave.

The tipster who said "[c]learly WH is doing well if it can hire even more layers of management" is a moron and is a classic illustration of why lawyers have no business sense.

Just WH hired a layer of management in no way means WH is doing well. If this new guy costs WH $x yet his aggressive management of attorney lifecycle saves the firm $(x+y), then clearly the firm will have made the right move.

For the people at WH's sake, I hope that this doesn't mean that management intends to more hyper-aggressively cull the payroll.

31 - tipster here - the remark was sarcastic. Nobody wants more management at WH - we've got more managers than we know what to do with. Over 20 in the NY office alone, where there are about 200 or so lawyers. Most likely this will come out of the associate bonus pot.

31, you are a tone-deaf idiot.

Irony, snark, facetiousness, sarcasm.

Learn about them.

I think the view at Heller was that he was brought in to help bring about the layoffs that were going to occur but which were preceeded and rendered moot by some other events of consequence.

So, um...does this mean we can expect a bloodbath at WH???

*scared*

34 - if that is true, and if he was hired to do the same at WH, perhaps 33 would call it ironic that the new guy is the "chief talent officer".

Former West Pointer? He should be good at the firing squad.

Do WH staff attorneys get to partake of Mr. Scott's expertise?

Is there some reason this site is all over WilmerHale lately? It's not like they're the only ones laying people off or refusing to accept people who leave to clerk....

Are you kidding? They should be WilmerHale like white on rice. No, they're not the only ones doing layoffs - but they're (among) the only ones blatantly lying to pretent that the rampant firings aren't economically motivated. They are ruining careers out of their own selfishness and greed. Bring on the bad press! Maybe they'll rethink their practices.

Are you kidding? They should be WilmerHale like white on rice. No, they're not the only ones doing layoffs - but they're (among) the only ones blatantly lying to pretent that the rampant firings aren't economically motivated. They are ruining careers out of their own selfishness and greed. Bring on the bad press! Maybe they'll rethink their practices.

Wilmer sucks. Morale is already ridiculously low as it is.

This guy was at Heller just long enough to oversee its demise.

Bob Slydell: Would you bear with me for just a second, please?
Peter Gibbons: OK.
Bob Slydell: What if - and believe me this is a hypothetical - but what if you were offered some kind of a stock option equity sharing program. Would that do anything for you?
Peter Gibbons: I don't know, I guess. Listen, I'm gonna go. It's been really nice talking to both of you guys.
Bob Slydell: Absolutely, the pleasure's all on this side of the table, trust me.
Peter Gibbons: Good luck with your layoffs, all right? I hope your firings go really well.
Bob Porter: Excellent.
Bob Slydell: Great... Wow.

@35

"So, um...does this mean we can expect a bloodbath at WH???"

Yes.

"*scared*"

As you should be.

Bob Slydell: Would you bear with me for just a second, please?
Peter Gibbons: OK.
Bob Slydell: What if - and believe me this is a hypothetical - but what if you were offered some kind of a stock option equity sharing program. Would that do anything for you?
Peter Gibbons: I don't know, I guess. Listen, I'm gonna go. It's been really nice talking to both of you guys.
Bob Slydell: Absolutely, the pleasure's all on this side of the table, trust me.
Peter Gibbons: Good luck with your layoffs, all right? I hope your firings go really well.
Bob Porter: Excellent.
Bob Slydell: Great... Wow.

Peter Gibbons: So I was sitting in my cubicle today, and I realized, ever since I started working, every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life.
Dr. Swanson: What about today? Is today the worst day of your life?
Peter Gibbons: Yeah.
Dr. Swanson: Wow, that's messed up.

Wilmer also just implemented a new Senior Associate position for 3rd years and up. Going to be a lot of layoffs disguised as firings this fall.

Has Wilmer made any cuts in New York?

I heard about that senior assoc position. The reviews we had last minute in late May are excessively negative to set a lot of people up for termination in the fall when they don't make senior assoc. And a TON of people were "transitioned" at their reviews.

Lots of paralegals and secretaries too. Everybody's scared.

WTF are they doing? This is a place that had HIGHER profits per partner. Client fees went up. Salaries went up.

wilmer sucks. simple as that.

I was transitioned at my review. One month to get out. And I have to work during the month, so very little time to look. Yes, WilmerHale indeed sucks.

"Transitioned" also. They show you what the reviewers said, and then have an overall summary. What was actually said was completely positive. The summary was inaccurate and stated that my work has not reflected my seniority and displayed a lack of commitment to the firm. Yes, most of my work was doc review - because there's no other work to be had! I can't get anything else! And then they fire me for it.

Sooooo glad I didn't go there! Best of luck!

Wasn't one of the fired people pregnant?

Terrible, if true. Can anyone confirm that?

57 - With layoffs in this economy occurring across firms and practice groups, we would expect that a few of the affected would be pregnant.

Well, hello Wilmer HR! We wondered when you'd get off work.

Why should a higher performing associate be sacrificed first instead of an an underperforming associate who decided to become pregnant?

yes, at least one person I know of who is being transitioned is pregnant. She seems to have until the end of summer like everyone else, baby is due in the fall. This way they save 18 weeks maternity leave pay.

True. Why should someone with no life, no family, slaving away on the hopes of being better than all mankind by making partner, be sacrificed for someone so insubordinate as to think of having a child?

Discrmination in favor of pregnant associates equates to gender discrimination.

And discrimination in favor of a**holes equates to a**hole discrimination.

I see, 65, you think you were terminated because everyone else is an asshole except for you.

I'm currently (still) employed at Wilmer. 99% are assholes.

This firm is so TTT.

Wow, one lone commenter claiming WilmerHale is heaven on earth. Thought they could've done beTTTer.

Wow, one lone commenter claiming WilmerHale is heaven on earth. Thought they could've done beTTTer.

I know others have said it before, but I want to reiterate. A huge amount of people have been let go. Unfortunately I don't know numbers because the firm is being so dishonest and forcing people to leave really quietly, slinking out.

67 - What does that say about you?

i HATE working at wilmerhale.

72 - I'm an asshole. I admit it. That's why I'm still around.

71,

Do you the firm for doing this? Don't you think they are doing so reluctantly and wish the economy were such that it could support retaining all their many talented associates?

71,

Do you blame the firm for doing this? Don't you think they are doing so reluctantly and wish the economy were such that it could support retaining all their many talented associates?

71,

Do you blame the firm for doing this? Don't you think they are doing so reluctantly and wish the economy were such that it could support retaining all their many talented associates?

How does Wilmer treat minorities?

75 - I wish that were the case. I wish they were doing layoffs openly, honestly, and helping their many talented associates find new positions. I wouldn't fault them for that. I fault them for selfishly destroying reputations and careers by faking bad reviews and firing people for economic reasons, but blaming them.

When I was let go, they blamed me entirely. I worked my ass off for four years, then one bad fake bad review in, I was suddenly the worst employee imaginable.

79,

In this economic climate, the stigma of terminations is lessened. I think that most would-be employers will assume there was a significant economic component. To the extent there is a stigma, it would probably be substantially the same regardless of how the firm characterizes the terminations. To the extent reputations or careers are affected, don't you think the bigger factor is the layoff itself, not the label the firm puts to it.

Also, the fact Wilmer is doing this somewhat quietly should help the associates that are being let go by creating some uncertainty around their status.

Would've been nice if I had a 3 month severance, job help, and accurate reviews to help me out. I have to work, and find something else, by fall. I'm told I'm shitty and worthless, they denied up and down there was any kind of economic motive whatsoever. And numerous others are in the same position.

@ 81 - what kind of role do you play at WilmerHale? I hope they pay you to troll around and spew talking points. You have no soul.

I used to think that Wilmer wasn't any worse than any other biglaw soul-crushing place to work. But that's just not true. They've shown their true character in hurting careers, reputations, and morale by not openly and decently conducting layoffs. Shame on them.

55 - I can relate - I had glowing reviews from 12 top partners and a summary that was 80% negative based on one comment from a known asshole Hale & Dorr partner, who said, in essence, that he thinks I"m a bitch. They have "serious concerns" - i.e., I'll be "transitioned" in the next round. Last time around he wrote shit in the not for attribution and they refused to give it to me even though I asked (and by law they are required to show us if we ask).

WH sucks. No doubt about it.

We got an email today suggesting that we vote for WH as one of the 100 best companies to work for. HA! Reading the comments at least gives me comfort that I'm not alone in hating the firm or in getting fucked over by it.

I've been at Wilmer for about a year and a half now and don't know anyone who's happy there. Not one. Sure, I know people who will stay as long as they can, because the money is good and they've made a comfortable existence. But everyone I know agrees that it's run poorly and makes for a pretty miserable existence.

which is worse, WH pulling this shit or Fish waiting until AFTER the last minute to shitcan a third of its incoming associate class? Someone should start a poll of the shittiest shit these shit meisters have the shit balls to do. this is shit.

85, I'm so sorry. That's awful and I'm sure you don't deserve it. Are you looking for something else?

86, you're definitely not alone! I can't wait to take that survey! Unfortunately I think they just rank the best, not the worst. Wilmer would rock that vote!

88 has a fantastic idea. Elie, how about a poll of the firm that's handled the downturn the worst?

88 has a fantastic idea. Elie, how about a poll of the firm that's handled the downturn the worst?

Poll!

Who's the worst?

I vote WilmerHale.

WH. Definitely.

As an associate, no poll needed. Objectively, Wilmer.

Wow, WIlmer's reputation has fallen faster than a meteorite. I predict that once the economy recovers, the most qualified law applicants will stay away from this place. The internet has introduced a new age where past debacles are easy to find, unlike in previous years.

Wilmer to V50!

why is everyone hating on wilmer? does anyone have some real information?

96: Here's some real info: The firm has been focusing more and more on PPP for the last few years for business reasons. An easy way to raise PPP is to cut the largest overhead expence a firm has - associate pay. They've been implementing incremental changes to make that happen. Among those changes is the new "structure" which is being used as an excuse to get rid of people. And, as part of the structure change, they shook up all the review committes and process, which means there is no consistency between the messages given in the last round of reviews 6 months ago and the round now. The review system is really just a CYA program to create a record before firilng associates anyway. Some Hale & Dorr partners go on vendettas and write horrible reviews of associates they hate every 6 months, years after they've stopped working with those associates, and that is used to fire people. And while we used to do upward evaluations of partners in the spring, this year we didn't, but there's been no announcement about it. They send out memos now and again about the changes that are nothing but fluff and make it sound as though nothing is changing at all. They've put in more and more layers of management so the partners are more and more removed from what is going on day to day. I hope whatever business model they're implementing works out in the long run, but it's got some pretty awful short-term effects.

And for the record, I don't deny that some people get fired because they suck. And I get that the non-lockstep counsel program got too big. But there's more going on than just those things.

I do. Real information - WilmerHale is a rancid TTTerible place.

You people are starting to sound like the Latham complainers

Anyone who says "you people" is a douchebag.

This thread must be having Lloyd Cutler and John Pickering turning in their graves. Not because of the posters but because of what their firm has become. Mr. Cutler and Mr. Pickering made that firm--and imbued it with a sense of class, dignity, responsibility and commitments to its employees. (apologies to legacy H&D people but I am referring to the old WC&P). It was a wonderful place, full of generally happy attorneys and--mostly--happy staff. What has happened??

It always was poorly run...staff who did nothing for years were allowed to remain because the firm was afraid of being sued. Inept does not begin to describe some of these people. But complaint after complaint went unheeded by management.

Now the rest of us who are left--the good workers--wonder what will happen to us. It's just another legal factory with nothing really special about it.

Look at the Firm Leadership section on the firm website. There are levels of bureaucracy that would make the comintern blush. Brussels looks streamlined compared to this.

This firm used to be the best. A tragedy really. But the partners all voted this in so there you have it.

It should be interesting recruiting season for them since they are not used to getting bad press like this and compete directly against the two big heavy hitters in D.C. who have been conspicuously absent from layoff talk or roll back of start dates.

92-94, etc. -

Your immature antics aren't fooling anybody, nor does changing the reference to Wilmer (WH, WilmerHale) successfully obscure the fact you are the same poster.

I work at Wilmer and it really sucks. It really started to go downhill after they merged with the Fish & Neave losers.

101 - Thanks for that analysis. As someone only a few years in, I don't know the history or have that sense of community. It sounds like it was a great place to work, and too bad for all of us that it lost so much.

Can someone explain the rationale for laying off associates? I can understand not offering associate positions to SA's or just not hiring new people, period; but laying off associates except when a partner departed with a book of business is senseless.

Associates know the client, understand how the firm works, and are part of a large team. Laying them off into this economy does nothing but create your own competition for your own clients.

The associates still have to eat. It's not like rent is suddenly free. Or there was a student loan bailout.

So, the associates will have to get by and solicit clients. What clients are they most likely to solicit? The ones with whom they have already dealt. At some point, in some way, every associate has seen that piece of paper or that email with the person responsible for the account at the client side.

Lay off that associate and that information walks out, along with knowledge of that client. Maybe after sending out a few hundred resumes, it dawns on the associate to hit the client up for work.

The associate can sell familiarity but also major fee reductions. $300/hr sounds good to a client. $225 even better. Think the firm can match that?

Just a little work will trickle in at first, then more, and before you know it the associate has enough to join some small firm as of counsel. That gives him/her the ability to handle bigger matters. The associate may never get the truly juicy stuff, but what he/she gets is enough to make the firm a hollow shell.

Question for anyone? Is the recent decline the firm's reputation due to changes in Boston or D.C. or both?? I guess what I am trying to ask, delicately, is whether legacy Hale & Dorr attitudes have deflated the Wilmer tire or whether it was oldtime Wilmer folks who have created the mishegoss and spread it to Beantown. Please enlighten.

105, you are clueless. Associates rarely take any business from major firms, rate differences or not. Litigation associates, in particular, almost never take any work from BigLaw. Associates are cogs in the machine. Clients that pay BigLaw rates hire partners, usually the senior partner in the food chain. The logic is simple, fire the associates, spread the work among the remaining associates.

Wilmer is getting a lot of abuse here for doing something that every big firm is doing in this economy: reducing its associates force.

106: It's gotta be both, because the NY Office is horrible. It's the only "true" merged office.

107, I agree that litigation doesn't move much, but I have seen in the last few weeks my fellow laid-off associates take transactional work with them from established clients.

Careers died. WilmerHale lied.

Former Hellerite here. No one at Heller, no one, had any clue about what Brad Scott did. Heller hired him in an misguided attempt to grow in NY that only seemed to result in massive over-spending there on facilities and non-revenue generating staff.

He did not cause the demise of the firm by any stretch, but some from Heller mark his hiring as one of the key signs we should have noticed that the firm was hiring (very, very expensive) management layers faster than it could support them. Non-revenue generating lawyers tend to be dangerous enough, but they rarely multiple...Watch the non-revenue generating management closely. They tend to breed.
Expensive non-revenue generating managers then need large, expensive staffs that no one knows what they do, then their staffs hire staffs, then they hire large numbers of consultants to tell partners they need to "focus on core competencies and high value matters for clients" while "increasing attorney utilization" (i.e., billable hours) and billing rates.

@109 - the NYO would not be so bad if they got rid of the vice chair of litigation in that office who thinks he's sitll partner-in-charge and better than god. Only Bill Lee is better than god.

108--You need to understand the concept of relativism. Yes, other firms have laid off. Other firms have always laid off. WilmerHale has not. Now they have. That's what makes them a bit different. Also, their two closest competitors in DC for candidate (I will not name them but you know who they are) have not laid off, either overtly or through stealth layoffs, and have not delayed start dates. That why Wilmer's actions, going into recruiting season, will be damaging to their ability to compete against those other two firms. If you are a D.C. Circuit clerk, where will you go?? If you are risk adverse like most law students are, especially in this economy, where will you go?? If you value stability, where will you go??

Where are the Thompson Hines and Skadden DC guy?

Whatever became of Loyola2L? Did he become Loyola Practicing Attorney? I hope so.

113--is the person you are referring to near retirement and have an Irish--or is it Scottish--last name?? If he's the guy, I heartily concur.

Here, here, 112. There are so many layers of management at WH! There are secretaries with secretaries. There are offices managers with sub-managers with personal assistants with secretaries. None of whom bill time. Why are we growing non-revenue generating staff?

105, Biglaw will soon collapse just like big business.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZlgNj-rIxw&NR=1

109--Yowsers, does she work for Hale & Door Wilmer Cutler Pickering Jarndyce & Jarndyce? Nice.

120, I think you meant 119.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8683536703590795617

I'd be interested to know whether Wilmer is keeping up its AA policy in these layoffs. I heard they hired a middling student from U of Baltimore this summer explicitly because of a Native American great grandmother. This, a firm that rejects 75% of kids from HYS. Can't compete with the big boys if you're diluting your talent pool like that, let's be honest.

26--

Don't worry. The partners at your TTT firm will be "filling you in/up" shortly when the work dries up.

What makes WH's different is that they're trying to mask their mass dismissals as performance-related terminations. That is simply inexcusable. Nobody believes you, WH. So, you may as well just come clean. Otherwise, you just end up looking silly.

As a county law librarian, I work mainly with solo, small law firm lawyers and self-representing litigants.

I feel sorry for the law firm librarians affected.

But daily, I work with many lower/mid-classes people who can not find/afford legal representation. Overall, county law libraries in California does a good job at empowering people. But just like giving people a wrench doesn't make them auto mechanic, giving people access to legal information is still far from giving them actual representation.

Isn't it funny how lawyers complains about not having jobs, while many people are complaining about not able to find lawyers to represent them?

— Toshokan Kanchou, California

http://community.nytimes.com/article/comments/2009/06/07/nyregion/07law.html?permid=135#comment135

Anyone who chooses Wilmer over Covington or W&C is stupid. Awhile back an associate in Wilmer's DC securities group left for Covington and we thought she was nuts. Apparently, she was the smart one in the bunch.

At my firm we have a chief talent officer,he is in charge of hiring talent, but there isn't anything legal about it.

The earlier posts are on the money. This firm used to be classy place where employees were treated well. The big merger was the beginning of the end, and the clowns running the place ever since have ruined this once-great firm.

@80 and other similar commenters:

Please stop with the "one fake bad review and I was suddenly transitioned"-type comments. Just stop. You are embarrassing yourselves. Nobody believes that.

"Nobody believes that."

I believe it, so you're wrong already.

WH never had a good reputation -- now they took our sabbaticals away. No one hardly speaks to one another -- it's always been like that. Secretaries are treated like the horse's ass!

No. 106 -- BOSTON RUNS THE SHOW! DEFINITELY!

122, really?? "Explicitly because of a Native American great grandmother"?!....and not because of, say, that person's grades and class rank at a school where the firm recruits every year?

In any event, sorry you didn't get hired....or that you are being transitioned...sorry, "laid off" (there, does that sound better?).

@128

As a former WH associate, who left before the madness started, I believe it.

@106 -- What 131 said. Definitely Boston.

I can tell you - the incoming class of first-year associates is VERY WORRIED. I think its going to be an incredibly unfriendly place when we arrive next year. I don't know how WH plans to recruit against C&B and W&C after this bad press.

Bringing in this "legal talent" guy sounds just like office space. I have nothing against getting rid of the few useless associates (though these lay-offs seem to go further than that), but you'd think WH would have the sense to thin out their over-inflated management ranks too, instead of hiring more people to do bullshit work.

Do current associates or others have any advice for how to survive at the firm (once we start next year) for at least a few years given all the bullshit that is going on?

Are certain practice areas immune to the layoffs and "transitioning" or is it firm-wide?

Wilmer Cutler & Pickering went straight to hell when it merged with that tacky Boston firm. And everyone starting with their LYING DC managing ptr knows it.

135--funny how two commenters have stated that it's legacy H&D in Boston running the show over legacy Wilmer. Everyone knew that Wilmer was a better firm than Hale & Dour. It was certainly more competitive place to get an offer. Anyway, this situation illustrates the problem with two firms, with two distinct cultures merging.

Reportedly, after a fistfight broke out between two legacy H&D lawyers at a Christmas party, one Wilmer lawyer said to another, "What have we merged with?"

So glad I left WilmerHale of my own volition before this economy crap storm started. Yes, the merger of Boston firm Hale and Dorr with DC firm Wilmer Cutler Pickering was a mistake. After the merger, things started going down hill at WH, but it did take about 2 years for the decline to become obvious. I was legacy Hale and Dorr, and yes, it was a better place to work before the merger. I'm sure WCP was too. But the post-merger megafirm became a dehumanized factory with too much bureaucracy.

As a former WH employee, I have nothing but stellar things to say about the firm. WH consists of solid, wonderful people, who unfortunately are dealing with the crappy economy just like every one else. All the losers on this blog that are complaining about mostly untrue gossip need to find another way to deal with anger- blaming a firm is lame.

And to undermine a management role is foolish. Just because you have a JD doesn't make you the most important player in a firm. A lot of you need to check your egos at the door.

Isn't the main task of associates to do research? If the amount of time spent here BSing was spent researching Mr. Scott, you'd discover that he has genuine and substantial bona fides to do exactly what he's been hired to do.

It is always puzzling that firms are condemned for being shitty places to work and then when they hire someone like Mr. Scott to turn it around are condemned for taking the very actions that would address the complaints.

And, to those posters who are terrified he's been brought it to lower the boom: you are wrong. He didn't come to Heller Ehrman to close the shop up. That it happened on his watch is an unjustice to him. But don't take my word for it. Ask him yourself. You'll get an honest answer.

@138 You state you are a former WH employee, you have no idea what the present environment is like on a daily basis. You can live in the past, but we live in the present and have to deal with the lies and manipulations on a daily basis. If it was such a stellar firm, why are you a former employee.

Wow! Lots of posts and most are true. I live the daily nightmare of too many managers, not enough work and listening to the lies that WH is not laying off anyone. I would have more respect for WH if they were up front instead of the terminations. Granted, there is a lot of dead weight, but their way of conducting business leaves a bad taste.

Has anyone heard about the new Resource Centers they are creating for secretaries at WH? They are going to assign 15-20 1st - 3rd year associates to 2-3 secretaries. No more assigned secretaries. Decided to do this because of a survey of associates - which I seriously doubt. They claim associates are self- sufficient. And by the way they are getting rid of the project assistants and telling secretaries they will be trained to be project assistants too! There used to be 100+ paralegals in WH DC - today approximately 50 if you are lucky, but WH says they are not laying off! Who do you believe?

TOO MANY LEVELS OF MANAGEMENT in WH DC! Two paralegal coordinators in DC to manage 50 paralegals, two secretarial coordinators to manage under 100 secretaries and a secretarial manager to manage them and who does absolutely nothing but have parties and pass candy out. Practice managers have an assistant and a secretary. HR has 5 levels of management.....need I continue? Reduce the non-billable people and you will save lots of $$$.

I'm late to the show here, but the former Hellerites who are disparaging Brad Scott on this thread are misguided. He was thrown into a situation that was already crumbling and, unlike almost all of us, he stayed until the bitter end trying to pick up the pieces, even without guarantee of any payment for his work.

-- Former Heller associate

Well, you wanna know how things went in my job today? They’ve hired this Chief Legal Talent Officer. This really friendly guy named Brad, how perfect is that? And he’s basically there to make it seem like they’re justified in firing somebody because they couldn’t just come right out and say that, could they? No, no, that would just be too honest, and so they’ve asked us… you couldn’t possibly care less, could you?

#145 Get out of that place now. You're welcome.