Nationwide Layoff Watch: Cadwalader offers ‘sabbaticals’ to 34 lawyers
Last week, Dan Slater, formerly of the WSJ Law Blog, wrote a piece for Dealbook entitled In Praise of Law Firm Layoffs. His poster child for laudatory layoffs? One of the first firms to make significant cuts to its ranks, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft.
It seems that Cadwalader really likes layoffs. As you can see from our collected coverage, CWT has laid off over 150 lawyers since January 2008 — and today the firm announced further cuts. To its credit, Cadwalader has been open and transparent about its reductions in force; it hasn’t taken the “stealth layoff” approach.
But the firm is not above trying to put a little spin on today’s layoffs. In response to our inquiries, a CWT spokesperson issued this statement:
The debt markets, particularly the real estate debt markets, remain very slow. As a result, Cadwalader’s Capital Markets and Real Estate Finance groups do not have enough challenging work for all the lawyers, particularly the young lawyers, in these groups. Unfortunately, two years into this financial crisis, there are no near term solutions for the problems which vex these markets.In order to address this situation, Cadwalader has asked 34 lawyers to accept a one year, unrestricted sabbatical. During the sabbatical, participating lawyers will receive one-third of their current compensation and medical benefits. In addition, a committee comprised of partners and senior administrators will work diligently to place these lawyers with clients, prospective clients, and not-for-profit organizations.
What happens to lawyers who decline the “sabbatical”? Will the lawyers on sabbatical be able to return to the firm after the year is over? One of our Cadwalader sources described this as a round of layoffs with four months of severance (i.e., “one-third of their current compensation”).
Update: This really is a round of layoffs, not an offer of “sabbaticals.” We’ve received some clarification from affected associates, which we provide after the jump.
Additional details, including a tie-in to the strip club story, after the jump.
Here is what we’ve heard about today’s reduction in force at CWT, from numerous sources:
Our sources say “layoffs,” but the firm says “sabbaticals.” Even if they are called “sabbaticals,” it’s not clear (1) whether the associates on sabbatical have a right of return at the end of the year, and (2) what happens to a lawyer who doesn’t accept the sabbatical.
We have follow-up emails and calls in to the firm, and we will update if and when we acquire more info. If you can shed light on the situation, please email us (subject line: “Cadwalader”).
Update: Call them layoffs, not sabbaticals. From a CWT source:
Affected lawyers were given two options: (1) take 3 months full severance or (2) take 1/3 salary over the next year and get placed with clients or pro bono organizations. At the end of the year with the client or pro bono organization, they will look into rehiring us. I seriously doubt that will happen, but who knows.They have already lined up 61 positions, some of which are paid and some of which are unpaid. So theoretically you could get the 1/3 salary plus a salary from the other place. Clearly the pro bono organizations are not paying associates during their time there.
If you take the severance and the job market changes, you will apply for a job just like anyone else. You will not be preferred if you were not a part of the “Cadwalader Connections” program. It is a hard choice to make and I have no idea what to do….
Further update: From another Cadwalader tipster:
My understanding is that you have (i) the standard 3 month severance, plus benefits, or (ii) 4 months pay spread out over the next 12 months, plus 12 months benefits. If you choose option (ii), you can basically do anything but take a full time position somewhere else; if you do, you lose the remainder of your pay and benefits. The idea is to place you with clients, pro bono or public interest positions with a reduced salary from them which would supplement your 4 months pay from CWT.If the market turns around, they would look to bring you back prior to hiring other candidates. I say that I am fuzzy, because when it was explained to me there was some doubt as to whether or not you even needed to be employed during the 12 month period under option (ii). So, if you don’t need to be employed during this time it would be essentially a sabbatical with no promises of a job at the end of the time frame (obviously this last part isn’t exactly how a sabbatical would typically work).
Either way, I think it is a great option for us in a shitty job market. I commend CWT for not (ever) doing “stealth layoffs” and recognizing that it is all based on the economy.
Earlier: A Stripped-Down Summer Associate Event at Cadwalader




Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
First?
Maybe not. But either way, day-amn.
SECOND!!!!
A charitable approach by Cadwalader if I do say so myself. I bet we see other firms copy this approach in the coming days. There is still way too much lawyering capacity at Am Law 100 & 200 firms right now.
THe memo says they "asked 34 lawyers to accept". What if they don't accept?
4 - It's an offer you can't refuse. Much like Obama's thuggery in the Chrysler and GM affairs.
6th
4 months severance + one year medical. Not bad really.
How has this effected the CWT NY 05 female associates?
Comment removed by moderator.
8 - No, I'm still around. NEVER forget!
CWT NY 05 female associate.
Were any foreign lawyers asked to leave or only natives? Firms prefer to protect foreign lawyers from layoffs because terminated foreign lawyers face the hardship of returning to their countries of origin. American lawyers don't face the prospect of deportation.
Laugh all you want the structure of law has been altered and will remain difficult for many years.
11 - Actually, I think foreign lawyers are often the first to go. They just don't renew their working visas.
Cadwalader once again steps up and gives its associates top-of-the-market severance.
13 - you're right. I know that this happened to three different ppl in my V50 firm..
13 - Firms feel a moral obligation to keep foreign attorneys on because in this job market terminating them can mean they will have to return to their countries because of the difficulty of finding work (and keeping a visa) in the United States at this time.
16- Do firms think about morals.....I thought it was profit v. lost....
11 / 16 - That certainly wasn't the case at my V10 firm. The foreigners were the first ones to go in our "stealth" layoffs.
In my observation, foreign lawyers are given a preference in retention when the time for layoffs comes. Moral duty may be one reason. I have also heard mentioned that foreign lawyers may file a lawsuit under anti-discrimination laws.
16
Surely you have to be joking. I have yet to see a law firm with morals or even feelings for moral obligations.
Instead of career fucking countless first year associates in the NY office, why didn't LaTTTham offer this?
11/16 is the anti foreign attorney troll
Has there really been NO pick up in capital markets activity over the last few months? If not, how are firms with big finance practices (e.g., milbank) surviving?
From intra-office public relations and legal perspectives, firing a foreigner can give the appearance of heartlessness and can be potentially more disruptive.
16/19 -- trolling. Happens on every damn post lately. The anti-foreign troll comes out harping on this crap. He/she/it is making things up in this case -- making claims without any factual basis with which to support those claims. Reminds me of the south park episode -- "they took our jobs!"
FIRST FIRM TO OFFER TO HELP ASSOCIATES GET JOBS
Latham NY laid off 45% of associates this year, including over half of the first year class.
Latham did not offer to help these people get jobs.
Dave Gordon should resign.
The tie-in strip club escapade infuriates me and fuels my thoughts about this generation of attorneys. If I were at this non-peer firm I would make the associates pay for the outing or report them to the ethics committee for theft of services or embezzling general account funds. Whether or not the associates felt they were on the way out does not justify "going out" in style on the firm's dime. This kind of opprobrious behavior would never be tolerated at my firm.
Even CADWALADER is treating associates better than Latham now.
23 - the capital markets have thawed a bit, but not in the real estate area. The writing was on the wall for these CWT associates for awhile. I guess you gotta give the firm some credit for acknowledging this.
Why would you not take the sabbatical? It seems to good to be true. Go diversify your resume in preparation for when you get laid off for real one day. It's not like you were ever going make partner at Cadwalader or any other firm.
Latham gave six months severance. Cadwalader, in this round, gave four monts plus 12 months of health insurance. That is a fairly equal match, but Latham is probably still the market leader in providing for layoff victims.
Partner Emeritus,
No one cares about your schtick anymore. Leave it alone. Thanks.
32-
last round cwt gave 5 months severance to all levels
#28, please explain where you read that CWT paid for the stripclub? I thought lawyers had good reading comprehension skills.
DLA Piper has announced that 5 of its major offices are closing.
The laid off strip club lawyer should sue for hetero discrimination. He could get the NYU-Singapore connection to represent him.
32, Do you mean Latham is a market leader because it produced far more layoff victims, such as former first year associates in New York?
Latham NY is a market leader in hiring like crazy and then firing a record number of first years.
What good does a shiTTTy 6 months severance package do for a laid off first year? Most won't get back into biglaw because of LaTTTham, and after taxes that money will BARELY make a dent in your loans.
Latham closed.
36: you meant to type "DLgAy"
The strip club thing has no connection. None of the individuals involved were doing it because they knew of any layoffs.
Some rumors of layoffs spread last week through financial services but no one affected really had any idea.
From what I've heard those affected also were more or less told the chances of a position being available is basically nill. This is not a program where you are in any way likely to come back. This is the firm helping some with finding other jobs but this is a layoff.
The ship be sinking...
Why don't the Latham trolls aim their sights on on another firm, one of the many that gave an inferior severance package to Latham's. C'mon - show us all you care about someone besides yourselves.
I'm surprised there was anybody left to cut at Cadwalader Charlotte.
The Charlotte office still has a few attorneys, mostly the affirmative action group.
46 - You are a moron.
Thoughtful and classy move by Cad. More importantly though 44 makes a great point, there are V50 NY firms which deserve to take shit a lot more than Latham, by first doing stealth/ performance related layoffs, followed by mass layoffs including most first years, with mere 2 months of severance. While Latham partners took a big hit by generously giving associates 6 months of severance. Let's be honest, I wish I had been in Latham instead of my old TTT firm
Is NALP creating a field to disclose the number of layoffs (and perhaps amount of severance given)?
I agree with 48, that's exactly what I came on here to say (i.e. thoughtful and classy on the part of Cad). When making my biglaw decision, it came down to Cad and the firm that ultimately let me go - it starts with a P, and people think they make cinnamon rolls there. Had I chosen Cad (which I was told was the more cutthroat firm) over the cinnamon rolls, the lay-off would have left a much less bitter taste in my mouth. More severance. More than two months of experience to put on my resume. Actual help from the FIRM in getting placed elsewhere. A possibility of coming back. NOT FINDING OUT ON ATL. Not being lied to and being told your job is safe, in fact, being given ADVANCE NOTICE that this was going to happen. All of it indicates that Cadwalder is really trying to look out for the people they are letting go. Huge, huge props to you guys, wish I had accepted your offer, and gotten laid off Cadwalder style.
Dan's argument boils down to: Now all these people "clinging to employment out of inertia" will have the "opportunity" to do something more interesting with their lives.
He does not specify what that would be, but I'm guessing it's "write for a blog without health insurance or benefits." Like he does. Fortunately - for him - he was a lawyer long enough ago that he doesn't have loan payments to make.
50,
While I don't disagree that CWT has actually handled layoffs better and more open than peer firms, I do feel the need to point out that those of us laid off last July did find out on ATL. As for the help in placement I suspect that beyond providing reccomendations and paying for outplacement services they won't really be able to do much else.
"Getting laid ... Cadwalader-style"
;)
Nice...
Isn't this the same thing as Skadden's highly touted "Sidebar" program????? In reality, "Sidebar" is a fancy layoff just like this is (1/3 salary for a year, health benefits, yadda yadda) - but Skadden's genius spinmeisters managed to position it such that the NYT and everyone else were bamboozled into overlooking the obvious (that Skadden's Sidebar = stealth layoff).
Why not give them quasi-challenging work instead?
Or let them wear poster-boards on the street
touting the firms ingenuity and new small-claims
practice area!
a win-win
Sidley's going to be joining the ranks of additional layoffs at the next review period, whenever they get around to it. Seriously. For the few people interested in this and wonder whether they might be on the chopping block (you know who you are), plan accordingly.
Great coverage by ATL on this particular layoff, except one quibble. This was not a "primarily junior associate" layoff. Many of those laid off were midlevel or senior associates, even a special counsel or two. Basically, there are hardly any associates left in Capital Markets New York. Partners and special counsel now outnumber them. This in a group that was once leveraged like seven associates for each partner.
The difference between this and Skadden's Sidebar program is that the Skadden program was offered to essentially everyone, not just 30 some odd lawyers.
And the vast majority have the option to come back. Is that true at CWT? Who knows whether there will be jobs for them in a year, but the implication is there. It was more like "suggested temporary attrition" than stealth layoffs.
Question for 52: at CWT London last July, we were told that firm management was forced to speak to the WSJ Law Blog because news of the layoffs had been leaked. Dan Slater's piece states pretty clearly that CWT called him up out of the blue to disclose the news. A day before any associates were informed. Other than that and a few other mistakes and lies from HR and partners, CWT did handle the process fairly well and I certainly can't complain about 4 months paid leave, since I got a job pretty much straight away. I'm sorry for those who are still jobless a year later, though.
6, really?
36, really?
Cadwalader, really? Why not just give it?
Take the four months severence, medical and 12 months with a client. You get paid for a year, weather the storm and get some corporate experience that you can use to find a job next year. You're not going to get that if you quit now cause you won't find a job in corporate this year.
59 - CWT had understood that the news would be publicized after the layoffs had occurred. However, something happened (not sure what) that caused the news to be leaked to the press prior to that time. CWT was trying to do the right thing, but got caught up in the media frenzy to be "firsty."
52 - You are wrong.
64 - and that "something" wasn't the Cadwalader PR person calling up Dan Slater, then?
59
59/66 - No. I believe he was supposed to issue the story at a certain time, but posted it before that time. Probably due to another site obtaining the same info from a leak and not wanting to be scooped. But I am not 100% sure.
65,
How am I worng? That CWT did not inform all associates last July before layoffs went siren flashing on ATL? (I know I am right about that point because me and my officemate and countless other of the 96 found out from ATL).
As for my second point that CWT will likely not be able to do anything for the laidoff beyond reccomendations and outplacement that is not a knock on them its just that there are no jobs out there for them to obtain for the laid off.
Again I think CWT handles it better than many firms my only quibble was with 50 saying how they do it before it hits ATL which is only true now after failing to accomplish that previously.
-52
64/ 67: ok, thanks. Still not clear on why CWT contacted WSJ on Tuesday when layoffs weren't scheduled to be announced until Friday, but not sure it matters in the greater scheme of things (although I do feel for 68 and his/ her officemate).
Long Live Neil Weidner
He survives yet again
How is this possible???????
68 - 52 Here. I agree with your first point. You are wrong on your second point.
71,
Check back with the 34 laid off in 6 months and see how many have jobs and also look at how many of the ones with jobs are servely under-employed.
check back in six months to see how many more lawyers at cadwalader are laid off and don't get as good of a deal
CWT is also getting rid of staff, they started this week and doing it quietly. Attorneys are walking around waiting for things to go back to the "way they were". The truth of the matter is, it will never be the way it was. CWT is the picture of a mental ward, lost souls walking around looking for....
CWT now has 461 lawyers, down from approximately 750 as of January 2008. Proportionally, this has to be the most dramatic reduction in the size of the attorney workforce at any major law firm.
I am not a CWT hater who fantasizes about the firm's demise but one has to wonder whether there has been irreparable damage to the firm. High profits during the boom were the direct result of a highly leveraged partnership (only 76 equity partners meant close to 9-1 leverage at its peak). You can't just create high leverage overnight when the business comes back. In particular, the reduction in size hit the most profitable businesses (MBS, structured products, derivatives) the hardest. It will take years of training associates to handle transactions and to manage junior associates with little partner oversight. And I think it goes without saying that, due to the massive layoffs (mush greater than any other firm) the lateral associate market will be closed to CWT for many years after this is all over.
Without an army of associates to service the work during the next boom, CWT will not be able to generate above market profits. Since the firm is just a bunch of mercenaries who value high profits above all else, how does the firm survive without high profits? Partners will inevitably lateral elsewhere.