Nationwide No Offer Watch: Dorsey & Whitney Brings More News From the Upper Midwest
It seems that many of our friends in the upper Midwest are preparing for a long hard winter back on the 3L recruiting circuit. Above the Law has confirmed that Dorsey & Whitney made offers to only 56% of its 2009 summer associates. A Dorsey & Whitney spokesperson broke the news to Above the Law:
Firmwide, Dorsey made 28 offers of employment to the 50 2Ls who were with us this summer, including offers of employment to 16 2Ls in Minneapolis.
The competition was so tough this year that even the 1Ls summering with the firm felt the pinch:
Dorsey also made offers to return for Summer 2010 to 3 of the 8 1L candidates who were with us.
Those 3 1Ls are very lucky. In August, the firm announced that it was canceling its 2010 summer program in offices outside of Minneapolis.
After the jump, the firm and Above the Law tipsters say that economics caused the low offer rate.
Our tipsters report that the firm told summers that did not receive an offer that the economy forced the firm’s hand. One tipster put it this way:
Dorsey told those that did not get job offers it was for “economic reasons” and was not performance related, going so far as to encourage the rejects to have potential employers call Dorsey to verify that claim.
A Dorsey & Whitney spokesperson echoed the tipsters’ reports:
Because of economic factors, Dorsey was not able to make offers at our historic levels. We have encouraged non-offerees to contact specific lawyers in the firm with whom they worked for recommendations. While Dorsey awaits decisions on acceptance of the offers and clerkship decisions by offerees, there remains the possibility that additional offers may be made. In addition, Dorsey is determining if other offices have positions available for non-offerees. Thus, at this point the final number of offers remain fluid.
Is a letter from a firm really going to help 3Ls during recruiting this year? People don’t usually solicit recommendation letters that say: “You should hire this guy. I didn’t, but you should.”
Perhaps that is why this tipster wasn’t happy with the Dorsey summer associate experience:
Most of us also believe that they should have been more upfront with us about the chances of an offer seeing as they spent the summer telling us they had no clue how many offers they could give out, but that we should not worry too much. What the hell? I, for one, would not have wasted my time with Dorsey if I would have known they were not doing so well and not capable of giving offers to those who deserved them. I was misled for the summer and was given a raw deal. Perhaps the most frustrating part was the constant Dorsey mantra of “shared sacrifice.” Maybe I am dense, but “sharing the sacrifice” does not seem like it should encompass giving only a few offers to summer associates when many more were quite capable of the work and received nothing but good feedback all summer. A little brutal honesty at the beginning of the summer or, even better, last year during the offer process, instead of the typical Midwestern inability to be forthcoming, would have gone a long way for many of us who now find ourselves screwed over.
Well, “brutal honesty” has been given to 2Ls interviewing for next year’s summer program. We’ll see if that information helps 2Ls interviewing for the firm’s Minneapolis summer.
Earlier: More Canceled Summer Programs: Quarles & Brady, Dorsey & Whitney (outside Minneapolis)
(78) Comments
Comments
Foist!!!
Looks like NYC is the place to be.
Take the no-offer as a blessing in disguise. You don't want to rot away in biglaw anyway. I truly believe that I've been directed to ATL to give this message -- the positive of the situation. Think about it for a minute. Most attorneys leave biglaw in a few years anyway. Nothing is worth your health, family, or sanity. Take a different job where you'll have more time for yourself and your family. None of us were born to work 24/7, and are bodies aren't designed to sit in an office all day. Trust me on this...this truly is a blessing.
3 - What does 30 years of poverty due to $1.5k/month in loan payments do to your health? Ass.
1 = hacker who should be banned. How can he post at 2:52 when the story came out hours later? Looks like someone has been playing around with HTML code a bit too much. Layoff impending.
That the tipster is surprised there were some no-offers is evidence that s/he is indeed dense and that Dorsey made the right move not extending an offer to him/her. Surprise that nearly HALF the class didn't get offers is reasonable, but in this climate surprise that there were any no-offers is just idiocy.
"I, for one, would not have wasted my time with Dorsey if I would have known they were not doing so well and not capable of giving offers to those who deserved them." That's just naive.
4, you don't have to pay $1.5k a month for 30 years. At that rate, you'll pay it off in 10. Take minimum payments and extend it through your lifetime. Just make the small minimum payment and forget about the rest until you establish a career.
YOUR FIRST JOB IS NOT DETERMINATIVE OF YOUR LAST.
YOUR FIRST SALARY IS NOT DETERMINATIVE OF YOUR HIGHEST SALARY.
SMARTEN UP. NOW.
Whoa, I guess Dorsey really struck out with summer associate recruiting this year! How can nearly half of the summers do so bad as to not receive an offer?
Wow Elie- thanks for covering the midwest. You might be becoming less incompetant. The transformation is incredible to watch.
I want one of Dorsey's $55,000/year associate gigs in Montana.
Actually, your first job is a pretty good indicator of where you'll wind up.
$55k in Montana = $200k in New York
11 = failure because of a lack of self-confidence and because of being a doomsayer who thinks first = last always and forever.
OFFER! To start in January. Fiddlesticks.
"...not capable of giving offers to those who deserved them"
wtf? They decided they needed 25 first years. They gave offers to the 25 best summers. No one "deserves" an offer. I'd agree with 6, but need a caveat: He's an idiot if he thought Dorsey wouldn't no-offer anyone who got good reviews. All summers get good reviews. Not all summers get offers. No one "deserves" an offer. Dorsey dodged a bullet with this guy.
If only there was some way to extricate the entire Midwest from the US and just have the coasts. Things would be so much better.
Bristol Palin has huge tits.
Two of those 16 in Minneapolis were returning 2Ls who walked in the door on day one with a permanent offer. At least one of those two probably wouldn't have gotten an offer, otherwise.
If you do well, you deserve an offer. That's how it works, at least in real cities like NYC.
Good firms gave out 100% offers, but I can't imagine why the tipster was surprised to find out he hadn't summered at a good firm.
I'd still go here over Latham.
I think that this is a good indication that the MId-West is hurting more than Mid-westerners want to admit. I think it is time for the top talent to head for the coasts. Even with all of this cost of living BS, there is no way that at 2L could really make the decision to stay in Minneapolis if they have an offer in NYC. Especially not after stuff like this happens.
How you like me now?
@22
The "top talent" already "head[ed] for the coasts." A long time ago.
Enjoy the 3 firms in Minneapolis.
Sincerely,
The Top Talent
Dorsey honest? HA. Minnesota nice, they are not.
Let us join in communal prayer for the summer cogs that did not receive offers of gainful employment. Little do they know their careers have suffered from stillbirth. At a time like this I am thankful for the opportunity to have tesitified before a subcommittee in 1996 in support of overturning the old bankruptcy code section that allowed student loan dischargeability. It is time these young sloths take responsibility for electing to pursue a career in this profession while supporting a presidential candidate that is a foe to capital markets and the legal industry. I am heading to Rick's to celebrate the comeback of hybrid tough love.
What is a Dorsey??
#11 seems to be forgetting all the public defenders who start out making $35K a year and end up as federal judges, and all the Legal Aid attorneys who end up taking on "the man" and later get partnerships in Biglaw. Having a long-term career plan is smart; thinking like a person who has never had a full-time job or career until they graduated from law school is just sad.
I think "forthright" sounds better than "forthcoming" in the last sentence. Other than that, a solid rant, full of the sound and the fury, signifying nothing. . .
@19
You sound like Karl Marx. Everyone who "does good" gets a job. Even if your assertion is true, which it isn't, it should be more like: "If you do well, you deserve an offer. That's how it works, at least in real cities like NYC. Of course an offer in no way implies that you won't be laid off six months later -- after you've incurred all those relocation costs -- in a bloodbath concocted by managing partners who have never even seen your face."
And it is good to have Partner Emeritus weighing in again.
is this bloody wednesday?
sounds like dorsey is about to pull a mcdermott will....
Dumping all of that money into their Sydney office to service India when they already had all of their counsel based in London seems like a great idea now doesn't it?
I can't comment on the other offices, but in Minneapolis, the decision was based on whether the summer associate had ties to Minnesota.
This is a good firm to go hogging at- the biggest pig from my law school works here
17 = win for the brutal randomness.
34 - That's not true, several of the people who got offers had fewer connections to MN than some of the people who were not made an offer.
How could that summer associate not know that the firm was not doing so well? The firm made that clear when they laid off staff and cut associate salaries during the second week of the summer program. The summer associates were even invited to the office-wide meeting so they could be "informed" on the economic reality at the firm.
The ship be sinking...
38 is right. And by the way Minnesota connections had nothing to do with who got offers. We clearly, when making offers in Aug and Sept for SA 2009, screwed up because we had no idea this recession would be so long and so difficult. Had we been more prescient we all would have sold all of our stock in our 401k's as well. But we had three events that affected our plans. One, the economy--more brutal and longer-lasting than we thought. Two, a higher than normal SA acceptance rate. Three, a higher than normal new associate acceptance rate. And there were two actions we were not going to take--lay off associates (like some in town) or withdraw offers to associates who had already accepted. So, we had no choice. We hope to still be able to make a few more offers and we have dramatically downsized the size of 2010 SA class so we can go back to a more historic offer rate.
I just sat down in Criminal Law 1 and I need someone to explain the difference between "specific" intent and "general" intent. I don't see the difference and I'm freaked becaues the professor said she's using Socrates's method today! That was not in the syllabus.
40 - So, if Minnesota connections had nothing to do with it, then why were those 16 picked over the others? Your explanation highlighting the economic considerations behind the decision only explains why there was a lower offer rate, but not why those 16 got the offer while the others didn't.
42--I can assure you MN connections had nothing to do with it. I was there. A number of the 16 had no noticeable MN connections.
Dorsey & Whitney? More like Dipshits & Witless.
This is the same shithole firm that hired some woman as an associate and the person not only hadn't passed the bar (anywhere), but hadn't even gone to law school. It took these clowns six (6) months to figure it out. If I were a client, I would have pulled all of my work from this place after learning about this incident. As a law student who didn't get an offer, consider yourself lucky you don't have to be associated with these fools.
oppenheimer wolff & donnelly is the one to watch fail
oh 44 you have posted this for years on the now defunct Greedy Associates site. Give it a rest and sorry that you are one of the few Dorsey associates who was counseled out.
Yo PE - Rick's Cabaret in Philly is a gay night club.
BAAAAAAAM
Also PE - Discharagability of student loans was before 1996.
BAAAAAAAM
Your mother blew me today - tell her to clean my hanky and return it.
Double BAAAAAAAM
45
Oppenheimer Wolff & Donnelly gave out 100% offer rate and is still paying 120K salary and is thus far planning to start everyone in Sept 2010
PE, I'll see you at Rick's and we can wait for the day my (our?) firm, WLR&K, embraced hybrid tough love. No 100% bonuses this year.
HOW ABOUT A LIST OF SHAME FOR THOSE FIRMS THAT HAVE YET TO MAKE OFFERS TO THEIR 2009 SUMMER CLASSES?
1. Winston & Strawn, NY
who is that in the chipper-oppenheomer wolff & donnelly
50: kelly drye
Hey PE! What time are you getting here for your bi-weekly dose of hybrid rump wrangling?
xoxo,
Rick
5:
1 here. No hacking. Don't know what happened either. Story came up and I was so happy to get a first post I just about crapped my pants. Then the story disappeared minutes later. I was crestfallen. Then the story reappeared with my "Foist!!!!" intact, and I was jubilant again.
Let me tell you, it's been quite the roller coaster ride of emotion for me today as a result.
-1 (damn, it feels good to say that)
This comment is addressed to post no. 47.
The 1998 amendment to the Bankruptcy Code made student loans non-dischargeable. I would like to think my testimony was critical to this change. Pre-1998, student loans were dischargeable so long as the loans were in collection status for 8 years. Please try to discredit someone of lesser stature you cretin.
C'mon PE! What time are you getting here??? I have a nice Grey Goose martini and 12 inch schlong waiting for you.
xoxo,
Rick
Just returned from my late night of pounding the blondes at K&E (we made a side trip to Philly) and I saw something I could not believe (it has burned a searing image in my brain):
PE dressed in drag and painting the toes of Rick (of Rick's cabaret), then sucking on them. Now that is some tough loving.
P.S. Did I mention that Rick was black, and looked like Obama?
These numbers are grossly inflated. In Minneapolis, Dorsey had 44 summers, two of which were returning 2Ls with permanent offers. Of the remaining 42, it extended offers to 14. That's not 56 percent; it's 33 percent. Abysmal.
Incorrect--59. The story is correct. Maybe read closer also as 56% was for the firm--41% for Mpls. it does help to read.
60 - 59 is correct. I think that he was saying that the 56% number was inflated by the number coming out of other offices. The Minneapolis number is 16 out of 44. Of those 2 were returning summers who started the summer with offers. Meaning that of the 42 summers competing for offers in the Minneapolis office, 14 were made offers. That is 33%. While the firm-wide numbers were higher the Minneapolis numbers were awful. Moreover, focusing on the Minneapolis numbers are more accurate because Dorsey has canceled the summer programs in those other offices that generated the inflated summer offer numbers. Dorsey made higher offers in those other offices because they knew that the summer programs in those cities was being canceled. So the only office (Minneapolis) that will be having a summer program next year had a 33% offer rate, when not counting for the summers that started the summer with an offer.
59 here. My point is that if you're looking at Dorsey Minneapolis (which is what you'll be looking at if you're looking at Dorsey at all), you should be thinking of a 2009 offer rate of 33 percent, not 56 percent. Tread carefully.
2010 Class will be about 15.
Dorsey is cutting down the size of the class to get their offer numbers back up. That is why they canceled the summer program in the other offices. So that they could hire out of those offices this year to inflate their summer offer rate. While at the same time cutting Minneapolis down to the size the class should have been in the first place.
Every associate at Dorsey should pack their bags. It's a pathetic excuse for a law firm. And the associates are all so pissed about the pay-cut on top of the freeze that many are just waiting for the economy to turn-around so they can leave is droves. it'll be the first time a firm collapses due to mass associate defection. And then we can all laugh at the partners who lose their capital contributions as a result. Hopefully that will teach them not to greedily and stealthily transfer wealth from the lowly associates to themselves. The arrogance of those people. Terrible, terrible business sense.
Associate at Perkins here. Of course I've been watching this blog and take special notice in Dorsey due to the former comparability of the two firms. I say "former comparability" because it's quite obvious Dorsey is conceding it's not on par with our firm anymore given its recent actions. Dorsey has made bad headlines three times in the past several weeks - all for associate/summer associate/staff mistreatment. Notice who is missing from that list. The firm is a mess. And the thing that makes me feel your pain is that you are paid $17K less than us per year and expected to bill the same. They are treating you like slave labor, either because the firm is going under and has no choice or because it is exploiting the bad economy because it can. Either reason makes me sick and the firm should be ashamed of itself. Total pigs.
Two words: Dorsey. Hahahahahhaha
yeah our associates wish they could be at a firm that did layoffs. what other firm had partners reduce bonuses to avoid layoffs. we'll see, hosers.
68, lay off the losers, keep pay competitive for the associates who are actually making money. That whole, we are making salary cuts so that everyone shares the pain is BS. If that were true they would have hired more summers. They are cutting salaries because they can save more money by cutting pay for all associates than by just laying off a few now. Anyone who thinks that Dorsey is going to increase salary back to its former level is dreaming. Dorsey is basically conceding that it is not nationally competitive firm. And from here on out they will have to settle for second-rate talent.
69--wrong again. Stay tuned.
56 percent? 41 percent? 33 percent? who the fuck cares. I wouldn't want to go to the shithole hiring any of those percentages.
dorsey is the most manipulative firm in existence. it also operates as if its associates are idiots, in which case, if dorsey believes that they hired idiots, it makes dorsey even worse.
get off your high horse, Short. seriously. these terrible business decisions are getting ridiculous. resign!
69 - dorsey is also laying off/firing people. several associates have been fired in the Seattle office recently.
Dorsey is just living in a dream world thinking they are permanently immune from any repercusion from these irresponsible decisions. Just because the economy is slow now and you can get away with it doesn't mean people will forget. Short-term/long-term trade-off, but the management committee can't see beyond their immediate pay checks. That's why they need to put some young partners on the management committee, rather than the senior partners. the senior partners only care about the here and now, whereas the young partners care about the carnage that is being created now and its consequences on the future.
no other large, prestigious firm in seattle has taken even one of these measures that Dorsey has. Has Dorsey forgotten that it needs to stay competitive in each individual market, based on what the other local offices are doing with whom you wish to compete? Or do they think that the Minneapolis landscape determines the world market? what a joke.
No other firm has taken the measures Dorsey has? Have you forgotten the Perkins layoffs? And no Dorsey layoffs. 73 not sure where you are getting your bad info but no layoffs at Dorsey Seattle of lawyers. This site is full of bad info from comments
Ah if only 2L's and 1st years ran law firms all would be grand. Of course, among the big pressures law firms are facing is that clients don't want to pay for the salaries and billing rates of 1st and 2d years.
70 - compelling argument, just compelling.
Dorsey is horribly managed. I guess that's what you should expect when you hire a woman to run your law firm.