I'll take that 20 baby!!

I guess it's better than nothing

Something tells me Arent Fox won't be the last firm to do this. Good luck to all affected.

Many peer and non-peer firms will join the recission trend toward the end of this year/January 2010. AF has cast the first stone. $20,000 can go a long way toward repaying your student loans.

"that this development my generate the firm..."

"The firms is giving . . . ."?

Seeing this firm's name always gives me a good chuckle. Thanks, AboveTheLaw. But don't overdo it on the Arent Fox news. It wouldn't be hilarious anymore.

"pow[d]er" ?

Arent Fox is going to Latham the first years? You bastards.

Only dilatory and ignorant plebs are laid off, no-offered, and fired.

If you make yourself invaluable to Arent Fox through 80-hour plus weeks and churning out the best work from among your colleagues, you will not be deferred. Period.

Stop complaining, start working, peons.

No mas, no mas, por favor.

Today is National Punctuation Day. Please be respectful and type the firm's name properly:

Aren't Fox

I don't know where some of you went to school, but 20,000 is just a drop in the bucket towards repaying student loans for some people. Is the 20K in addition to a previously received deferral stipend?

20K is not an insignificant chunk of change....wish everyone did that

How you like me now?

Reluctance and regret?

How about:

"We're reluctant to tighten the belts of the partners and current associates and staff."

And don't forget:

"We regret to say that we're piss poor at generating new business."

And also:

"We're reluctant to give you the 'market' go-away money, because . . . well . . . suck it."

Today is National Punctuation Day. Please be respectful and type the firm's name properly.

Aren't Fox

NOT
Arent Fox

JaKe, you are unoriginal and not funny in the least. I'm sick of your silly posts. You should be ashamed of hitting that "post comment button" repeatedly.

On another note, I've heard rumors about other firms here in the city that may be doing this. Primarily firms with overtly large summer classes this past summer including Dewey, DLA, White & Case and possibly Skadden.

Good luck guys.

JaKe, you are unoriginal and not funny in the least. I'm sick of your silly posts. You should be ashamed of hitting that "post comment button" repeatedly.

On another note, I've heard rumors about other firms here in the city that may be doing this. Primarily firms with overtly large summer classes this past summer including Dewey, DLA, White & Case and possibly Skadden.

Good luck guys.

20K, as in 1/3 of some firms' deferral stipends?

20 is lying.

20:

On another note I've heard rumors that there's a man with an axe in the back seat of your car.

For the curious (because I was), these first years had thought they would be starting in November of 2009 per the last "start date round-up". Please correct me if you have inside information.

Is Elie seriously encouraging the firms to rescind offers? It's one thing to constantly report anything that seems at all like layoff news to encourage the firms to jump on the bandwagon. But you're seriously encouraging the firms to do this stuff now? When did this blog go from being the voice of (downtrodden) associates to trying to be the voice of reason? How about just reporting the news, Elie? That way maybe you won't encourage other firms to do this.

I heard a rumor from 23 that 20 has a car.

Basic Reporting 101: How many were revoked? How many have started? And how many still in Purgatory?

Perhaps Arent Fox should take down this part of their website for now? Just a thought...

http://www.arentfox.com/careers/students/

Looks like market rate for rescinding an offer is plummeting. That 60k from Pillsbury sounds awfully nice right about now. Those who get cut in Nov, Dec will probably get nothing with even less notice.

Although only a lowly associate, if I had a say in law firm management, I would rescind all associate offers and then extend new offers on the basis of their work during the summer of 2008 only on an as need basis. The firm could then continue to bring on associates if and when they need them during the end of this year and onto 2010. Those at the bottom of the totem pole will eventually just find another job or leave the profession entirely. On the other hand, the firm will have the upper hand and not waste money on any further recruiting/HR crap.

25, all Elie wants is attracting more eye-balls and advertisers.

I lied, careers of young lawyers died.

I'm Barack Obama?

This is a step in the right direction. Make a decision, let us move on, and compensate us appropriately. To those that say that this is not enough money- get over it, you are not entitled to 160k, go out and find another job. To those that say this is too much- this is not a minor inconvenience, this represent the costs many of us have incurred spending the last two years not securing other employment plus relocation and other expenses made in reliance on their promise of employment. I think they did an admirable job monetizing the loss.

That's right 28, AF won't be getting students at the top of their classes any time soon.

Twenty grand is a slap in the face.

It is a shame that these poor people are going to be let go. Partners should be ashamed of themselves while they live a lonely life in their penthouse suites.

Luckily, though, this just means more people to foment the growing dissatisfaction with corporate greed and overindulgence.

And soon enough, the people will have what they need. Fewer disgusting old men who believe they are better than everyone else, and who rely on children and the impoverished to grant them sexual satisfaction. Less exhorbitant hoarding of wealth by those who have it during times of economic crisis.

More healthcare, so that poor childred aren't disadvantaged during their entire life because of a failure to treat routine problems. More and better education, particularly in poor areas, so that every child has a chance to succeed based on his/her ability and desire, rather than on mommy and daddy's wealth.

Partner and Jake are soon to become fossils of the past, while the illegitimate children they have abandoned across the country will become the leaders of tomorrow.

Here's an INFINITELY better course of action:

Simply start the people when you said that you were going to start them. Let them know that, given current market conditions, the firm isn't going to be able to keep some of them for longer than 1 year. This gives you 1 year of performance so that you have a better idea who you want to keep and who you want to let go. This also gives you another year to generate business so that you can grow the firm. You have a less jarring hit to your reputation, and you might not have to let ANYONE go if work starts flowing into the firm.

Chasing after the sometimes ridiculous goal of increasing annual PPP is short-sighted and ill advised. If you care about your firms' long term strategic goals, you'll sacrifice a little now to make a lot later.

Unless, of course, the firm is teetering on the edge of insolvency. This could always be the case. Are we about ready to see another Heller or Thelen?

This is a step in the right direction. Make a decision, let us move on, and compensate us appropriately. To those that say that this is not enough money- get over it, you are not entitled to 160k, go out and find another job. To those that say this is too much- this is not a minor inconvenience, this represent the costs many of us have incurred spending the last two years not securing other employment plus relocation and other expenses made in reliance on their promise of employment. I think they did an admirable job monetizing the loss.

I'm tired of hearing these sudo-communist arguments that partners should take a hit so that the poor associates and staff can live a better life. Law firms are a business, not a charity. They need to start acting like what they are and cut the fat when times require it.

It sucks to get rescinded, but the sooner you know the better.

Walrus
WALLLLLLLRUSSS!

Elie,

Check the IP address of the posters talking about the 20K stipend in a positive light. I bet you a doughnut they're all coming from the same place . . . and I'll go double or nothing and say that they're all coming from inside Arent Fox's offices.

The name is apt. If a fox is sly . . . these people most certainly aren't fox.

The economy is great! THANKS REPUBLICANS!!!

The way Arent Fox has handled this situation dating back to the beginning of the year reveals what a farce their self-promoted reputation of being a "lifestyle firm" who cares about people is. This firm is a joke, and any 1Ls or 2Ls reading this, or anyone considering joining this firm should think twice about it.

Elie,

Check the IP address of the posters talking about the 20K stipend in a positive light. I bet you a doughnut they're all coming from the same place . . . and I'll go double or nothing and say that they're all coming from inside Arent Fox's offices.

The name is apt. If a fox is sly . . . these people most certainly aren't fox.

37:

No.

How exactly is it decided who to keep and who to fire?

Solely based on prestige? Looks? They haven't done enough work to be assigned to a practice group.

Former Thelen and current Orrick partner The Glass Cock here, telling Partner Emeritus that I bet your dog complains to other dogs about how fucking stupid you are.

37, great idea except for how shitty the environment would be at the firm amongst first-years who are constantly feeling the tip of the axe rub against them as the doomsday clock counts down.

Well, I was going to make fun 35's grammar and spelling but then came along 39 with that sudo-comment.

It's funny that law students think that rescinding offers to associates or no-offering summers has any effect on a firm's reputation. I can't stress this enough: Baby. Lawyers. Are. Worthless. Partners at other firms do not consider these actions shameful. Current associates applaud such steps, as they lessen the chance associates will be cut to reduce costs. Clients certainly don't care, and likely will endorse such measures as they will result in less bill padding to compensate for first and second years salaries.

46:

Are you in the know? Do you have info on the firms balance sheets? This is the boldest any firm has been. Other firms that rescinded offers gave 60K+. Why would AF distance itself so much from the herd if not out of necessity?

I'm thinking that 37 may be on to something here. Can someone at the firm shed some light on this?

Arent forgot to mention that it's actually 20K in Japanese yen.

be happy with the money as other firms will follow without the 20

Here's an INFINITELY better course of action:

Simply start the people when you said that you were going to start them. Let them know that, given current market conditions, the firm isn't going to be able to keep some of them for longer than 1 year. This gives you 1 year of performance so that you have a better idea who you want to keep and who you want to let go. This also gives you another year to generate business so that you can grow the firm. You have a less jarring hit to your reputation, and you might not have to let ANYONE go if work starts flowing into the firm.

Chasing after the sometimes ridiculous goal of increasing annual PPP is short-sighted and ill advised. If you care about your firms' long term strategic goals, you'll sacrifice a little now to make a lot later.

Unless, of course, the firm is teetering on the edge of insolvency. This could always be the case. Are we about ready to see another Heller or Thelen?

"Sudo," 39? Really? You're too dumb to make an argument, so why don't you just shut it? And, no, I'm not going to tell you how to spell "sudo." I'd tell you to look it up, but lots of luck figuring out where to begin.

Here's an INFINITELY better course of action:

Simply start the people when you said that you were going to start them. Let them know that, given current market conditions, the firm isn't going to be able to keep some of them for longer than 1 year. This gives you 1 year of performance so that you have a better idea who you want to keep and who you want to let go. This also gives you another year to generate business so that you can grow the firm. You have a less jarring hit to your reputation, and you might not have to let ANYONE go if work starts flowing into the firm.

Chasing after the sometimes ridiculous goal of increasing annual PPP is short-sighted and ill advised. If you care about your firms' long term strategic goals, you'll sacrifice a little now to make a lot later.

Unless, of course, the firm is teetering on the edge of insolvency. This could always be the case. Are we about ready to see another Heller or Thelen?

51, well if firms continue recruiting at the top schools I could see such actions negatively affect a firm's ability to attract students and a firm's relationship with the law schools. But perhaps the landscape of student recruiting is changing.

"So give Arent Fox a little bit of credit."

Yes, let's all stand up and applaud this firm.

51,

Agree, but I think you're confusing the notion of "reputation" with the desire to work at a particular firm. And that desire has at least an indirect relationship with reputation, as top talent will go elsewhere. But I do think you are spot-on with respect to your analysis of how others view these measures.

"the firms anticipated workload and client needs"

"Of course its possible"

At least two grammatical errors. What a SHITTT firm.

Can't let you do that Aren't Fox

-Arent Wolf

Firm-to-dissolve list:
1. Arent Fox
2. Fish Richardson
3. Alston Bird

Can't let you do that Arent Fox

-Arent Wolf

I'm not an Arent Fox guy - never even heard of the firm until today - but 20K seems like a pretty decent send-off. Let's get real, they don't owe any of these recent grads anything, so everything above a big "F U" along with the pink slip is a net positive.

I hear the partner who made the calls sounded a little too cheerful for the grimness of the occasion.

What the whole "suck it up" crowd doesn't seem to realize is that by this point people have undertaken substantial real and opportunity costs in anticipation of starting work this fall. People have moved, taken the bar exam in places they might not otherwise want to work, secured housing, etc., etc. Moreover, they have spent the months since graduation not looking for permanent employment because they believed they had permanent employment. While I agree that nobody is entitled to any sort of job ever, I do believe that law firms should be condemned when they lie to new hires for a year and half, continually reassure people that they are "firmly committed" to honoring all incoming associate offers, and then pull the rug out from under people's lives.

Law firms are businesses, true, but there used to such as a thing as honor among businessmen. Perhaps that's an antiquated notion.

51--

I believe that you have overlooked the reputational hit that Latham and Watkins has taken in the Vault Rankings.

I'm not a "Lathamer"...but the fact that they rocketed down in the rankings shows that a law firm cannot be so brazen.

The firms that have given high offer rates, have not deferred start dates, and have not laid off first year associates are, for the moment, doing better prestige-wise.

If you had the chance to summer at firms like White and Case or Latham and Watkins, or...you could summer at a firm like Cleary or Gibson Dunn...the choice is obvious.

Firms are rewarded for being loyal to their plebes.

Pretty weak, JaKe. You've said essentially the same thing a few times now in these threads about revocations and deferrals, and it wasn't that funny to begin with when applied to kids who never started in the first place. You should try something along these lines -

"Clearly, those who had their offers revoked today let their middle class roots show through during their summer associateship. Biglaw is only for the truly elite. ArentFox is lucky to have the chance to dispel the taint of those with ancestors who actually worked for a living from their offices. Unless you have personal recommendations from two Senators and three members of the Fortune 500, and can trace your ancestry to a member of the House of Lords, you are unsuited to work at any firm I care to be associated with. The downturn is the perfect excuse to cleanse the bourgeoisie and nouveao riche from the ranks of Biglaw. I can only hope all firms follow suit."

The above isn't perfect, but it's better than the same stupid thing about working hard you have been saying in every thread. Come on JaKe, step your game up. You were funny for a while, let's get that back.

Fox, Fish, and Bird: the shittiest firms by land, sea and air

I met a chick from that firm once. I told her "you aren't foxy." She told me she was smart in my world.

you're all morons for not forming a union. it might require a pay cut, but at least you can obtain some job security.

"Please Arent Fox friends, do not blow your $20K on terrorist activities. Instead stock up on Ramen and a buy a good sleeping bag. It’s going to be a long winter."

Stop trying to be funny. It's beginning to seem like you are enjoying this.

49 -

What's worse? Working in a cut-throat environment while making a decent salary and knowing that things have a chance of improving, or not working at all? Given the circumstances, I'd choose the former.

But really, this isn't about associate happiness. This is about what's best for the firm. Of course, we don't have any numbers here so we don't know how many have been asked not to show up. If the number is less than 25%, I doubt there will be an ill effect. If the number is greater than 50%, the firm is running the risk of damaging future recruiting and business development efforts. Don't think that clients don't notice these kinds of things when deciding on which firm to use. High end value sensitive clients see these kinds of actions as a rather bad signal.

-37
(former law firm associate, current legal industry consultant)

45- I'm not at AF. Just another 2009 grad hoping his start date holds up. I'm not looking forward to an email like this one but I'd take it over 95% of the scenarios that have been running through my head for the last couple months.
-33

unionize now

65

You most definitely ARE a AF guy.

I think that, at a minimum, 50% of one year's salary would be appropriate. $20k to go away, permanently, is a huge cock slap in the face. 65 deserves 20k of those.

I went to Harvard and I don't know anyone going to Arent Fox. That said, I have a "January start date" and I'd take 20K right now. I don't have much hope that my start date is going to materialize and 20K in the hand is better than 160K in the bush.

36: Railing against the greed of those "who rely on children and the impoverished to grant them sexual satisfaction"

I must say that is a really strange characterization of the situation. How do you go from being just a greedy bastard to being a pedophile. I am not sure what you would call the other one an impecuniophile.

Will that $20K be taxed up front?

Can we get some clarity on how many offers were revoked? What did the partner say on the call?

Former Thelen and current Orrick partner The Glass Cock here, telling Partner Emeritus that I bet your dog complains to other dogs about how fucking stupid you are.

Robert S. Summers often gnashes his teeth whilst reading judicial opinions with questionable reasons.

77, no "at a minimum" you deserve nothing in compensation since you made zero dollars for the firm. Try not to look that $20k gift horse in the mouth.

-- not 65

Guys, if you're going to refer to what you do as "reporting," please try to dig up some of the basics:

1) how many were cut loose?
2) how may are getting to start?

The firm's statement implies they're starting about the same number they did last year. Confirmation on that? Surely some of those who have been cut loose have been emailing you.

9/24/09: NEVER FORGET

Well if you took out a bar loan with an insanely high interest rate expecting you'd start at the firm that assured your employment and then be able to pay off that loan immediately, you would probably think $20,000 is a pretty low amount. Especially considering they only gave a $5,000 deferral stipend. No one's entitled to a job, but there is something to be said for cultivating expectations and then completely going against your word.

64 = A++
Andross has ordered us to take you down off the Vault rankings.

This is only the start...other firms will follow the lead. So much for big law being the best gig. I predict a gruesome October for law firm layoffs. However, any of these deferred genius should grow a pair and use the 20k to start their own practice. One personal injury settlement will pay you more than any big law firm could pay.

This whole situation reminds me of this:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/4154/saturday-night-live-schillervision-hidden-camera

DOJ Honors Interview Notifications are going out, maybe we could get an open thread on this.... As it actually matters

84

You don't deserve anything because you don't know how to read. I never said that they DESERVED any money, only that 65 deserved 20k of cock slaps to the face. Of course I know that the rescinded haven't brought a dime in for the firm. Duh. But $20k is chump change, especially considering the fact that those whose offers were rescinded aren't likely to find a job anytime soon and that $20k will dry-up in a matter of weeks. Don't you pay attention to anything?

$20k is good money if, like these people, you were deferred to 2010 and paid a stipend. Firms that paid $60k were telling Fall 2009 starters to go away.

And I agree with Elie, this is much cooler than letting these people twist until February and then telling them to piss off.

87- reasonable reliance: it's not just a good idea, it's the law.

Latham was the only v10 that fucked everyone over and now it's not a v10 anymore. It's still the only v20 to do so. Probably won't be a v20 next year. Part of prestige is managing yourself well enough that you don't need to do mass layoffs.

It would seem to me that the firm has made a difficult, reality-based decision. They do not have work for new associates (right now) and they are being extraordinarily generous in giving any money at all. It's a shame that the industry has fallen on such hard times, but hey, nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to go to law school. Lesson #1: Life is unfair. Get used to it. The law of supply and demand is a wonderful thing. Lesson #2: Things change. All.The. Time. I do have great sympathy for the class of '09 (and even more for next year's unfortunates), but you got to play the hand you're dealt.

STEPTOE AND JOHNSON IS A TOILET FIRM.

WHERE ARE THE OFFERS??? WHERE ARE THE OFFERS???

I would rather have a firm that is smart in court than is smart in my world. My world is actually kind of dumb.

I would rather have a firm that is smart in court than is smart in my world. My world is actually kind of dumb.

For those of you complaining that $20,000 is "chump change" perhaps you should consider relocating to Cambodia or Thule, Greenland. It is my understanding that $20,000 will go a long way in these places. Happy trails.

Does anyone else think this statement does not look like it was crafted by a lawyer? I'm assuming the punctuation problems and random additional words are transcription errors and that the original statement did not contain those errors. Even so, the wording of the statement makes me think that the statement was hastily put together. Perhaps the poster suggesting severe financial problems is correct.

PSA to 68 and other bitter commenters: Latham, Cleary, and Gibson Dunn are peer firms that pay the same salary. There is no distinction between the three except Latham is more fun and laidback with hotter associates while the latter two will work you to death.

wtf is with all the life lessons and words of christian thankfulness that people are posting

Hey ATL,
Your stats are dying. Better "create" some more news.

Hey ATL,
Your stats are dying. Better "create" some more news.

Firms are just waiting for Bar results to come out foolishly hoping there will be enough first time losers that they wont have to do additional layoffs. Give it time, as more bar results come in more phone calls will go out.

67:

I call BS on that. I'm a deferred associate right now, working for the government until my start date. If my firm pulls the rug from under me, I can ask to make this job permanent - you have to look ahead. Those who are sitting on their ass right now or waiting tables until their start dates are just not being smart. If you get that this is a business, then you better start acting like it's one. Honor has nothing to do with it - there's no honor in indefinitely stringing along a recent grad if the work just isn't there. The issue here is risk management. We all knew we were taking risks in coming into this business model. When businesses have to forecast their needs two years in advance, there's bound to be situations like this one. If you're not looking out for your own best interest, no one else will, especially not the firm that has no responsibility to you whatsoever.

77:

50% of a year's salary? For what? I think 84 nailed it on the head: no deferred associate has brought a single cent of value to their firm. ANY money received is pure charity at this point.

Were all the typos in the Arent Fox original (bad sign), or was the memo retyped by an ATLer (to be devoutly hoped)?

67 -- you are right, honor among businesspeople is an antiquated notion. It is all about maximizing profit and shareholder return. As it should be. Increase efficiency, generate greater returns, weed out the uncompetitive/unprepared, and grow the economy.

92 -- you make no sense and are probably at AF. Arent Fox incomings were promised a $5000 stipend, and are now being given $20000 to walk away. $5000 + $20000= $25000. No matter how you slice it, $25000 does not compare to $60000. I'm sure any of these kids would have preferred $60000 back in May to walk away than this money.

106

no. they turned down other offers. the opportunity cost for one year alone is 160k. jackass.

In view of how much these worthless not-yet-to-be associates are, I can't understand why any firm would pay them more money to not comes. Just tell them to go eat dog shit. Failing to make appropriate business decisions is what put these firms in such a shitty position, so why compound the fuck-ups now.

"Fox! Get this guy off me!" -Slippy

Elie, google "trustafarian" and "xoxohth.com." I'm betting you and that "tipster" will be getting a visit from the FBI. terrorism is not a joking matter, and I fail to understand your "clear parady" argument?

then again, I may be wrong, but i think the trustafarian analogy is apt here.

110

I concur. These bitches need to learn to forecast their hiring needs. People turned down other offers. Arent Fox wasn't the only game in town. Fuckbags.

Elie, google "trustafarian" and "xoxohth.com." I'm betting you and that "tipster" will be getting a visit from the FBI. terrorism is not a joking matter, and I fail to understand your "clear parady" argument?

then again, I may be wrong, but i think the trustafarian analogy is apt here.

106 congrats on finding someone willing to hire you despite the fact that a) you can probably only work for them for a couple of months and no previous experience, and b) technically you are a current employee of a firm- one that apparently doesn't care if you get conflict-check pwned
Try not to fuck it up for the rest of us just because you got lucky and "looked ahead"

37 of the Parkinson's disease: your idea is infinitely awful. First, that requires the firm to blow $300k on someone they don't intend to keep - even if they haven't yet precisely identified that someone - without assurance that they can effectively recoup that investment (based on practice area and performance).

Second, other industries, like business consultants, operate according to your model and the result is abject misery for the "candidate employees." A friend of mine endured the first year gauntlet at a top 5 consulting group, and he made the cut. And got ulcers (at age 24). He also promptly left that job voluntarily. I'm quite certain law firms don't want their talent emulating that pattern any more than it already does, and that is the incentive your proposal creates.

Typos to be blamed on BlackBerry.

You can't out fox the Walrus.

they withdrew offers from ALL of their ny incoming associates. the some must be in DC's office.

70,

That was pretty damn funny. You should be getting more credit for that.

110:

What other offers?!? Offers to other firms that are also rescinding? In case you haven't noticed, AF isn't the only firm that hasn't brought in a single associate from the 2009 class. They won't be the only one that cuts their deferred associates loose either. So your statement is basically that they were denied the chance to get fired by a different firm.

You only have an opportunity cost if you had another opportunity - find me another biglaw opportunity in this market.

Unfortunately for the Class of 2009, they entered law school when the old recruiting and hiring model was still being promoted as the status quo. All the players were complicit in what happened. Career services told law students at top schools they just needed to coast through the summer and were assured an offer and would start the following September. The law firms during the summer of 2008 gave no indication that anything like this would happen to 2009 grads. In fact, 2009ers thought they were safe, and that it would be the class of 2010 that would feel the heat. The fact is, you can't blame the 2009ers for being upset when the rug was pulled from under them with almost no warning.

24 - we were deferred from sept to november, and later deferred further until "earliest feb."

121

Most firms haven't rescinded you stupid jackass.

110, and the "opportunity costs" matter to the firm, how?

108

Yah, it's so great to have these kids turn down offers from stable, well managed firms during the window of opportunity for entry level hiring just to go to a garbage dump that couldn't forecast it's hiring needs.

The trickle effect is especially awesome. They can't repay their 150k student debt, so the government gets to bail out big sallie mae. If they have a house it's getting foreclosed on. If they have kids, they'd better give them up for adoption.

Arent Fox is a great hero today. Thank you partners for protecting your profits.

125 = simpleTTTon

67/106:

You are a dipshit because you liberally use the term "opportunity cost"

110, so if hypothetically one of these AF guys manage to get a new $160k job right away, so that his "opportunity cost" is $0, then he deserves to get zero from the firm?

Why does the firm care about your "opportunity cost"?
Jackass.

122,

I agree 110%. Thank you for putting that out there.

RIP AF first-years.

Is it just me, or are all of the BigLaw associates out there experiencing immense pleasure in watching the desperation and fear of the no-offered summer associates?

You know who you are. You are the ones telling us this will be a character building experience, that we shouldn't come into a summer associate position expecting to get a full time offer of employment later on, that this is what we get for having an inlated sense of entitlement.

Sadly, character won't pay back the $150K I have taken out in loans, and I can't find a job anywhere. They've all been taken by your former colleagues. You know, the ones who got the pink slip? Remember them?

And it wasn't very long ago that you were a smug summer associate, regaling ATL with your summer retreat gaffes and horror stories. If anyone has a sense of entitlement, it is certainly not the Class of 2010.

Enjoy the schadenfreude. I don't blame the economy on BigLaw. I do blame the firm for lulling me into a false sense of security during fall of my 2L year and throughout Summer 09 up to my very last day on the job.

Sincerely,
No-Offered Summer

PS: Screw all of you who have said that the people being no-offered aren't as "good" as the ones who have been fortunate enough to receive offers. I'm sure that is the case with a handful of people, as in every summer class. But chances are you jackasses spouting your alleged superiority would be sitting on my side of the fence if you hadn't had the good fortune of going to law school many years removed from this hot mess.

Just received another stipend check from my firm, however it did not come with any reassurance that we will start in January as scheduled. Should this concern me?

PE pwned by GC!

The ship be sinking...

We got paid a lot less than $20,000 when our Seattle gig got canceled and replaced by that lame Air Force base dance.

132

No. Your firm is likely being very tight-lipped about the situation, which sucks. The next time you hear about your status is when they (a) call to setup the logistics of your start date or (b) call to extend deferral. I hope for your sake that it's (a).

131 -

who's fault is it that you took $150k in loans? waaah. *cries*.

124:

Yet.

-121

p.s. Do you think anonymously calling me a "stupid jackass" makes you sound more or less authoritative?

129

you're still not getting it.

let me guess, 25k a year shitlaw employee, or AF partner troll?

Any word on whether any AF summers got offers???

Alston Bird and Arent Fox are just the beginning of the offers being rescinded. This will continue, and we will also see some large firms fail soon. The reason we haven't seen more fail yet is because banks are waiving provisions in their credit agreements with law firms. The banks realize that it is a lot harder to collect from a dissolved firm than a zombie firm. But that can only go on for so long.

I am very pleased that these people were laid off. It's a good start!

106: It's wonderful that you've been able to find an employer willing to accept you in a permanent-track position while you are deferred. However I think you are the exception rather than the rule. Most employers don't want to hire people who are likely to leave within the next year. That means most deferred lawyers are limited to part time positions with little or no long-term potential.

141---source?

All AF summers got offers today, after the firm announced that the 3L offers had been rescinded. Coincidence? I think not.

131 - Please don't take the comments on here as representative of all big law associates. This message board is a refuge for the cruel, the insecure and the entitled. No firm measures up, no partner measures up, no associate measures up, no comp plan measures, no school measures up and certainly no summer associate measures up to their high standards. You don't need to ask yourself who the real scourges on the profession are 131, you have already addressed them in your post. They just aren't the majority is all I am saying. They are also peons just like you and me - except they would never admit it.

During the next few months, stable firms will separate themselves from firms on the brink of failure. Rescinding offers is the WORST indicator a firm can give regarding its financial health; thus, it's typically a last resort.

Alston & Bird; Arent Fox; Fish & Richardson --> avoid at all costs, 2Ls.

Are those ex-Latham babies still out of work?

I'm genuinely curious as to why the same people who insist that newly minted lawyers should be responsible for their own choices seem to give a free pass to the older, more experienced recruiting-committee members across this country who chose to over-recruit, chose to over-promise, and then chose to break their promises?

Is it only the person with vastly inferior bargaining power and information who should be responsible about their decisions?

THE S&J WAY:

The last summers at Steptoe and Johnson finished their program on July 31st. It's almost two months later without a peep.

WHERE ARE THE OFFERS???

It's hard for me to feel too sorry for these grads - they're doing better than many other '09 grads who also have debt but never even had an offer (let alone 20K to help ease the transition) - to say nothing of established attorneys who were laid off after having actually worked.

At what point is the legal industry going to admit they've been working with a broken business plan? Or at least give better information to those considering law school?

Gotta agree with 141. I feel like we're on the leading edge of some serious implosions that will radically reshape the legal landscape. If I were a service partner without a portable book of business, I'd be very very nervous right now.

37 wrote: "Here's an INFINITELY better course of action: Simply start the people when you said that you were going to start them. Let them know that, given current market conditions, the firm isn't going to be able to keep some of them for longer than 1 year..."

A YEAR....that's laughable. My firm gave me all of two MONTHS before they cut me (and 60+ other attorneys) for economic reasons. AF isn't going to take a hit on those inflated salaries for a year. Wake up to the world we now live in.

c/o Class of 2008 grad

108: It's because of people like you that the socialists will eventually win. I say that as an ardent capitalist. If there is no honorable way to conduct free enterprise then the people will eventually turn to the government to force a degree of fair play on the economy.

G-d, I am so very fucked if my offer gets revoked. And I suspect it will. I'm at my deferred job right now literally paralyzed with feelings of fear and uncertainty.

I just know that my firm is waiting for more firms to break the ice before it does what we all know is coming...

62,

I loved Starfox. Great post.

153 put his/her finger on it. Class of 2008 got massacreed in the layoffs. Which is better to start and then get fired half a year later or to know now.

What I want to also know is whether anyone has looked at whether law school applications are down. You would have to be crazy to go to law school now. These are all top students/top school people we are talking about who are either being fired or laid off. I can't see what would justify spending the dough.

79--

The sexual quip was a direct shot at PE, and some of his filthy references to having dated, for example, a 24-year old stripper, and the repeated solicitation of homosexual prostitution on this blog to those who have been laid off.

It was also based on my assumption that if a 17-year old (or younger) were to offer, PE would accept...at least in his fictional role.

This is rightly pointed out as disgusting, revolting trash...even coming from the unwashed plebe.

153

If anything, applications are up. People in non-law job sectors have also been hit hard with layoffs/shitty money and are turning to law school as a way to "defer life" for a few years. Not sure that's a wise move, but whatever.

150:

There won't be any.

Yours truly,

In-the-know

64 - You brightened my day.

Now when I came out, I told you it was just about Latham.
Then everybody had to open their mouth with a mother f******* layoff
Well this is how we gonna' do this:
f*** Arent,
f*** Dorsey,
f*** Morgan Lewis as a staff, record label, and as a mother f****** crew.
And if you want to be down with V&E,
Then f*** you too.
Paul Hastings, f*** you too.
All you mother f******,
f*** you too.
(lose money, lose money)
All of y'all mother f******,
f*** you,
My low rates make sure all your PPP don't grow

Giving only $20k this late in the game is pretty TTT. Those recent grads are fucked.

152 - keep up the wishful thinking.

154--

I agree. The socialists will win. As rightly they should...at least on some issues.

I, for one, will rejoice on the day that healthcare becomes available for everyone legally in the U.S., regardless of financial means.

That said...government will replicate the same problems as businesses in most things, because they can be bought out by special interests.

The plight of the plebe continues, even with government, I'm afraid.

If you are applying to law school now, you would graduate in 2013. I suspect they would come out in a much better hiring market than what we face now.

I still wouldn't go to law school. But no one reads Above the Law until they go to law school or become a lawyer. And, frankly, no one cares that lawyers are getting shafted by the economy, so the general public doesn't know, and doesn't care, that its a horrible time to be in law school.

How is Orrick still doing so well?

137 --

Wah, indeed. I'm crying my eyes out that I don't have your trust fund to pay for law school. I had to take out student loans to cover tuition and living expenses, just like 99.9% of the law student population out there. Blue collar parents be damned!

Respectfully,
No-Offered Summer

PS: I'd be happy to go in on a joint bank account if your family is currently adopting. I'd stop crying, for one. I think that would make you happy. I'd stop looking for a job, too. That would make all the pink-slipped, infinitely deferred, and no-offereds of the world ever so grateful to have one less peon looking for a job.

166, a friend of mine's girlfriend is planning to go to lawschool. I told my friend, who is not a lawyer or a law student, that she shouldn't go for all of the reasons regularly discussed on this blog. Unless you are certain that you would enjoy being a lawyer......No jobs, too much debt, have to be top percentile of class, lawyers are miserable, no loyalty, dont learn how to do anything in school, etc, etc, etc....

He casually said something along the lines of, "dude that's crazy, she'll be a lawyer!" Non-law people have absolutely no idea how bad it is right now for lawyers. Even my parents don't get it....I'm deferred from a biglaw firm right now, and they say, "well if things don't work out, you can just work for a smaller firm - you have a law degree!"

People dont understand that a law degree is pretty worthless when there's no work to go around and your school has failed to teach you how to do anything on your own.

39 - the word is spelled "pseudo" - Smart With A Heart

168: you path of least resistance crybaby. You could have done it like I did -- go part time for 4 years to a less expensive school, work full time, and finish with 1/3 the debt.

But no, I'm guessing you saw dollar signs and jumped all in. You figured you'd do well and have a cush $145k, then $160k, then maybe even $190k to soften the blow and help you live like a bourgeois prince. It probably prompted you to borrow more than you knew you could afford, since you'd "easily be able to pay it all off in 4 years." You took the easy route, wildly missed on your bet, and hit harder than you thought you might.

And that's the law firm's fault?

169: I hear ya. My non-lawyer friends just assume that you graduate from law school and suddenly are rich. They don't understand that you are six figures in debt and only about 85% of new grads make a six figure salary. Add in that, in the current job market, you'll probably be making less than you did before you went to law school, and being a lawyer feels like you just made the worst decision someone could possibly make in their life.

Yeah, in a few years things might get better. But, you can't just put your life on hold for a few years. You go get a job, probably oustide the legal profession or completely unrelated to the practice area you want to be in, and then you end up doing something you never wanted to do with your life, making a modest income, but with an extra six figures of debt.

The only people that ever tell you not to be a lawyer are other lawyers. The outsiders just assume they don't want others in on their secret. In reality, its because they are the only ones that really know what an unwise and foolish decision it is. It's kind of like when your in college, and people tell you to enjoy it, b/c it will be the best four years of your life, and you just kind of laugh it off. Then you get to the rest of your life.

I'll go ahead and add in...wah, wah, wah.

haha -- you're a joke, night-school guy. you'll always be a joke in this profession.

48/82 - That I do. That I do...

Exactly 154. The government only comes along to regulate when the people begin to feel that others can't be trusted to act in a responsible manner. Did a group of bureaucrats sit around and decide to come up with a law banning drunk driving? Of course not. People were doing it, and it was dangerous. This led to the law. If the populace as a whole feels that others can't be trusted to self-regulate their behavior, the government will step in and do it for them.

167 - cooking the books.

It's hard for me to feel too sorry for these grads - they're doing better than many other '09 grads who also have debt but never even had an offer (let alone 20K to help ease the transition) - to say nothing of established attorneys who were laid off after having actually worked.

---Laid off lawyers with good experience (say, in the 5+ year range in many areas) will be the first ones re-hired when the economy kicks into high gear. Summer, first and second year lawyers laid off/deferred/no-offered will be the last ones rehired.

Some people might be getting the message that it's not the best time to go to law school. NPR just had a piece on law firm recruiting yesterday. Included Quinn partner and Orrick CEO:

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/09/23/pm-recruiting-lawyers/

I would not have gone to law school if I had had to pay for it myself. Do I feel guilty because I had no loans, actually got a job ... and have kept it? Yes. How can I repay society? I'm thinking about starting a school for retards.

I'm still laughing. No law school loans.

Six-figure paralegal secure.

You will all hear about me if/when I get a call like this....

Kudos to all, there has been an improvement in how reality is perceived and handled. Gone are the Lathamic tantrums, now replaced by a calmer resignation. People are finally coming to terms with the fact that no one fresh out of law school should be earning a six figures income. There is still a ways to go, but we are finally moving in the right direction. Here is a pat on the head to ATL for helping attack the unbearable sense of entitlement that new lawyers graduate with.

Finally, a note of congratulations to the people rescinded by Arent Fox, at least you got $20,000. If it were up to me, you would have gotten nothing other than a note on nice company letter head signed not by a partner but by the office administrator. Enjoy the money. After all you did not work for it.

182, do you think banker analysts right out of college are entitled to six figures (they made $100k with bonus this past year, in the worst economy in decades)? If not, why not? If yes, why do you think they're entitled to make six figures using taxpayer money?

101 - Latham is not a peer to Cleary or Gibson because peer firms have work and do not lay off half of their people and when send another half to secondments. Peer firms have real clients who stick with you and not just bottom feed from banks.

Latham used to be fun, but now it a place full of sharks, suckups and douchebags and everybody hates it. There will be a mass exodus once things change. Latham will fall really hard in the rankings next year ands its future outside of CA is over.

P.S. shut up you stupid first year or HR. See your shit somewhere else, rats of new york

Latham will be the next to do this. . . mark my words.

Also, I wonder what is going on at the firms that actually had their incoming class start in the fall of 09. Are they busy, are they simply doing busy work? Will those who failed the bar get laid off? This informaiton would be valuable. Come on ATL. Have a thread on how the incomining students are doing, etc. There were quite a few firms that did have September and October start dates.

Latham NY will take 40 and defer another 40. The deferred 40 better start looking for jobs cause you ain't welcome here, no matter what we lied to you last summer.

- Dave Gordon (surfer, habitual masturbator, best friend with Madoff, rat of new york)

One major Florida firm, outright rescinded offers in their NY office a while ago, and offered NO stipend.

I think we all have the same questions as 185. ATL: we need more details. How many offers were revoked today? Which offices? Which practice groups? These details are crucial.

Layoffs are one thing. But stringing along an incoming class for 8 months post-graduation when you know there is not enough work is a whole other beast.

I wonder what practice areas are starting and which were deferred forever.

I also wonder if kids picked these practice areas or had them picked for them?

Yes 131, by all means, blame everyone but yourself. And always remember that you are a helpless victim. Never, ever, get over that.

I know for a fact that there are many angry no-offered summer associate stories that are quite hilarious. The no-offered kids who were told in the office. I wish people would post these to ATL. DO IT!

Do people seriously think the "work" they did over the summer is real? Can be used to measure performance? Get over yourselves. You got busy work that a paralegal or a good legal librarian would do -- maybe a low level contract attorney.

Do you think partners really read anything you handed in? They gave it to their secretary, spouse, child, dog to mark-up and recited the notes back to you.

Get over yourselves.

179,

I think there is already a school for retards. Dig up your law degree...read the name of the school on it.

My heart goes out to all affected by this, but the future will only be worse. Things only look better at firms because 2008 Q3 was getting bad and 2008 Q4 was abysmal. Like Elvis, panic has finally left the building and mngmt committees are finally grappling with reality. Recission, sadly enough, will be practiced as widely as deferrals.

Certain firms will still go to OCI, but offers for SA spots will 10-15% of those in 2007. Senior associates aren't leaving, because there is no place to go.

Firms with large commercial RE practices will see a meltdown in those practices worse than FSG practices. The few left in corporate will be decimated as the market's bull run will crash.

Of the AmLaw 100 maybe only 20 will not dissolve, merge with another albatross, split into smaller practice groups, or merge with a few regional firms and cede control to them.

Prestige whores won't be talking about the T14, it will only be the T5 that matter and that will assure grads job offers.

194 - you are an idiot.

195, you are entitled to your opinion. I called Heller's demise two weeks before it happened. I called Wolf Block's demise at least twice in the weeks before the dissolution.

-194

I will post a list of three "endangered" firms in this thread, if Kash, Elie, or Lat post a picture of themselves doing something stupid.

195,

Wait, a whole two weeks? My goodness, its like you were reading..I dont know, this very site in the weeks before those firms dissolved. For course, to be fair to me, you should list every "prediction" you have ever made in your life and indicate the ones that were correct.

198, 194, I predict you spent 200k on your 7 years of education and have yet to pay it back, while my consulting contracts with your firm's managing partners start at 200k.

194

194 is probably dead on. We are all fucking doomed. There are too many law firms.

194,

Add that to the long list of incorrect your predictions. Also on the list, what you think the word "prediction" means.

198.

Also add to the list - notes where you switch 4's and 5's.

Arent Fox at least has the balls to admit that its partners can't generate enough work to feed more associates. I wonder if MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY will have the cajones to do the same....

Still waiting,
MWE 2009 summer

ummm murder? ummm, is anyone surprised how this firm conducts itself?

ummm murder? ummm, is anyone surprised how this firm conducts itself?

a Rent a Fox? What kind of business are you running here? Their fur trade has been down for a while - switch to rent a rabbit.

173: You would be surprised at the number of evening students who are partners in big law (and for the same reason, you reveal yourself to be a student). It is impossible to tell by attorney bios posted on web sites, because degrees are not so labeled. Once you are in a firm, however, it becomes clear. At the end of the day, lawyers are no different than other workers -- a large portion of life's success is premised on diligent, hard work.

Why do evening students typically succeed in big law? It is fairly obvious. They are in law school because they really want to practice law, as going to school at night while holding down a full time job (and typically supporting a family, too) is difficult. Thus, they really "want it", and they are no stranger to hard work. The recent studies showing that students from lower ranked schools are typically happier at big law than those arriving at big law from more privileged paths are informative. Why are the former happier than the latter? Because the former are grinders and thus used to the big law environment from day one. They don't expect to be coddled. Same for evening students.

Luck, of course, also plays a role in one's career. Those of us who graduated many years ago are fortunate to have reaped big law financial returns during what turned out to be a bubble. And for the same reason, I have tremendous sympathy for those entering the job market now.

At the end of the day, however, your career success over the next 40 years will be measured by how much work you put into it. Conversely, starting a profession by denigrating those within it who got where they did via a different path, as you did in your post, is not the right mindset if you want to have a successful career in any field in the years and decades ahead. Some fatherly advice as I head into the twilight of my own career: drop the arrogance, as it will only hurt you.

Regards,

Big law partner and former evening student

At least Arent Fox is giving the associates it cuts loose money. Alston is asking their associates to give back any money Alston provided (including bar expenses) if the associates find a new job.

Well said, 206. I held down a full time job while going through school at night, and when OCI came around I found most employers, especially big law partners, impressed more by my work ethic than by my grades. Fortunately, it also provided me with interview material that set me apart from the herd. I also had something to talk about other than my favorite class in law school.

206, 208

Completely agree.
I worked as a law clerk throughout law school and each interview spent 90% of the time on issues I faced at work, with 9% on my prior work history before law school. Maybe a perfunctory question about school just because...

I think most top business schools require a certain amount of time between BA/BS and MBA start. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for law schools to have a similar approach.

BS and MORE BS from A-F ... numbers don't add up ...20K is BS ... people have put their lives on hold for this company ... F*** the '08 class for the '09 class? Can you say Breach of Promise? At least A-F should be forthcoming with exact numbers, not this "about 8 or 9" ... how many were left on the list (assuming some said screw it and got clerkships, jobs etc?) NY "between 1 and 2"? Well, 1.5 lawyers? C'mon ... there is SO much wrong here ....

I'm a bit of a errant fox myself.

NY to 190!

Arent Fox sucks. They are cheap. They tried to seduce them all over the summer of '08 about valuing people. This is all about the bottom line as every business is. Wish they and every other law firm would stop trying to blow smoke in law students' faces. Arent Fox does not care about people. No law firm does.

The REAL crime in this A-F mess is that those who waited patiently now have lost opportunities for employment ... THEY should be compensated FULLY for this loss of employment ... perhaps the salary of a gov't lawyer? ABout 60K would be appropriate. I still think a lawsuit is in order ...AND I think its winnable as a class action suit.

The hastily thrown together statement with numerous errors reflects the level of professionalism at that firm. Great attempt to save face after screwing over a bunch of people who relied on your offer of employment, most certainly to their detriment, as they could have pursued other employment back in August. It's now end of September, what are these people supposed to do? How about this novel concept: don't give offers for permanent employment to people when you have no clue whether there will be work for them.

Some of you people are clearly delusional. Don't you all remember that little financial meltdown last year at this time? Kinda killed the major deal and real estate work that had been driving many firms' bottom line. AF was no exception, with a large real estate / transactional practice left exposed in the downturn. That work has not come back in any meaningful way, so it makes little sense to hire newbie lawyers with no experience to work deals that do not exist.

Now, I know for a fact that the firm is doing just fine overall, with litigation and regulatory work going strong. So some first years were brought on to handle the overflow grunt work coming from those departments. The others were not so lucky.

But here is a little secret about hiring that I expect is occuring at other firms as well. The firm has actually hired quite a few lateral attorneys as associates this year. These are people with an expertise or knowledge base that is currently of value to the firm.

Unfortunately, this doesn't help potential first-years, who are mostly screwed in this area, but it does show that particularized knowledge or expertise in a hot area can score you a job.

Peace out.

I have now seen so many posts about MCDERMOTT, WILL and EMERY.

That firm seems to be a rat hole, with no compassion for its associates as all. I am glad to have turned down an offer there. In fact, everyone should turn down their offers there.

They appear to have no compassion for their summer associates. They haven't given them offers yet. They lowered the summer associate pay AFTER THE SUMMERS SHOWED UP, with no prior notice.

People like this are not worth working for. They will continue to be a sub-par firm, because they do not understand that their worker bees are the future of their firm, and that the quality of their associates is now going to plummet because the talent is going elsewhere.

Go into public interest. Go into government work. Do something good for your community. Do anything.

But NO ONE should accept a job offer at the sorry McDermott Will and Emery.

I have now seen so many posts about MCDERMOTT, WILL and EMERY.

That firm seems to be a rat hole, with no compassion for its associates as all. I am glad to have turned down an offer there. In fact, everyone should turn down their offers there.

They appear to have no compassion for their summer associates. They haven't given them offers yet. They lowered the summer associate pay AFTER THE SUMMERS SHOWED UP, with no prior notice.

People like this are not worth working for. They will continue to be a sub-par firm, because they do not understand that their worker bees are the future of their firm, and that the quality of their associates is now going to plummet because the talent is going elsewhere.

Go into public interest. Go into government work. Do something good for your community. Do anything.

But NO ONE should accept a job offer at the sorry McDermott Will and Emery.

Here is some more information:

Chairman Marc Fleischaker, in an interview with The NLJ, confirmed that about 12 incoming associates are affected by the move: one in Los Angeles, another "two and three" in New York, and "about eight" in the firm's largest office in Washington, D.C.

Per NALP, there were 6 incoming associates in NYC, 18 in DC, and and 2 in LA. So, they revoked 50% of their offers.

The only mystery that remains is how they decided who they kept and who they ruined....

wouldn't these folks have to pay taxes on that amount, probably at a 28-33% rate? After taxes, 20K at 28% is 14,400. That's not enough to pay off your loans, but you can eat and pay rent on that for a few months. Too bad you can't put some of that in a high-interest bearing account now so that you could earn a bit more than that.
The 60K from Pillsbury is looking very generous. Arrogant Fox has lowered the bar once again.

No doubt in exchange for that $20k each of those lost souls had to sign a fairly one sided release

140: No, 2009 summer associates haven't heard anything yet.

216: You're totally correct about what's going on.

220 -

Actually, if the 20K is all they made for the year, and if they have families, etc., not only will they not have to pay taxes, but they may qualify for the EIC as well. The $20K may become more than $20K. Of course, the tax code stars have to align for this to happen.

216:

"Now, I know for a fact that the firm is doing just fine overall."

That's been the unofficial Arent Fox motto since the first round of layoffs. No one was buying it then and no one is buying it now.

How many firms have yet to offer their 2009 summer class???? It seems like MWE is on this list. Can we get a list going.

162 just hit em up...well done

216 - Agreed with at least this part: the firm is doing fine.

Its doing much better without the 12 mouths they wont have to feed. Sucks for the 12 people though.

225 - if you haven't heard from your summer firm, you probably wont. If they aren't telling now, they probably wont tell you until the spring. Better just start looking for new employment.

Also, I'm a TTT grad in biglaw. I went to school full time yet worked 20 hours a week as a professor (I have advanced degrees in other topics). The 90% of my interviews focused on (1) my work and prior education and (2) how I was ranked #4 in my school while still working those hours.

If you have substantial work experience, it really plays a big rol in the interviews. A lot of people take a strong work ethic and ability to multi task over some kid getting an A in torts. Worked for me. Good luck to those who do it. Don't listen to the assholes who say night school or TTT is trash.

- A Proud, TTT, Biglaw lawyer. :)

Arent has gone through about 4 rounds of layoffs since late 2008. The first round was supposedly based on performance issues, but that was pretty clearly BS- in many cases, the associates involved had been with AF for a number of years, including a couple of associates who had been with the firm for 5+ years right out of law school

The firm admitted, to greater and lesser degrees, that the 3 rounds of layoffs following that were for economic reasons. These layoffs have slashed (a) the junior associates in the transactional group , since they are the easiest to get rid of; (b) the senior associates and counsel in said group, in the mistaken belief that their work could be passed on to partners who are not busy; and (c) very quietly, a number of older and junior non-equity partners.

What has ended up happening, to the Firm's chagrin, is that a number of clients went with the terminated senior associates and counsel. The partners didn't seem to realize that clients give work based on relationships, rather than firm name. A number of terminated associates have found that they can offer their services to clients at half the cost Arent Fox was charging. The client gets a break on its legal fees, while the associate actually makes 50% or more per hour of work than they did when they were employed by AF. The only loser in this is Arent Fox.

AF was still hiring associates and bringing in entire groups to the transactional department in mid-to-late 2008, even when existing transactional associates were not making their hours. During this whole time, firm management was telling associates, in so-called "Associate Town Hall Meetings" that the firm did not foresee any need for layoffs. In order to avoid bad PR, the firm repeatedly assured associates that the firm was well-placed to weather the economic storm and that numerous firm initiatives were on the brink of bringing in new business. That was, at best, wishful thinking and, at worst, an outright lie.

The layoffs at AF are not likely to be over. There are rumblngs of another round of slashing of associates, counsel and even partners at the firm.

The current leadership at the firm has taken a DC legal institution and turned it into an economically teetering basketcase.

"During this whole time, firm management was telling associates, in so-called 'Associate Town Hall Meetings' that the firm did not foresee any need for layoffs. In order to avoid bad PR, the firm repeatedly assured associates that the firm was well-placed to weather the economic storm and that numerous firm initiatives were on the brink of bringing in new business. That was, at best, wishful thinking and, at worst, an outright lie."

Which biglaw firm hasn't used "internal marketing," similar to this, in the past year?

Arent Fox hasn't been stable in years. I used to work there in the early 2000s. IP group was awful, including the patent group. Few of the senior partners in IP (particularly soft-IP) have business of their own, which is surprising for IP. They were laying off people back then, too, and trying to suggest that the layoffs were "performance based." AF would do stuff like charge exorbitant rates for mid- and senior levels, but would tell the associate that their rate was much lower. In addition, they have a lot of small clients (not all AOL/Time-Warner) that don't like to pay even mid-sized law firm rates. Maybe Mars, but that's it. Even the partner who brought in Mars had to continue to fight her partners and make sure that they did not steal that client from her. She worked at home while on bed rest and all of the way up to the day she had her first baby. She had the laptop in the delivery room!
A true "eat what you kill" environment with incompetent management and incest all over. Many of the male partners (married/partnered/otherwise) are sleeping with junior p'ners or associates. In addition, they've never been able to keep their DC base while expanding to be truly national (their NYC and LA offices want nothing to do with the DC office).

I'm surprised they haven't folded up yet.

231 here.

AF is a good place for you if you are:

Jewish, or
Mormon, or
a gay white male or
willing to have a relationship with a married partner.

Other than that, don't bother.