firsttt

I've lay myself on the reg, fo free.

Sounds like a great plan for someone looking to head to law school next fall.

i wonder if you could bargain another month or two out of the deal.

the Bird did this too, sometime ago

Elie, there's a big difference between a 4 to 1 staff to attorney ratio (your statement) and a 4 to 1 attorney to staff ratio (the quote).

In fact, it's about 16 to one--about the ratio of your weight to Kash's weight.

Oh yeah. If you're looking to go back to school . . . have kids . . . change careers . . . this is a fantastic option. As long as you aren't reliant on firm sponsored healthcare for the family, I'd say . . . go on, take the money and run.

the Bird did this too, sometime ago

What's the verdict on split infinitives? Socially acceptable? Inane?

The ship be sinking...

What a great deal. I would take that in a heartbeat. Anyone who stays will likely wish they did.

Split infinitives are OK if you know what one is and know that you are doing it, and are doing it to spite a silly leftover function from a dead language.

Not OK if you are typing as fast as you can to get back to your Simpsons reruns.

I am not a secretary but I would take 6 months salary to leave

This reminds me of the People's Temple Rev. Jim Jones--who asked his people to “voluntarily” commit suicide.

[Hint, those who did not got the bullet in lieu of the Kool-Aid.]

I can't believe they used to words "humane" and "secretaries" in that email. How about "compassionate" and "staff?"

When they say "humane" it sounds like they're going to euthanize secretaries like the ones in Mad Men.

Who?

6 -- I think Elie got it right, there's no difference between the post and the quote.

If you take this package, can you still claim unemployment?

This is sad and I'm sorry for those facing this decision. This is more than a "reduction" to those being placed in this situation.

But just remember, whether you're a janitor, a partner, or whatever rank/title, at the end of the day it's just a JOB and there WILL (...eventually...) be another one should things come to the worst. Remember that what's most important is your health, your family & friends, and your sanity.

Keep your head up!

Guys at my high school used to lay themselves off all the time. Mostly in the courtyard next to the gymnasium. It was no big deal.

4 to 1. That is good.

I worked at a biglaw firm and was laid-off in February. 4 to 1, 5 to 1, etc. That was the norm. for years. Now they have "secretary teams". You have 5 on your team plus you have to cover for anyone who is on vacation or sick. Usually 7 or 8 to 1.

Secretaries have slit their own throats. For about a decade now, junior attorneys have had to do their own typing, filing, reservations, appointments, etc. It's all they know and secretaries are becoming redundant.

This is a nice policy, but Im not sure that it makes any business sense. Why not just get rid of your lowest performing people and not pay them anything? Is this just a way to prevent the hassle of a couple of lawsuits/annoying firm wide emails?

Couldn't Crowell & Moring achieve the desired ratio by simply hiring more attorneys?

24

I like the way you think out of a box. If I were hiring, you'd be the first in line.

~A Rainmaker

David,
This your Mom here.
You should date nice asian girl, stop think about man.
No sleep with man, David. You good boy. Stop making blog so gay.
-Mom

At my firm and at our peer firms, we don't have "secretaries." We have legal assistants or paralegals. "Secretary" is an antiquated and sexist term.

23,

yes, in my experienced companies (although not any law firms I'm familiar with) often tend to do this to avoid age discrimination lawsuits.

They give someone the opportunity to "retire," and pay a generous severance package rather than face the claim that the laid off people were being discriminated against because of their age.

This is also true where the long tenure secretaries tend to be higher paid than the younger ones. A long term staffer may be incredibly valuable to the people he or she works for, but it can be difficult for managers (or worse, consultants) to get past the fact that two people are doing fundamentally the same work and one gets 20% more money.

But besides all this, I do think this is also an attempt to preserve the firms reputation (for whatever that matters for anymore).

And in other news, the state of California is asking retired public employees to voluntarily die. Governor Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said "Our finances are being crushed under the weight of public pension promises made when times were good." He went on to say "We've looked at every possible solution but none will reinflate the housing bubble that made all the politicians giddy with so much cash that they promised fire chiefs they could retire at age 50 with lifetime pensions of $250,000 annually and lifetime medical benefits." He concluded by saying "There's just no money to be had so something has to be done. But we want it done in a humane and egalitarian and Californian way. So, starting next week, retirees are invited to come to the beach here, at the states expense, to enjoy a wonderful party and an exhibition of everything that made California so great. Then, as the sun sets, those unselfish, caring Californians will be asked to give something of themselves one last time and walk into the ocean, hands clasped together and signing together to a Beach Boys tune. We'll be holding these Golden Passing celebrations until the retiree count is reduced to a manageable level. Thank you and God Bless California!"

I would totally go for that. Six months is nice. Heck, they would probably fire people in three months anyway. www.stupidrightwingers.com

I don't see how you can validly claim unemployment if you leave voluntarily. So the six months appears more generous than it actually is given unemployment benefits are now at 24 months.

27 - two sugars and a little half and half. thanks.

Or 31, I'm just thinking, they give people the opportunity to "volunteer", but then used the "volunteers" and lay them off under the normal layoff proceedures. More like "we are going to fire a bunch of you, why not offer to move to the front of the line" more than "who wants to leave!"

If that is the case, they get their cake and eat it too (6 months + 24 months, ample time to find a new job). Otherwise, its just 6 months + nothing (do you even get COBRA if you quit?), which is NOT a good deal.

@29 -- I laughed very hard at your post. Well done!

Haven't firms been doing this with attorneys (CWT, for example)...

"Secretaries have slit their own throats. For about a decade now, junior attorneys have had to do their own typing, filing, reservations, appointments, etc. It's all they know and secretaries are becoming redundant."

Many secretaries have also been too "grand" to be paired with lowly paralegals. The "you aren't important enough to work for" chickens are finally coming home to roost.

Also, this firm forgot to add the usual boilerplate about how, even though they need to reduce their head count, the firm is still amazingly strong, viable, solvent, awesome, dynamic, etc. What gives?

27 - "Support staff" at Crowell are secretaries and administrative assistants. They are not timekeepers and are therefore cost centers. Completely separate from paralegals/legal assistants who are in a different category.

27: I'm not Nigel Tufnel, but what's wrong with being sexy?

I am 25+ year veteran secretary of a large national law firm. The problem is that the typical "big law" secretary is probably 40+ years old, which makes a layoff difficult since the great majority of those who would be laid off would be in a protected class. Offering voluntary layoff with a generous package gives those secretaries who are in their 60's or over (yes, there are many) the necessary nudge to retire. Why more major law firms haven't figured this out is beyond me. A decent severance package (based on years of service) which would include health benefits until 65 is all that is needed.

A lot of questions need to be answered before anyone jumps on this offer. 6 months sounds good, but try talking to those who were laid off 7, 8 and 9 months ago and still cannot find work. If you are not able to collect unemployment then what? Health benefit questions need to be addressed as well.
Be careful. If they lay you off after you decide not to take this offer what severance will they pay if any? Ask about Cobra benefits? Ask if they will continue your health benefits for a period of time after the layoffs. Make sure all is clear before you decide to say yes or no.

Sad, very sad. Good luck to all. It is a tough job market out there and firms that are hiring know they can get the best of the best for less money and they are certainly being very picky.

As for the ratio, well, many firms are 5 and 6 attorneys to 1 assistant/secretary. This is the norm now.

It reminds me of studying Roman history, where they would do you a favor by offering you the chance to die by your own hand rather than a formal execution. Keep in mind they will be offering you severance if you are fired, so it may be two or three instead of six months. If you are a secretary assigned to two people and even those people don't like you, take the severance. Other than that, I'd roll the dice. If you are well liked and work for some big dogs, you will be fine. If you are working for some middling service partner or associates, you're at risk, especially if you don't have at least three, hopefully four, people assigned to you.

29 - well done.

And as a number of posters have said up thread, this would be a great deal if you were heading to law school, grad school, having kids, etc.

This is not earth-shattering. Corporate America has been offering "early retirement" packages for the gray-hairs and voluntary workforce reduction packages to the rest for at least 20 years. If they can get enough people to go voluntarily, then they don't do layoffs. Otherwise, the layoffs occur. The packages for layoffs are usually worse than the voluntary packages.

In my prior career in corporate America, I was always categorized as part of the "core business" and therefore was not elligible to take the voluntary reduction package (I would gladly have done so and found another job). Looking back on it now, it seems discriminatory to not offer the package across the board.

Chances are they will reach their goal easily with this - there are likely enough close to retirement staff looking for a quick way out the door or some who are looking to leave for security or school or what, not. Take the six months and run like hell. Chances are if people don't, you might get canned and get nothing.

I temped for this firm in a past life. It was just about the worst month or two of my life. Temps got canned, associates got canned, temps sued for sexual harassment- just a disaster. I think this is possibly the worst firm in America to work for.

re: chickens coming home to roost - no, sorry, nothing like that going on here, though maybe due to your prior bad experiences with a secretary with attitude, you wish it were so. layoffs are just a fact of life in economic depressions, and unfortunately, secretaries are not immune.

If I were considering this, I would need to know that this would count (for unemployment purposes) as a termination, not a resignation. I believe in New York state, you file for unemployment right away, but if you have severance, they take the total severance amount, divide it by the maximum weekly benefit (which is about $405), and commence paying benefits at the week upon which your severance would run out (as a substitute for payments from the UI trust fund). I'm not 100% sure on any of this, but obviously, you shouldn't take this offer without speaking with an attorney and spending a lot of time considering the pros and cons.

Good luck to everyone.

Jesus wept Mystal, it's a buyout or early retirement - not a "voluntary layoff." It happens all the time, even when the economy is good.

The temp who said C&M was a horrible place to work was spot on. I worked for this firm as an associate earlier this year. I pretty soon found myself holding on hoping for some sort of voluntary package like this, before finally deciding it wasn't worth it and quitting with no package.

C&M has been laying off staff all year without a package, but no one has picked up on it because C&M is such a TTT firm that no one has any reason to pay attention to it.

Well, if 48 is right, it looks like C&M is looking for a mass exodus without the bad press of a mass layoff. Partners got what they wanted when they wanted it and C&M attorneys weren't pressed as hard for high billables anyway. It is therefore no surprise that absent the presence of a mega merger to keep the boat afloat, that they've come to realize that they can no longer afford these kinds of business options, that they have way too many bodies for the available hours and even more so in this economy. As a touchy feely firm that put a premium on consensus, C&M has always refused to meet the business reality of its size and the unpopularity that strong leadership sometimes garners with it. Welcome to reality.

49 -- They are far from broke! They just want their PPP to rise. Don't kid yourself!

If they were broke they wouldn't:

Have tons of memos emailed out every single day with "Report of Proposed New Business" to every employee for Conflicts purposes. They are getting new business hand over fist.

Have opened a new office in Anchorage, AK this month.

Have had a Summer Program this year.

Have hired 25 attorneys (Partners, Counsel, and Associates) since August, including 17 Fall Associates.

Have promoted 2 men in Practice Support.

I think the problem is this Firm does not value women.

Most, if not all, of the people potentially on the chopping block are females (secretaries).

I rhink this whole thing is to look "fair" by allowing people to go voluntarily. (Please note that in a subsequent email, they amended the Voluntary Program description with "The Firm reserves the right to den an individual's request to participate in the Voluntary Program.") However, by giving themselves this "out" it is easy for them to keep someone even if that person will go voluntarily, and involuntarily terminate their real targets, while saying "oops we tried."

Saying they can reject people who want to go voluntarily sparks of two things to me: (a) they don't want to do it the fair way and fire the people who have the least seniority as they prefer to get rid of some of the people with longer tenure and (b) a sneaky way to be cheap, as if the refuse your request to participate in the Voluntary Program, does that mean you've still got your job OR that they will Involuntarily terminate you and you get less than 6 months pay?

At any rate, this bloodbath will be almost totally female.

The only promotions were for males (and how do they justify this in the "economic climate?"

Of the new attorneys hired, 15 are male, 10 are female.

Comment removed by moderator.

51 - all I can say is RRRAAARRRRRRRR!

to #51, all I can say is wow!! I used to work at Crowell, not the NY office. I didn't know it was going down like that there. And that office hasn't been open that long. Make me wonder what is going on at the main office in DC.

Dear Moderator(s):

These days what are the guidelines for posting? You used to not have any moderation at all. People call everything and anything TTT. Elie gets attacked regularly for his writing ability and gets called fat.

I don't read everything in the blog, but I did catch some moderation where the "Stepford Secretary" was named. We were instructed not to name names or our post would be deleted.

Now my absolute favorite part of the blog is when insiders post juicy tidbits. Some may be fakes, but I believe many of them.

I was thrilled I finally had juicy insider tidbits (GOSPEL TRUTH) to share with ATL readers.

Alas, my post was deleted.

In order to do things the right way in the future, what exactly caused you to delete it?

I didn't name names.

You have created whole posts about people who could easily be identified by their situation (the Stepford Secretary was the STAR of many, as was the Redskins guy, and more), so I thought it would be no problem to post the juicy gossip and not name names.

Did you delete it for any sexually related content? I still see a lot of that on here though.

People were storming around the C&M office claiming that the Powers That Be will order ATL to remove the post or I suppose they thought they could "crush" ATL. And, voila, it was taken off!

There were several other posts critical of C&M, but not containing any real gossip, which were NOT removed. But this one was. If it was just a troll post fooling around with everyone and making up fake scenarios, they would not have bothered you to remove it.

So what are the current rules on commenting? One thing I love about ATL is the reader comments. Should we just not share anything juicy on here and stick to bland? I always had the feeling that you guys are for the people. Now I am very puzzled to the point where I am wondering if things might go to the extreme on here, like ATL giving posters' identities (IP address) to the Firms so they can make blacklists or punish whistleblowers who are only telling the truth and cannot be sued for slander or libel, because, whatever they said, while unpleasant, IS TRUE, but they just want to mess with the employee. You know employers in general are very interested in doing this as per the amount of spying they do via Facebook, My Space, etc. Please say it ain't so and that you are still for the people! And please give an update on what people absolutely have to avoid in their posts. Thank you.

-- the infamous 51

54 - You are obviously gay, just like most Crowell employees. (oh, and I know. was there a couple years ago and it's like gay-central opened a village. actually kinda creepy

50 - don't be so sure, and don't be so naive. First, business reports don't = money, per se. Second, there are major staff layoffs now as we speak. Third, many "stealth" layoffs of attorneys at this firm in the last few months as well, just not reported. All the while bringing in partners, some with business, some without, just to look good before fiscal year '09 numbers come out and it becomes known Crowell has sunk big time.

C&M has whole practice groups that do nothing but collect paychecks, And that's in good times. When I was in their offices, I constantly heard partners complaining to eachother about all of their "lazy" associates. Interestingly, I didn't hear the associates complaining about the lazy (I'd say incompetent) partners failing to bring in business (do they spike the water? Brainwashing?)

Point is, while there may be a practice group here or there with some actual reputation, expertise and work to do, the firm as a whole is a disaster. A disaster with a happy face pasted on the front. It's just sad.

And by the way, I want to know the gossip. Repost?

No. 54 you really need to stop and concentrate on yourself and your job. All your comments you have made make you look stupid and sound like you a jealous hater. Get a life and stop worrying so much about others and do your job before maybe your one of those that is involuntarily let go.

58, all your comments you have made are ungrammatical. A C&M secretary perhaps?

I still want a repost.

Never mind, that place is so unimportant that even the gossip doesn't matter.

55 -- No, I am not gay and I haven't noticed a large gay population at least in the Firm's NY office. Maybe you are talking about another office. But I do have very bad gaydar, so my observations don't count for much.

56 -- Then maybe getting laid off now is good because if you end up getting laid off later you get nothing.

57 -- I will not repost the gossip. It is mainly a compilation of secretaries who get away with murder and who will probably be retained UNFAIRLY to the people who are professional and follow the rules. Look at it this way, if you don't actually work at C&M you will not recognize who any of them are anyway.

58 -- I see one of the subjects of the post has piped up.

59 -- Yes, I am sure it is. Most of the secretaries have decades of experience and many have a very poor command of the English language. It's a shame, isn't it when people with actual brains are unemployed all over the country.

60 -- You're probably right in the grand scheme of things, what does it matter?

58 -- Nobody is jealous of you and your ugly attorney. YOU need a reality check.

"Secretary" is not antiquated.. they are called "Legal Secretaries".. Legal Assistant is different, that equals Paralegal.

As for unemployment, you have to wait 7 days. Not six months. It's not a severance package for a period of time, it is a one time payment.

C&M is a good firm and this decision is not a financial one, not primarily at least. If it were a solely financial decision, they would not be able to pay all the people for all their six months worth of salary.

If you do not take the 6 months, you can still be fired - and receive very little in the way of severance. More C&M secretaries should be concerned.. you know who you are. Or, more likely, you don't. You will soon enough.

The firm could easily have just started firing all the dead weight. To make this kind of offer speaks volumes. Akin Gump unceremoniously fired a large number of secretaries, some who had been loyal to the firm for 3 and 4 decades, without notice, without conscience and without any offer as generous as this one.

If you are miserable and don't like C&M take the offer and STFU. This isn't 6 months ago.. and if you really are a star secretary you should have a problem finding a new job.

Hey, the government is hiring, and they love dead weight.