Add RSS RSS

Nationwide Layoff Watch: Foley & Lardner Lays Off 39

Foley Lardner LLP logo Above the Law blog.jpgWe’re getting multiple reports that Foley & Lardner is laying off 39 people today. Our sources report that associates are being told right now. If you work at Foley, I hope your phone is not ringing.

One tipster tells us that the IP group could be the hardest hit:

Foley announced associate/senior counsel/etc. layoffs today. Exact number not entirely clear, but about 39 folks are supposedly being informed today. There were others informed earlier that could take the total up to 50+. Not sure which offices, etc. Rumor has it that Foley’s IP group is especially vulnerable — very little work in that group.

I guess cutting the soda subsidy wasn’t enough of a cost savings.

Spokespeople at Foley & Lardner did not respond to an immediate request for comment. We’ll keep you posted as more news develops.

UPDATE: In other Foley news, the ABA Journal reports that the firm is claiming it’s the victim of vexatious litigation filed by a patent holding company. See also The BLT.

Earlier: Reversed Perk Watch: Soda Subsidy Slashed at Foley & Lardner

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:06 PM

firsT!!!

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:07 PM

posting from the future!!!

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:08 PM

third...

avatar
4 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:10 PM

Foley is spiraling downward anyway. Getting to bloated to sustain itself.

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:11 PM

2 - Looks like they fixed the timestamp problem.

6 Posted by Dubya | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:13 PM


Mission Accomplished!

7 Posted by JaKe Emeritus | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:14 PM

Poor people disgust me. They are somnolent and picayune.

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:15 PM

IP SECURE

9 Posted by Paul Bearer | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:21 PM


I know that I haven't been around much lately. Did you miss me?

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:21 PM

IP seems to be one of the strongest practices at this V20. Odd that Foley can't maintain such work.

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:25 PM

JaKe,

Do you enjoy working with those at your peer firm who did not have the same upbringing as you?

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:25 PM

I personally hate the emeritus shticks and I almost never read them. However, JaKe, you obviously are trying to compensate for your limited vocabulary by throwing in words you just discovered. Disgust is an inappropriate response to somnolence. Somnolent is NOT a synonym for lazy. Shouldn't you be studying? (Shouldn't I be working?)

avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:27 PM

Hmm, maybe it is a good time for Sharon Barner to head the USPTO...coincidence?

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:30 PM

You boys wanna do to Mex i co?

yeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaw~!!!!!

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:30 PM

Which offices?

16 Posted by JaKe Emeritus | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:31 PM

This post is addressed to Commenter #12:

1) The fact that you think the words I use are big speaks volumes about your education (or lack thereof).

2) Somnolence is a state of perpetual drowsiness, which is an apt word to describe homeless, drug-ridden destitutes. This state disgusts me.

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:32 PM

jake is right on this, unfortunately. Someone can choose to be disgusted with someone who is always drowsy.

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:33 PM

JaKe - your comment, as always, was itself picayune. Worse, you come off as picayune, though I know that this is your intent. And learn what somnolent means, you mouthbreather.

avatar
19 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:34 PM

Foley is more a prosecution and counseling shop than a litigation shop. That can explain, in part, the lack of work - this kind of work often goes to the lowest bidder and the most efficient workers. Perhaps Foley is neither.

On another note, I find it interesting that Foley is laying off when other firms are slowly starting to hire laterals. The rounds of layoffs that we went through were clearly downsizing. Now is the time to engage in "rightsizing." (I hate to use the trite business dweeb expression, but it fits). Now is the time to increase headcount in areas about to expand (regulatory, IP Lit, Antitrust), and adjust headcount in areas that are going to be slow into the future (if necessary, of course). A pure layoff like this does not speak well of the firms prospects. What were they doing during the recession to position themselves for the future? Anything? For firms that had a plan in January - even a mediocre plan - we shouldn't see any more significant layoffs. For firms that had their thumbs up their collective asses . . . well . . . here you go.

20 Posted by Partner Emeritus | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:34 PM

There is some bittersweet solace for the 39 terminated personnel. Their "leader" was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. That and "hope & change" will go a long way towards their personal and professional recovery.

avatar
21 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:35 PM

Layoffs occurring at all offices. Word is that SF and Chicago offices were culled earlier this week. Stealth layoff of senior counsel have been going on for months. They have NO IP litigation work.

avatar
22 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:39 PM

妈了个巴依的,大爷的姥姥的,这都他妈的什么时候了,还擂你妈的奥夫。不是都经济好转了吗

avatar
23 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:39 PM

PE summed it up perfectly. I'm sure the savior will help the 39 now out of work.

avatar
24 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:40 PM

深深的,深深的,操所有擂奥夫人的所的大爷

avatar
25 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:43 PM

22/24 - 你是狗屎

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:45 PM

Lol at the Chinese commentors above. Cao Foley ta ma de B!

avatar
27 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:46 PM

Foley. Sounds like a catheter.

avatar
28 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:46 PM

22/24/25/26 - cao ni ma de b

avatar
29 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:49 PM

which other practice groups?

avatar
30 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:50 PM

Ban 24. You can't say that about Kash in any language.

avatar
31 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:51 PM

wow... I'm glad I turned down their interview for a SA spot...

avatar
32 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:55 PM

All the people who comment in Chinese can't say anything other than curses? Clearly your mother failed to teach you not to say anything nasty about other people's mother.

avatar
33 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:55 PM

I know of at least one Boston secretary that was laid off last week. So, staff lay-offs are happening at F&L also.

avatar
34 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:55 PM

hopefully the LA office. Anyone else have an awful experience interviewing there?

avatar
35 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 1:55 PM

12 here -

I call bullshit on JaKe. He's using a thesaurus like a high school kid trying to make his English paper sound more impressive. He's not the first person to attempt to use the word somnolent to indicate laziness. Furthermore, the phrase "lazy and picayune" makes much more sense than "perpetually drowsy and picayune."

Furthermore, JaKe, learn to read. Never did I say that either of these words are big. The word somnolence is actually quite common in certain communities (e.g. medical). Obviously, it's not common to you.

I figured that perhaps if I exposed you for the hack you are, you'd go away. And yes . . . you are a hack.

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/somnolent?jss=0

avatar
36 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:01 PM

Oh no, I know somebody working in Foley's IP group. Just checked their website, his profile is still there.

avatar
37 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:03 PM

LA Office has been slow since the beginning of 2008.

avatar
38 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:03 PM

profiles don't go down until the day after a person leaves

avatar
39 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:07 PM

guys, pay attention to firms who did not do layoff before. who is the next? vinson and elkins?

avatar
40 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:08 PM

It seems "both" JaKe and PE struggle with vocabulary. At least Jake doesn't misuse a word in his own character name.

JaKe and PE, take a break from ATL and work through a stack of GRE flashcards.

avatar
41 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:10 PM

There was a big IP partner in one of Foley's California offices that left recently. Wonder if there's any connection?

avatar
42 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:10 PM

There was a big IP partner in one of Foley's California offices that left recently. Wonder if there's any connection?

avatar
43 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:11 PM

Google translation of

22:
"Mother of a Palestinian in accordance with, and Grandpa's grandmother, this is what fucking time, but also grind your mother's Aub. Do not have the economic upturn of the"

24:
"The deep, deep, speaks to all people by beating the Aub's uncle"

25:
"You are the dog feces"

I lulz at the Engrish.... Can someone please tell me what an "Aub" is?

44 Posted by Jim_Mora | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:12 PM

LAYOFFS? LAYOFFS??!!

avatar
45 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:15 PM

Haha Jim_Mora best meme ever

- not Jim_Mora
also, no homo

avatar
46 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:22 PM

"Did not return an immediate request for comment" should be "did not immediately return a request for comment." Sheesh.

avatar
47 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:24 PM

44 for the win! Good stuff.

avatar
48 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:24 PM

Whatever happened to I Am Future Ellie? He'd know what's going on.

avatar
49 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:26 PM

43, google translator sucks. totally missing the point

avatar
50 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:27 PM

Jim M, how has your firm been performing lately?

avatar
51 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:27 PM

5,

Thanks. I just got off the time machine. It's been a wild ride.

-2

avatar
52 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:33 PM

Anyone know how many were laid off in the Chicago office and what departments were hit?

avatar
53 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:36 PM

The people on this blog who are actually bothered by JaKe and PE need to get lives. Seriously, this is ATL. You are all trolls.

54 Posted by kanyeezy | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:37 PM

6, doesn't care about black people!

avatar
55 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:39 PM

The people on this blog who are actually bothered by the people that are bothered by JaKe and PE need to get lives. Seriously...

Oh wait...damn.

avatar
56 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:43 PM

We need to bomb Oslo back to the stoneage!

-DOJ Secure

avatar
57 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:48 PM

Does this mean no more MFBJ's?

avatar
58 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:50 PM

#22, to answer your question, light starch and hangers, please.

avatar
59 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 2:53 PM

I think that it means more MFBJs for those that remain

avatar
60 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:03 PM

19 - you have no idea what you're talking about. Foley avoided layoffs this long because it is BETTER positioned than firms that had layoffs months ago.

What do you mean, "What were they doing during the recession?" Do you think the recession is over for BigLaw? What are you, a mentally handicapped rooster?

Also, Foley has been steadily adding laterals throughout the recession. If you think that doesn't square with these layoffs, that's one thing - just get your facts straight, dipshit.

avatar
61 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:05 PM

LOVING Jim_Mora!!

avatar
62 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:07 PM

#43:

Could "you are the dog feces" be the Chinese version of the cat's pajamas?

avatar
63 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:15 PM

I assume that all of the Obama bashers will be voting Democrat in 2012 when we are out of the recession and lawyer layoffs are a thing of the past? I mean, if he's to blame for the economic meltdown, doesn't that mean that he should be rewarded on the flip side? I'm guessing not. It will be "market forces" that saved the economy, but not "market forces" that ruined it.

64 Posted by Barack Marx | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:17 PM

It is my firm belief that both Partner emeritus and his son Jake are products of the failed policies of the past. Specifically, presidents Hoover, Reagan and Bush emphasized the accretion of wealth at the expense of social conscience causing the odious phenomenon of wealthy people. My administration is moving with all due speed to reverse those failed policies and through enlightened tax policy will equalize the distribution of wealth in this country. It is only when every citizen in this country is listed as "tied for first" on the list of richest americans -- each with a net worth of $28,000 -- that I will consider my job done.

In summation, those that indict Partner and Jake emeritus for what they are do nothing more or less than indict the failed policies of the past that produced them.

Barack x

avatar
65 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:18 PM

44 ftw

20 also had a nice riff on this one; surely Obama will rescue these people

-Latham Secure

avatar
66 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:47 PM

60 = Foley's Chairman

I don't think there were any intelligent attorneys at Foley that were surprised by the layoffs, except that management has been telling everyone that "all is fine" almost all the way to up to the end. . .

avatar
67 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:47 PM

Their former head of IP litigation just took a position as Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Wonder if that has anything to do with the layoffs? She worked out of Chicago.

http://www.foley.com/news/news_detail.aspx?newsid=4024

avatar
68 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 3:50 PM

66 = cocksucking lesbian.

avatar
69 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:00 PM

Any news on which offices, practice groups, class years? What about the incoming class that was deferred?

avatar
70 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:12 PM

I heart 44.

71 Posted by The Plebe | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:18 PM

63,

Don't worry. Obama was voted in at the very best possible time. Reagan's approval rating was in the 30's in 1983, during the economic recession of his day.

The economy will bounce back sometime in 2011, and everyone will start to agree that Obama has done a wonderful job. He will win in 2012.

And yes, PE...he was given the Nobel Peace Prize for, heaven forbid, trying to create peace, of all things.

You must feel a pretty outclassed by Obama, right about now, eh? No jealousy at all? No staying up at night, wondering if the lack of love in your life is ever going to end, and wondering why Obama has it all, and you have nothing?

Poor, poor, PE. Obama wins.

avatar
72 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:26 PM

71--you are wrong about PE. He has love in his life. It comes in the form of "Dick Longing" as he stated in his post earlier today. Of course it is anonymous love that leaves him cold and shivering in an alley, hands tied to a dumpster, with his pants down by his ankles, but he loves every minute of it

avatar
73 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:32 PM

When I summered at Foley many years ago, I thought they were a pack of mouth-breathing retards. I'm surprised it took this long for them to circle the drain.

avatar
74 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:33 PM

Safe!! Just wonder now who I won't see around the halls any longer.

avatar
75 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:41 PM

Didn't Foley pick up a bunch of IP litigators from Heller Ehrman? Maybe it's infectious.

avatar
76 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:44 PM

73,

Year and office?

avatar
77 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:48 PM

Foley - crap Milwaukee firm. Real assholes work there.

avatar
78 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 4:56 PM

76, you first.

avatar
79 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:01 PM

IP is going down! HAHAHA!

avatar
80 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:03 PM

69 -

They re-deferred/revoked half of the incoming associates. ATL, of course, can't be bothered to look into this.

avatar
81 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:09 PM

I almost went into that group as a Sr. Counsel just before the recession. So I would have been on the chopping block.

avatar
82 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:10 PM

My sources tell me that Foley has been steadily and "secretly" firing people for more than a year, including mass layoffs of staff; failed to make offers to the majority of its summer associates; deferred the people who were supposed to start in February 2010 to September 2010; and, obviously, just laid off 39 people today. Good luck to the affected.

avatar
83 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:23 PM

Wonder how many in the LA office are laid off. The majority of the LA summers were no-offered.

avatar
84 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:24 PM

how many people did get offers this summer, anyway?

avatar
85 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:32 PM

Anyone know how many, if any at all, were laid off in F&L's New York office?

86 Posted by Michael Ray Richardson | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:38 PM

The ship be sinking...

avatar
87 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:38 PM

Is it true that Foley's leader (1) announced layoffs are coming this morning, (2) then told the Foley assos to go back to their offices and wait for the dreaded visit or phone call, and (3) said that you won't be laid off if you read a forthcoming email from some underling saying layoffs are complete?

If this is true, the Foley assos know what it's like to be water-boarded by Guantanamo Bay interrogation techniques. (Imaging the similarity to a not-so-famous book: "Being without enough food to support the entire prisoner camp, the Commandant announced, 'As nighttime falls, we're going to kill 39 prisoners. Go back to your cells, and if you count 39 shots, be thankful: you're alive to remember what happened here today.'")

avatar
88 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:40 PM

Anyone know if the re-deferred to-be associates are being given anything in addition to the $10,000 stipend they were originally promised?

avatar
89 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:48 PM

88,
my friends' jobs.

avatar
90 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:50 PM

89,
touche.

avatar
91 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 5:58 PM

"But perhaps Foley & Lardner's most newsworthy move is the one that it didn't make. So far this 934-lawyer firm has sat out the national layoff party. Its secret: low leverage. “Our business model is different from Orrick’s or Latham’s,” said Boer. “We’re just a little better than one-to-one, associates-to-partners. My colleagues who watch the other Am Law 100 firms say they’re all going to look like us soon.”
(http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2009/03/the-am-law-100-foley-lardner-maintains-revenues-avoids-layoffs.html)

I hope the other Am Law 100 firms don't start to look like Foley soon.

avatar
92 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 6:59 PM

Since when were deferred assosciates re-deferred at Foley?

avatar
93 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:07 PM

92 - ATL dropped the ball. They re-deferred half of their incoming class recently.

avatar
94 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:11 PM

Keep the law industry terminations coming - a healthy and well-deserved dose of reality for those who couldn't cut it - absolutely fabulous!

avatar
95 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:15 PM

It sure doesn't seem like Foley is in any real trouble. They have been steadily poaching partners over the past several months. Check out their press releases for the past half year. (And keep in mind, partners who lateral see the books and wouldn't jump to a sinking firm).

9/30/2009
Foley Expands Bankruptcy & Business Reorganizations Practice With Addition of Douglas Spelfogel

8/18/2009
Foley Adds Dr. Steven Davis to Intellectual Property Department in Boston Office

8/18/2009
Foley Adds Jonathan Moskin to Intellectual Property Department in New York Office

7/14/2009
Foley Adds Former U.S. Ambassador V. Manuel Rocha to Miami Office

6/11/2009
Foley Continues Expansion of New York Office With Addition of Leading Health Care Attorney

6/9/2009
Foley Adds Japanese Partner Specialized in International Transactions and IP to Tokyo Office

5/27/2009
Foley Adds Patent Litigation Team To Boston Office

5/19/2009
Foley Adds Former Merrill Lynch Co-Head of Global Litigation to New York Office

5/13/2009
Foley Adds Veteran Environmental Attorneys to Chicago Office

5/13/2009
Foley Adds Veteran Energy Attorneys to New York Office

5/13/2009
Foley Adds Veteran International Trade, Transactional Attorney to Washington, D.C. Office

avatar
96 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:25 PM

Foley is better than Latham. Everybody knows about Latham's horrible layoffs. Next year, everybody vote latham out of top 25.

avatar
97 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:28 PM

93,

Were those who were re-deferred given an actual start date or was it the dreaded "indefinite" deferral (what Elie likes to call "the bird")?

avatar
98 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:35 PM

I interviewed at their LA office. The people seemed pretty cool. The haters above probably got dinged after their interview. I wish I would've taken the SA job at Foley. I got shitcanned by a different firm.

avatar
99 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:38 PM

89,

you can't blame them for the decisions of the management.

100 Posted by Jim_Mora | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:40 PM

50: It can't do diddly poo.

avatar
101 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 7:52 PM

Anyone know if its hard ip or soft ip? Lit or prosecution?

If its prosecution, its not surprising -- even the boutiques have been shedding prosecution work.

avatar
102 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 8:04 PM

Wasn't the Jim Mora shtick done like a year ago?

avatar
103 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 8:15 PM

No one will ever top Latham's layoffs. It's 7 months after the fact and it's still a daily topic on this board. Btw, Latham is a $hithole.

NEVER FORGET LATHAM

avatar
104 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 8:21 PM

Latham treated us very well...excellent severance compared to others...very unfair to deride Latham.

avatar
105 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 9:07 PM

101,

Both were affected, but it seems like more from litigation.

avatar
106 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 9:07 PM

101,

Both were affected, but it seems like more from litigation.

avatar
107 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 9:11 PM

105/6,

what office?

avatar
108 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 9:19 PM

questions for insiders:

1. which offices/groups suffered the greatest losses?

2. what happened with start dates?

avatar
109 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 9:54 PM

The first Mora poster was better.

avatar
110 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 10:30 PM

Confirm/deny that it's now full year deferrals at Foley? If true, OUCH.

avatar
111 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 10:40 PM

110-confirm

avatar
112 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 11:36 PM

60 & 95 ignore the fact that Foley has lost far more partners over the last 4-5 years than have joined Foley during that time. Foley has a hard time keeping partners in the larger cities. Foley has been stagnating for years.

avatar
113 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 9, 2009 11:54 PM

There were numerous people laid off in January from F&L, snce then many more and still more this week, they are way above 50. I would venture over 100 this year.

avatar
114 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:49 AM

For those of you law students...take this into consideration. I am support staff of another large firm, and these cuts are industry wide. The economy is CRAP...everyone is having trouble with collections, no one is paying, and yet the outrageous salaries for Associates, especially in this economy. I've heard a number of Associates complaining in our building about their salaries being cut, etc, etc. Well boo-hoo. Try making it on $45k/yr, with a wife and child! Wife lost her job last year and still can't find work. Then I hear these late 20-somethings bitch about the low salaries. Get a clue. At least you're getting a paycheck, have insurance, and ONLY 29 yrs old. Try being 42 with more on your plate than where to blow $300 per night on chocolate martini's. I sure hope some of you are saving. It's obvious we haven't hit bottom yet.

avatar
115 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 1:09 AM

114, the thing is you don't have $200K in debt.

avatar
116 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 1:27 AM

114 - go to law school and take on massive amount of debt and see how far the "outrageous" associate salary goes. Yeah, I know you have bills and a wife and a child, but many associates have similar obligations too (in addition to law school debt).

For every so-called spoiled associate there are many more who are not spoiled and are suffering along with the support staff.

avatar
117 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 5:54 AM

114 here - sorry about going off like that. i understand. guess i just got carried away about from seeing the large number of spoiled ones at my firm.

avatar
118 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:38 AM

I am a non attorney who used to work at Foley in LA. I still keep in touch with some and they confirmed 2 layoffs yesterday. One was a TM attorney. From my perspective, they need to reduce the amount of management staff who do nothing but scare and micromanage the rest of the staff. They had about 15 - 20 non attorney staff people laid off (or as they put it, "eliminatred their positions" so as to avoid bad press) since earlier this year. Attorneys at Foley are great to work for, it's the management that I never trusted and most of the staff despise. It's sad for everyone, because the attorneys are losing great talent so that they can have these watch dog managers in place. One of which recently was hired in the IP Western region area who has little to no experience and is a total flake. I don't know how she got through the cracks but it's a big waste of $$$ to have people like this in these high positions.

avatar
119 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:38 AM

I am a non attorney who used to work at Foley in LA. I still keep in touch with some and they confirmed 2 layoffs yesterday. One was a TM attorney. From my perspective, they need to reduce the amount of management staff who do nothing but scare and micromanage the rest of the staff. They had about 15 - 20 non attorney staff people laid off (or as they put it, "eliminatred their positions" so as to avoid bad press) since earlier this year. Attorneys at Foley are great to work for, it's the management that I never trusted and most of the staff despise. It's sad for everyone, because the attorneys are losing great talent so that they can have these watch dog managers in place. One of which recently was hired in the IP Western region area who has little to no experience and is a total flake. I don't know how she got through the cracks but it's a big waste of $$$ to have people like this in these high positions.

avatar
120 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:55 AM

108 - my sister was laid off in DC and she said she was one of nine there. Hardest hit was the DC office and hardest-hit group was ip litigation - sounds like half of dc's ip litigation people were shown the door.

avatar
121 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:57 AM

Any word from anyone on what severance, if any, they're giving?

avatar
122 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:04 AM

Can anyone confirm, with details, what is going on with the summer associates?

avatar
123 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:11 AM

whoops, I mean deferred associates

-122

avatar
124 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:21 AM

121, I have heard three months severance.

avatar
125 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:38 AM

They have added a couple of IP partners to the Boston office over the last few months. What is the story there?

avatar
126 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:45 AM

Big ouch to the people fired prior to yesterday... Clear message from foley: not good enough to be laid off! LOL!

avatar
127 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:49 AM

126, screw you

avatar
128 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:59 AM

Good luck to the associates that are affected. I've heard that the real problem at Foley is the number of partners without business AND work.

avatar
129 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 11:38 AM

The tragedy of F&L and Fish&Richardson proves that IP has passed its prime. The only safe associates today are specialized in energy law and regulatory areas.

avatar
130 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 1:25 PM

Foley's leadership is highly centralized, unpopular & clueless.

avatar
131 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 1:51 PM

122 -

As I have said before in this thread, the deferred associates have been re-deferred until next fall. No assurances were given that we would actually start and there is no concrete date.

NO NEW MONEY.

avatar
132 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM

In one sense, Foley should be credited for trying to avoid having to make any layoffs. One reliable source informed me that Foley has made no layoffs until recently, whatever that means. In another sense, Foley may end up penalizing itself for waiting so long.

avatar
133 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:52 PM

131,

I don't think every one of Foley's offices re-deferred its associates.

avatar
134 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:16 PM

Start dates for first years will be spread out -- some will start as early as Dec 09, and some will start as late as Sep 10. I bet each office will have a say as to when their first years will start, depending on the needs of each dept and location. Friday was a very sad day for the firm.

avatar
135 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, October 10, 2009 11:56 PM

Did your leader cry when he announced the layoffs?

avatar
136 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 4:23 AM

114-

I feel your pain. Most of us do. I, for one, was staff at a firm before deciding to go to law school. It sucks making shit money and doing what you feel is the same work the first and second years do for three times the pay.

Every decision to advance "professionally" in life, however, comes with a price. This is NOT a judgment on your career choice! I think, however, that 115 and 116 put it well.

There was no reason for you to apologize. It sucks for everyone, whether you're in debt more than your (my) parents made in a decade, or you're simply trying to get by.

No one fails to appreciate the job you do everyday for the attys. Please know that.

Best of luck to us all - support staff/paralegals included.

avatar
137 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 8:57 AM

I've heard that more staff layoffs are planned in the near future. Any truth? (Makes sense that you would need to trim the staff levels as well)

avatar
138 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 10:31 AM

Any inside word on whats going on at the Milwaukee office?

avatar
139 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 11:23 AM

Staff to go on Monday.

avatar
140 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 11:28 AM

I heard that the next round of layoffs will be on Tuesday. 50+ staff.

avatar
141 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 11:30 AM

Any news about how Foley's New York was impacted by the lay offs?

avatar
142 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 3:35 PM

What is the range of billing rates for mid-levels through senior counsel at Foley?

avatar
143 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 3:42 PM

95,

Nice try!

avatar
144 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 4:35 PM

138 - The Milwaukee office is being shuttered.

Incidentally, I'll be in Milwaukee all of next week for a doc review project. Can anyone recommend a good cheese store?

avatar
145 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 6:08 PM

144 - There isn't a farm within 50 miles of Milwaukee.

However, you can get cheese that's been trucked into the Milwaukee Public Market right on Water St. Downtown.

At least that's what I heard.

avatar
146 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 11:23 PM

144 - the Milwaukee office is closing?? Are you serious?

avatar
147 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, October 11, 2009 11:30 PM

Anyone who thinks that the MKE office is going to close is just plain nuts. Its over 200 attorneys with the headquarters located there. If that office closes, then the firm might as well dissolve

avatar
148 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 12:30 AM

Foley will end up having to merge. The US economy is inevitably shrinking, the US legal market will shrink along with the economy. Foley and many other firms just won't be needed. The sooner some of these firms will do it the better.

Just curious, why do they need 200 lawyers in the Milwaukee office. You don't even need a 200 lawyer office in Chicago. Do they treat the Milwaukee lawyers as overflow capacity?

avatar
149 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 8:24 AM

Foley's headquarter is in Milwaukee. That office has always been the largest office. Anyone who thinks that Foley is closing the Milwaukee office is truly clueless.

Foley's IP group is not nearly as good as their marketing hype of that group. There were/are some great attorneys within that group, but the majority of those remaining are just mediocre.

avatar
150 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 8:27 AM

Insiders -- any numbers? offices affected and practice groups? Is this the last of the layoffs or is there a timetable for more if things don't improve?

avatar
151 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 12:35 PM

There are no insiders on this blog these days. Its usually a bunch of fear-mongering with the occasional nugget. Problem is too hard to tell. Don't take anything you read in the comments seriously its bad for your health. I speak from experience.

avatar
152 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 2:34 PM

I was among the 39 laid off on Friday. Foley's Milwaukee office is not shuttering, been open since 1842, and yes, that does mean something. If you're going to blog, stick to what you know, and not whatever comes to mind. Foley waited as long as it thought it could, and made hard decisions I personally disagree with on many levels. It stings, I like many am going to feel some financial hurt, what else would you expect an insider to say? It SUCKS. But we all assume risks working at a huge and generally impersonal firm/corporation, at least Foley was relatively professional, humane and up-front about it, and Foley has been a good place for several years. Much worse, or worthless, is reading these blogs -- any possible, predictable view can and will be expressed. Get a job, thats what I am going to do. And if you still have one, quit wasting your time here and do what you can to keep it.

avatar
153 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 2:35 PM

there are lots of insiders on this blog, btw

avatar
154 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 2:55 PM

and TOUCHE 152. I'm sorry for your situation

avatar
155 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 2:56 PM

152 - Thacher Proffitt & Wood opened in 1848 and Heller Ehrman opened in 1890. A firm being open since the 1800s doesn't really mean much lately.

avatar
156 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 3:19 PM

149 = rejected by Foley's IP group

avatar
157 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 3:26 PM

155 - Someone had to say that, as I predicted above, but at least you're citing facts. What I meant at a minimum is Foley has a long history of taking care of people and usually trying to get it right. Sure, Foley management has changed a few times over 167 years, but the culture and style benefit a bit from that history, more so than at a newer firm and/or one more single-mindedly profit driven (anyone remember Testa, Hurwitz from late 90s?). But, yeah, change has evolved into a tougher-to-predict phenomenon, so I agree that in the end, longevity is no savior, and like my time there, maybe all good things eventually come to an end.

Thanks, 154.

152

avatar
158 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 4:41 PM

Foley's garbage and has been garbage for a while now and clients can sense it. Their California offices are deserted, not sure if they're going to cut them out entirely.

avatar
159 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 5:34 PM

152 - sorry for your situation. were the layoffs primarily out of Milwaukee or spread out across the offices?

avatar
160 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 6:01 PM

about a quarter of the layoffs were in D.C.

avatar
161 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 7:15 PM

Sorry to hear about the Foley layoffs and wish the best to 152 and the rest of them. For those outside of Milwaukee, you will be better off elsewhere. Foley is a very self-absorbed place from what several have consistently told me over the years.

avatar
162 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 7:18 PM

Sorry to hear your news #152. Thanks for sharing your perspective. Best of luck to you.

avatar
163 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, October 12, 2009 7:19 PM

Sorry to hear your news #152. Thanks for sharing your perspective. Best of luck to you.

avatar
164 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, October 13, 2009 3:39 PM

So #139 and #140. How reliable were your "sources?" Any staff layoffs?

avatar
165 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, October 14, 2009 9:49 AM

When are these extra deferrals to the class of 2009 happening?

avatar
166 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, October 15, 2009 11:26 AM

The firm has confirmed the accuracy of ATL's report:

http://www.jsonline.com/business/64302042.html

avatar
167 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:06 PM

I would really like to know what the deal is with SA offers. As far as I can tell, out of 8- 2L summers in D.C., at least three were no offered. Two of those three had spent two summers at Foley, had great reviews and ended up going to top ten firms to practice IP Litigation. These were definitely not no-offers based on qualifications, work product, or loyalty to the firm. Anyone who did receive an offer this year won't be starting until at least February 2011. So, did anyone actually receive an offer?

avatar
168 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, October 16, 2009 10:46 AM

I still see, at least as far as Foley's New York office goes, all associates and partners names still listed on the firm's website that have been listed since well before news of the layoffs. Was the NY office not effected at all or is there just some lag time before web site bios are removed after attorneys get laid off?

avatar
169 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:48 PM

They were given two weeks' notice, last day of Oct 23 so the bios wouldn't be down til after that.

Post Your Comment