If you thought you left the curve behind when you graduated law school, think again. DLA Piper has decided to throw its hat into the killing lockstep arena. In a long memo released to associates this morning, DLA outlines its intention to withhold a greater percentage of associate compensation until the end of the year. Associates will have an opportunity to get this money back, if they perform well on their performance reviews.
But the performance reviews will be curved, bringing a sense of the grading competition and bitterness from law school and adding it to firm life.
Let’s jump into the details, after the jump.
The memo is extraordinarily detailed (please read it in full below). Essentially, DLA is splitting up its associates into three different classes:
Instead of traditional lockstep advancement, the associate career path
will be characterized by three broader and more flexible levels of development: Level I,
Level II, and Level III. Each Level will in turn consist of two to three Steps through which
an advancing associate will progress. Promotions between and within Levels will be
performance-based, not tenure-based.
This is similar to what Orrick is doing with its new compensation structure.
But, unlike Orrick, DLA will be withholding a significant portion of associate compensation until the end of the year. Can you say “time value of money?”
And it’s not like the compensation will magically return to associates at the end of the year. They’ll have to earn it, through their performance reviews. The better you do on the review, the more of your money you’ll get back at the end of the year.
Interestingly enough, this system of partial withholding of compensation is more similar to how partnership comp works. See, e.g., the discussion of partner comp back in this post (regarding Seyfarth Shaw).
There is a curve, at least for most Level I and II associates. Here’s the pertinent part from the DLA memo:
The output of the Annual Review Process will be a comparative Performance Rating (on a four-point scale for all associates beyond the entry-year) assigned to each associate by the Associate Evaluation and Compensation Committee (“AEC”) in consultation with our Practice Groups. The Performance Rating will be driven by the associate’s Competency Level with possible adjustments upward or downward based on the associate’s Contribution Factor. The objective of this more holistic approach to defining and assessing associate performance is to focus associates and partners on creating value for clients and for the Firm and on investing in an associate’s career development.
For Levels I and II (with the exception of entry-year associates – Level I, Step 1), we expect that roughly 20 percent of associates will receive the top Performance Rating of “4,” 50 percent will receive the expected Performance Rating of “3,” 20 percent will receive a “2″ indicating their performance is not fully meeting expectations, and 10 percent will receive a “1″ indicating their performance is unsatisfactory – with minor differences possible in distribution within individual Practice Groups. For Level III, we expect a somewhat different distribution with few associates, if any, receiving a “1″. Entry-year associates (Level I, Step 1) will continue to be assessed on a “Pass/Fail” basis with an expectation that the vast majority will “Pass.”
Under this new plan, the firm expects to grade 30% of its associates as not meeting expectations, while 50% are meeting expectations. If we think of “1, 2, 3, 4″ as corresponding to “D, C, B, A” letter grades, you can see the outlines of a “B-curve.” That’s pretty standard for law schools. But for law firms, the only thing this reminds us of is Kirkland’s “above class”/”with class”/”below class” system.
And doesn’t that sound like fun.
How you do under this new competitive system will determine your pay. DLA is setting a “target compensation” goal. For most people, that will be the same salary they received in 2009 (which of course was the same salary they received in 2008; the freeze is back on, guys). DLA will take 15% of that target compensation out of base pay. Associates who receive a “4″ or a “3″ on their performance review (which is again curved to represent about 70% of DLA’s class) will get all 15% of that salary back at the end of the year.
Associates who get a “4″ or a “3″ will also get a bonus. We presume that would be the standard market bonus that (for instance) Cravath associates are receiving. There is no longer an hours requirement for the market bonus; you just have to be better at “performance” than the bottom third of associates at the firm.
Associates who receive a “2″ will get only 5% of their money back. But they will not get a bonus.
The ten percent of associates who score a “1″ will not receive their 15% salary back, will not receive a bonus, and will need God’s mercy on their souls.
First years will also not receive a bonus.
We’ll have more analysis and reaction to DLA’s plan later. If you’re at DLA and have some thoughts on this plan, please email us.
For now, we want to hear what you think, readers. Read the full memo below, and opine in the comments.
DLA Piper Associate Compensation Model [PDF]
Earlier: Orrick’s New Compensation Structure
FIRST to finish the exam sets the curve
QUINN REMAINS lockstep
FIRST BITCHES
Is this a joke?
*Gulp*
Uh…Merry Christmas, DLA associates.
*Gulp*
Just want to go on the record so glad I am not practicing for a firm.
First prize is a new Cadillac. Second prize is a set of steak knives. Third prize is your fired.
In other words, DLA is cutting salaries and potentially raising end of the year bonuses next year.
This type of evaluation for bonuses (but not salary) is otherwise fairly standard outside of NY.
this is the most horrible thing i’ve ever heard any firm do. no exaggeration.
Did DLA just rape their associates with this gay proposal? Did the SBA executive board have anything to say about it?
Even Third tier students shouldnt work at a firm that does this bullshit. We offer you a salary, then arbitrarily decide whether we want to pay you after you do the work? Fuck that.
And furthermore, what a bunch of asshats. If I got a 1, I would totally sue the firm. Litigation costs associated with performance reviews will outweigh the potential cost savings. Why the hell would you want to open your firm up to nasty public squabbles?
If the work was good enough to bill a client for, I don’t see how it doesn’t qualify as a 3 or 4.
How does this differ from the more informal system where if you are progressing in your work, you stay, if your work is not up to snuff you’re fired; and your bonus is somewhat at least proportional to how you rank within your class? I realize that because of the economy more people are being forced out who would have stayed longer in prior years.
Basically built in to this system that the firm will fire 10% of its associates every year.
The paychecks at DLA Piper are not getting smaller. They’re just getting more selective.
Since this was left out of the actual post, I feel obligated to post it here. From the DLA FAQ page:
“With whom can I speak if I have concerns about meeting my personal financial obligations in 2010 in light of my reduced bi-weekly pay?
To help address any short-term financial concerns that you may have as a result of our restructured compensation program, the Firm has
contacted various banks that have expressed a willingness to provide short-term credit facilities to our associates, in accordance with the bank’s own policies. If you are interested in pursuing this option,
or have any other question relating to your own financial circumstances, you may contact your local HR rep who can provide you with contact information regarding credit facilities that may be available for associates at banks with whom the Firm has a long term relationship, and who can also provide a brochure regarding the Employee Assistance Program (EAP). Your interaction with the EAP is
completely confidential. If you want to connect with them directly, go to guidanceresources.com.”
So basically, if you can’t pay your rent or your student loans because they cut your salary, they’ll be happy to get you a loan. so you can pay your loans with a loan. fun.
I inherited this mess!
I’m Barack Obama?
This sounds pretty absurd (at least in terms of determining salaries).
DLA Piper sucks a big fat Zulu cock.
DLA Piper at the gates of pwn.
Micheal Ray Richardson, what do you think is happening to legal profession?
ATL to PH!
Sounds kinda like GE to me. Are DLA partners talking Six Sigma classes like Seyfarth?
Ya, that’s pretty idiotic on DLA’s part. I’d assume they will not tie your individual work to identifiable billables because if work is “graded” in the lowest two tiers but still billed to the client, isn’t that an admission of improper billing practices of some sort?
I think it only makes sense for law firms to start treating associates with the same care and understanding as they treat their partners.
Layoffs and deferrals are one thing but this is the DEATH KNELL for their ability to attract anyone other than asshats and rejects.
God this is awful.
I always said iIwanted to get paid to go to law school! now i can! DLA PIPER U!
This is shocking. DLA just announced a pay cut, but made it super complicated.
Nice of them to take no-interest loans from their associates so they can survive 2010.
This makes sense. Since DLA associates and partners are mostly TTT and FTT grads who thrived under the harsh curve regimes, they should be used to this.
homina homina homina homina homina homina homina homina homina homina homina homina
DLA just took the first step towards destroying any pretense of collegiality and professionalism that once existed at the firm.
They took er salary, jerb security, and sense of collegiality!! DER DERK DE DERK!!!!
“Dear Clients, we have determined that 30% of our associates are incompetent but have decided to increase our billing rates anyway.”
Does DLA Piper change their hourly rates to clients based on the quality of the associate? If so, then I can see this being fair. If I were a client, however, I’d want to make sure I wasn’t getting C associates and paying A+ rates.
So glad I did not take the DLA offer -
3L secure!
pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
“The Performance Rating will be driven by the associate’s Competency Level with possible adjustments upward or downward based on the associate’s Contribution Factor.”
In plain English: If you are a minority, you will get no lower than a 2.
Affirmative Action is like Herpes; you see it early on and think it went away, but it rears its ugly head at every stage of your life….plus there is no cure.
This is how it works in-house. I’ve worked at three Fortune 100 companies. At each one, there is a mandatory curve, with at least 10% falling into bottom performers and no more than 20% as top performers. Your bonus and stock options are based on where you fall. Of course, you still get your salary, but there is no functional difference — all DLA Piper has done is take 15% of salary and made it an expected bonus. If you can’t hack this system at a law firm, you’re in trouble because this is how all large companies operate with respect to in-house legal talent.
Yeah, new system sucks, but it sure as fuck beats paying $180,000 for a Northeastern degree, graduating sans job, and discovering last week that career services put up a posting for Pangea3 in fucking Mumbai. They also have an associate listing for The Law Offices of Attorney Robert Hunphrey in Tiverton, RI (you can call his cell phone 24 hours/day!), and a two year unfunded fellowship in Liberia. Thanks for the slap in the face, you fucking fucks!
Unemployed Northeastern motherfucking ‘07
The post:
Job Type: Post-Grad
Employer: Pangea3 (Mumbai, India) [view profile]
Division: N/A
Title: Litigation Attorney
Description: Seeking Talented Attorneys for Immediate Litigation Opportunities in Mumbai, India!
We are currently seeking talented, energetic law interns and attorneys of all levels of experience to work for new and ongoing litigation projects for our international clients.
You see, pal, I’m A Level III, that’s who I am. And you’re nothing. Nice guy? I don’t give a shit. Good father? Fuck you — go home and play with your kids!!
You wanna work here? Bill!! You think this is abuse? You think this is abuse, you cocksucker? You can’t take this — how can you take the abuse you’ll get on your performance review?! You don’t like it — leave. I can go out there tonight with the matters you got, bill myself fifteen hours! Tonight! Can you? Can you?
Go and do likewise! Get mad! You sons of bitches! Get mad!! You know what it takes to reach Level III? It takes brass balls to reach Level III.
Go and do likewise, gents. The hours are out there, you pick them up, they’re yours. You don’t–I have no sympathy for you. You wanna go up to your office tonight and bill, bill, they’re yours. If not you’re going to be shining my shoes. Bunch of losers sitting around in a bar. “Oh yeah, I used to work in Biglaw, it’s a tough racket.”
Well I’m a Level IV Dungeon Master Slayer…suck it Piper!
41 – The Fellowship in Liberia would probably be a great experience. Too bad it’s unfunded…
Here are my thoughts:
We are not rocket scientists. We are well-educated, highly specialized individuals with above-average IQ’s. The reason we are paid well (on the transactional side of the firm) is that we are incredibly thorough and careful and therefore, when the client is doing a deal that cannot afford to be bungled, they call us in and we do not fuck up nearly as much as some midlaw firm which has to rely on third rate talent from the local state school.
This does not require us to be particularly bright, or have moments of genius, but it does require us to be hyper-communicative. If we do not work well together, stuff falls through the cracks.
What this plan does is take the first stop towards destroying the collegial atmosphere that is essential for working well together. By providing an incentive to undermine their co-workers, DLA has made a huge mistake and essentially guaranteed that those important matters is does land will not generate repeat business, because stuff will fall through the cracks. No one is going to be willing to support their colleagues, if it means more money for themselves.
I’d wish these DLA associates good luck but they wouldn’t know what to do with it if they got it.
And to answer your question, pal: why am I here? I came here because DLA Piper asked me to, they asked me for a favor. I said, the real favor, follow my advice and fire your fucking ass because a loser is a loser.
7 FTW. You see this watch?! Also well done 42.
As for DLA Piper associates, sorry guys that blows. It’s pretty ridiculous for them to not only continue the salary freeze (same salary for a third year in a row) AND take it away. So you’ve now dropped them back to at least a level most attorneys were at in 2007 (pre-bonus and pre-15% “salary”).
I think that if DLA set this system up as having associates being raised up a level and having their salary increases be withheld in this system, at least it wouldn’t necessitate their attorneys getting payday loans to pay off their rent and student loans.
45 — Then why do all major in-house legal departments have the same system?
How exactly is there supposed to be curve when the incoming class of first years is so small? Are the percentage by office, or nationwide class? If you have 7 people, or even 30 for that matter, starting in an office how can you have a curve?
How exactly is there supposed to be curve when the incoming class of first years is so small? Are the percentage by office, or nationwide class? If you have 7 people, or even 30 for that matter, starting in an office how can you have a curve?
DLgAy
Think of the hundreds of productive work hours wasted by this convoluted scheme. All that’s missing is the white smoke coming from the chimney.
My best guess, some ad wizard at DLA got caught up in the 5 hour World Cup 2010 group drawings last week and thought to himself “I can think of a more wasteful, asinine plan than this!”
DLA: epic stupidity
What’s wrong with this little gem?
Associates who receive a “2” will get only 5% of their money back. But they will not get a bonus.
Hint: Replace one word with and.
I just don’t understand The Curve. I just don’t. Why have it in grades or elsewhere? Makes no sense.
Coffee is for Closers!!
Great idea. Horrible execution.
This is merely a pay cut in disguise. Here are the things you need to do to make this kind of compensation system work to achieve operational goals other than decreasing labor expenses:
1) Establish a bonus pool, a target bonus, or something quantifiable that you disclose at the beginning of each fiscal year. This keeps you accountable and sets employee expectations. Never ever ever adjust this downward. In good years, feel free to adjust this upward.
2) If you are adjusting downward the amount of salary current employees are receiving, make sure to communicate that you are INCREASING total employee compensation firm-wide. Doing anything else is seen as engaging in what can otherwise be good HR tactics for the sake of cutting expenses.
3) Communicate the metrics required to achieve the levels of performance stated at the same time you communicate the system. How can people perform to your goals without knowing what they need to do? In other words, develop the ENTIRE plan before you roll any part of it out. Don’t you have clients, DLA? Don’t they do similar things with their employees? Come on, now. Talk to SOMEONE about this . . . it’s not rocket science.
So, by completely fucking up these three simple tasks, DLA has taken a good idea and turned it into an albatross. Good job.
You know Elie has put up a quality post when it takes up to comment 54 for someone to point out an error.
This is the type of thing that makes law a great profession. The cream rises to the top and the non-hackers get fired, BigLaw needs more of this, more competition, more stress, more bitterness, it makes the profession better. I for one fully support it.
Cordially,
In-House Attorney
I don’t have a problem with the “pay for performance” type of compensation structure in general. I do have a problem with the notion of a curve applied to this. What happens if you want to give 60% of associates 3 stars rather than 50%. Or more importantly, what if you don’t want to give any 1 stars – are you forced to give some? This is detrimental to associates in terms of pay, and it is not practical for partners to have to evaluate to this standard.
So what happens when the bottom 10% gets fired/layed-off/let-go/pushed out before the end of the year? I doubt the curve adjusts accordingly.
48 – because everything that is really important (read, if it gets bungled, the GC has to be able to play CYA) gets sent to outside counsel.
Why is always the dogshit firms that go out of their way to be gay? And who the F would want to work for Rowdy Rodney Piper anyway?
This would be easier for associates to accept if they were not keeping salaries so low. The substantially reduced biweekly pay will be a biweekly reminder that the firm is screwing you.
They should have increased the target compensation rate higher so people aren’t getting pay cuts. Then it wouldn’t have received such terrible reviews.
58
I caught it when I read it, but wanted to get through all of the comments, and they are coming at a torrid pace.
-54
48: In-house attorneys/”firms” don’t have to worry about repeat business. They either have the job and have business or they get fired. Thus their synergy [and (insert other business savvy terms here)] doesn’t matter near as much to the on-going competitiveness of their firm
Hard to look at this as a positive step for a faceless megafirm that wasn’t exactly known as a good place to work to begin with…..
Why is every post on ATL about putting balls in other guys mouths and / or double fisting small Philippine men?
Hey DLA, Sarah Palin called,
she wants her asinine idea machine back.
This plan sounds like something Altman Weil would come up with.
Oh, and I wasn’t the original poster.
-66
Typical McFirm.
62, just the opposite. Interesting and important work is kept in-house. Drudgery work and litigation is sent to outside counsel.
66, a good point, except I haven’t seen any drop in synergy or cooperation because of our review system. There’s a little something known as character.
Here’s a link that might prove useful to DLA associates trying to keep ahead of the curve.
http://cgi.ebay.com/576-Chapstick-Peppermint-Lip-Balm-Sticks-Buy-in-bulk_W0QQitemZ380152843630QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0
FAIL.
Hope DLA isn’t the subject of a legal malpractice claim in which they had an “unsatisfactory” associate work on the case at issue. Talk about admitting that you are liable.
Are clients going to stay with a firm that considers 30% of its employees below standard?
74,
I get your point, that the GC will always be head-honcho, but for things like accessing the capital markets and selling all or some of the company, the GC will be relying heavily on the expertise, manpower and attentiveness of a firm.
And the drudgery you refer to, if not done right, can be the source of huge problems. Again, not saying it requires a lot of intellectual horsepower, just that you need the ability to trust and rely on your co-workers, which is what this plan destroys.
We should all go to India. I hear the women are wonderful!!
74,
You are an insufferable douche in-house lawyer who went in house because you couldn’t hack it at a firm. Grow a sack.
The best part of this plan – it came from Amy Schulman’s barnacle. A lesson for all law firms, if you have a rock star rainmaker that has married six or seven levels below their station in life (professionally or socially, or both), do not employ their spouse. They will only cause harm. As DLA burns to the ground, Mr. Amy Shulman will retreat to his wife’s mansion where he is not permitted to interact with or bother the staff.
Wake up call people – putting people in some form of a curve is what happens everywhere on an informal basis. Payback of deferred comp, however, is rarely based on anything other than hours hit. Subjective criteria is fine, but that’s for bonus, not comp. So fess up DLA and call this a pay cut with increased structure around the bonus scheme.
Oh, and by making this tacit scheme subject to a memo, you’ve officially killed any morale that associates may have coming to work in this place.
this “we’re paying you back your salary” is bullshit. They are giving you a bonus (or two bonuses depending how you look at it. Base pay has been reduced and any one who cant see that is stupid.
As other posters above pointed out, DLA are going to fire a certain, predetermined proportion of their workforce every year. This of course, raises questions about their recruiting abilities.
This structure is exactly the same as what ENRON used to do. There, it created and fostered a hugely competitive environment that, at least in part, brought the company to its knees- the unwillingness of different groups within the firm to communicate with each other, partly cos they hated each other, caused the firm to take positions that undermined itself.
A) DLA have reduced base pay. As I said if you cant see that, you’re stupid.
B) it is going to be a terrible place to work from now on.
Basically, it’s a tier 2 firm now.
reduced hours requirement!
I guess this kind of structure is what’s necessary to run [into the ground] a firm that went from what, 500 attorneys, to 3500 in 12 months through 2 large mergers? Way to solidify the [lack of] culture by making it miserable for anyone to work there.
[ dissolve to interior, as three elves try to build toys with inferior tools ]
Elf #1: So, what’s this meeting about?
Elf #2: I don’t know, but it better be about our tools – my hammer’s falling apart in my hands.
Elf #1: Yeah, elves can’t build with tools like these.
Honeydew: I’ll never be done with my toys by Christmas.
[ Head Elf enters, with Winter's Breath in tow ]
Head Elf: Everyone, settle down. This is winter’s Breath. He’s an elf from the home office.
Winter’s Breath: Can I have your attention for a moment! So you’re talking about what? You’re talking about the hammer.. bitching about the quality of your wood, some pixie you’re trying to screw? Well, let’s talk about something important! [ turns to Honeydew ] Put that cocoa down! Cocoa’s for cobblers only. [ Honeydew looks stunned with her giant cup of steaming cocoa held before her ] Do you think I’m screwing around? I am NOT screwing around. I am here from Kris Kringle. I’m here from the north Pole. And I’m here on a mission of mercy. [ to Honeydew ] Your name’s Honeydew?
Honeydew: Yeah.
Winter’s Breath: You call yourself an elf, you son of a bitch?
Elf #1: Heyyy, I don’t have to listen to this. Winter’s Breath: You certainly don’t pal. Because the good news is, you’re fired. The bad news is, you’ve got – all you got – one week to regain your jobs. Starting with tonight’s build. [ the elves sit in stunned silence ] Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. ‘Cause we’re adding a little something to this month’s toy contest. [ stands before a picture of a toboggan ] As you all know, first prize is a shiny new toboggan. Anybody want to see second prize? Second prize is a box of candy canes. [ holds up the box ] Third prize is you’re fired. Everybody get the picture? You laughing now, huh?
[ none of the elves say a word ]
Winter’s Breath: You got tools. Santa paid good money for those tools. You can’t build with the tools you have? You can’t build garbage? You ARE garbage, hit the bricks, pal, and beat it, ’cause you are going out!
Honeydew: Hey, hey, our tools are weak.
Winter’s Breath: Your tools are weak? The f’in’ tools are weak?! YOU’RE weak! I’ve been in this business for 615 years.
Elf #1: Heyyy, what’s your name?
Winter’s Breath: Screw you, THAT’S my name! And you wanna know why, Mister? ‘Cause you rode a hedgehog to work, and I got here on a talking moose. THAT’s my name!
[ Winter's Breath steps over to the sales blackboard, and flips it over to reveal the neumonic mantra: "Always Be Cobbling" ]
Winter’s Breath: Remember, boys and girls: Always — [ catches himself, starts over ] A – Always, B – Be, C – Closing. Always be clo- cob! [ Baldwin finally realizes his lines in "Glengarry Glen Ross" are still firmly implanted in his head; the audience screams with delight ] Always Be Cobbling. Always. Be. Cobbling.
[ the audience cheers at Baldwin's slip-up, as even Seth Meyers tries to suppress his elfish giggle ]
Elf #2: That’s incredible.
Winter’s Breath: What’s the problem, pal?
Elf #2: Well, you’re such a hero, you’re so rich. Why are you coming down here and wasting your time on a bunch of bums?
Winter’s Breath: [ Head Elf hands him a giant green gumdrop ] You see this gumdrop? You see this gumdrop?
Elf #2: Yeah.
Winter’s Breath: This gumdrop costs more than the mushroom you call a house. You see, pal, THAT’S who I am. And you’re nothing. Nice guy? I don’t care. Good father? ELF you, go home and play with your kids. You wanna work here? COBBLE! I can sit here tonight with the tools you got, make myself fifteen train sets. Tonight. In two hours. Can you? [ shifts his aggressive gaze to Honeydew ] Can you?
Honeydew: No.
Winter’s Breath: No. Get mad, you sons of bitches, get mad. You know what it takes to be one of Santa’s elves? [ he pulls out a pair of stringed ball bearings and hangs them near his crotch ] It takes brass balls to be an elf. The tools are out there, build with the tools. You don’t — I have no sympathy for you, and you know what you’ll be saying? A bunch of losers sitting around the reindeer shed, drinking fermented dew out of acorn caps. “Oh yeah, I used to be one of Santa’s elves, it’s a tough racket.”
[ Head Elf hands Winter's Breath a shiny new tool ]
Winter’s Breath: These are the new tools.
Elves: [ impressed ] Oooohhhhh…
Winter’s Breath: These are the Glengarry line of power tools, and, to you, they’re gold. And you don’t get them. Why? Because to give them to you is just throwing them away. They’re for cobblers. I’d wish you good luck, but you wouldn’t know what to do with it if you got it. [ turns back to Elf #2 ] And to answer your question, pal: why I’m here because Santa asked me to be here as a favor. I said, the real favor, follow my advice and fire your elf’n’ asses, because a loser is a loser.
[ a beat, as Winter's Breath takes on a sudden different tone ]
Winter’s Breath: Oh. And one more thing: you all get holiday bonuses, it’s still Christmas.
Elves: Yaaaaayyyyy!!!
DLA associate here, and yes, while my ass is hurting right now as I re-evaluate my life choices, I do believe a correction is warranted here. According to the memo, the “target comp” (what you get in total at the end of the year, assuming you pass) will exceed the increase associates would have gotten under the lockstep system. So, while the freeze didn’t help, the language in the memo suggests that the total amount will be above what we would have expected to receive at the end of this year under the traditional lock step system. If I am reading it right (and I might not be, since the thing is 8 pages of b.s., most associates will see a very small increase in take home next year, with the 15% putting them over what they would have gotten last year, but for the freeze.
That DLA memo raped me…oh wait, wrong thread?
Mission Accomplished!
Dear 88,
Read the memo a little more closely. Most associates, with very few exceptions, will net less next year than this year. The exceptions, between classes 5-7, may break even.
I used to work at DLA — thankfully I don’t work there anymore. I am actually amazed that they would pull this (and believe me, they pull a lot of sh!t). Now I know though, expect the worst, and expect anything and everything from this firm as they try and screw over and milk thier associates for every penny. It’s a shame — when it was Piper Marbury, used to be a nice firm, decent hours, decent work, decent collegiality — that’s all done now. This firm sucks hard.
No one has yet mentioned the increase in cost of benefits being passed on to associates. In addition to financing operations with a pay “hold back”, associates will also be financing a much larger share of health care costs. Thanks again!
You just got DLA PIPER’d!
Hey, where’s that guy taht defends DLA and was so excited when they announced the crazy “bonus” structure of between 5k and 50k (with no guidelines as to who would be paid what amount and why, thus basically giving all associates whatever bonus they wanted to give)? Where’s that guy now? This is a horrible firm. There was no quality control and they merged with everyone and anyone that would take them. They wanted to be “global.” Whoops. Bye bye DLA!
DLA Pooper
I know this isn’t their concern right now, but how would they ever land a Biglaw lateral with that comp system once the market turns?
This sounds just like Orrick’s new compensation scheme, which no one is happy about except for the partners.
I find it very difficult to believe a curved system, akin to law school curves, can work when it is not anonymous.
Politics are far too involved for this system to be seen as even remotely fair—DLA to bankruptcy!
Hehe pooper
The upside to this? All you Yale grads will finally understand what is like to be on a curve instead of this Pass/Fail crap…
T14 – 3L secure….
Like DLA has any Yale grads…
@ 88 – you’re an idiot.
Love,
Your colleague at DLA.
Where are the salary numbers? I don’t see any in the memo…
96 nailed it.
@98 — you’re wrong. This is similar to Orrick only in the paybanding, but deduct roughly 40k from each of their base comp numbers and you have the DLA base comp numbers. No kidding. Seriously. People here would be thrilled with the Orrick scheme.
74 — character? hahaha
This firm, like a certain pro golfer, should just admit it is fucking everyone in the ass instead of being all deceptive and shit.
45–on what authority do you assert that DLA Piper is less of a shithouse than any midlaw firm?
Seriously, I could name several decent-sized midlaw firms in NJ who are more respected than DLA Piper.
God help any older attorneys that ever need my help. The way they have treated us during this recession is ridiculous.
So how much time will it take to figure out an associates level/step/rank? The associate will probably have to fill out a form, maybe 2 partners in the practice group will look at it, partners call their favorite senior associate to ask about the junior associates who all look alike, have a practice group partners meeting, try to figure out the difference between a level and a step, call someone from the tax department to check their math on the percentages, arbitrarily move people around to fit the curve, just bump someone down a step to make the math easier, cut and past phrases off the HR forms to make reviews for the associates justifying their level/step/rank, then start all over when some senior partner in another practice group decides all of his associates deserve full bonuses so the other practice areas have to compensate with lower rankings. Sure, that sounds really worth it to hold back 5% of some associate’s salary.
110,
Speaking in generalities here. Not making the claim that DLA > any midlaw or that any given midlaw is < than any biglaw firm.
In general, the people in biglaw are better than their counterparts in midlaw. Not a controversial statement.
Partners with larger books of business/more work will demand a larger portion of the 3s and 4s for their pet associates, while partners with smaller books will get their associates left on the bottom of the curve. Further confusion will ensue from attempting to apportion grades across practice groups, as comparing an NY real estate associate’s performance to a Chicago litigation associate’s performance is almost impossible. Stronger practice groups will either be penalized by even apportionment of grades across groups, or will have to politically fight to have their associates ranked higher. Partners who rank all of their associates highly will have at least some rankings knocked down by firm higher-ups who have never met the subject associates.
Good times.
Partners with larger books of business/more work will demand a larger portion of the 3s and 4s for their pet associates, while partners with smaller books will get their associates left on the bottom of the curve. Further confusion will ensue from attempting to apportion grades across practice groups, as comparing an NY real estate associate’s performance to a Chicago litigation associate’s performance is almost impossible. Stronger practice groups will either be penalized by even apportionment of grades across groups, or will have to politically fight to have their associates ranked higher. Partners who rank all of their associates highly will have at least some rankings knocked down by firm higher-ups who have never met the subject associates.
Good times.
Partners with larger books of business/more work will demand a larger portion of the 3s and 4s for their pet associates, while partners with smaller books will get their associates left on the bottom of the curve. Further confusion will ensue from attempting to apportion grades across practice groups, as comparing an NY real estate associate’s performance to a Chicago litigation associate’s performance is almost impossible. Stronger practice groups will either be penalized by even apportionment of grades across groups, or will have to politically fight to have their associates ranked higher. Partners who rank all of their associates highly will have at least some rankings knocked down by firm higher-ups who have never met the subject associates.
Good times.
This is the real world. Corporations reward their employees based on performance. No performance, no bonus. Stop whining. You make more money annually than 5% of the rest of the population of the U.S.
“You make more money annually than 5% of the rest of the population of the U.S.” Don’t you mean 95%?
Also, so what if we earn more than most people? Most people do not have a biglaw style work life. It is bad enough that the hours are far more ferocious than most people have to work and the work environment at many firms is piss poor. Throwing a completely asinine pay structure that will further degrade the office morale in the mix is only going to make things worse.
Also, yes corporations reward based on performance. Many junior associates in biglaw are stuck on projects like doc review, dd or other types of work where it is often impossible to do amazingly. You only get noticed if you screw up. If you get assigned to these types of deals by more senior associates/partners, it isn’t like you have a choice.
@ 82 – You nailed it. DLA’s “Professional Development Department” reeks of unprofessionalism.
Oooops! Yes – I meant 95%. And, be sure, working conditions are not so peachy at the corporations. Everyone is impacted by these rough times. If the firm does not make money, ther won’t be a firm. Pretty simple analysis. Associates are not “owners”, you are employees. When you own, you have a stake in the game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S2f76Kjx0c
117 you are a moron.
This isn’t bitching about having to be productive in order to be paid. It’s calling B.S. on a firm saying you’re salary is X, but if you don’t do enough work (including for reasons beyond your control), you actually make <X. That’s a paycut with a potential bonus. If you can’t see that, you should drop out of law school now.
There’s plenty of reasons to end lockstep, some of which benefit talented associates.
But this DLA piper nonsense is nothing more than a poorly veiled way to f over associates and keep morale as low as possible.
DLA – Are you my husband? If not, why are you trying to do sex to me?
45 – everything you said about what makes your job important is true of the jobs done by the offshore attorneys your clients will soon be hiring to do doc review in their litigation matters, and it suggests your job is not as important as you believe it to be. That’s why dla is ending lockstep- clients don’t want to pay what you cost for a task most 8th graders can do with proper instruction.
118 – please chill out. It’s called copy and paste from an SNL sketch that actually was quite funny and clever if you’d seen it. Your bitter tone makes you sound like you are an associate at DLA and just heard the good news. Your comment contributed even less to the “discussion.”
@125 – well played, sir. Well played.
I have never been happier than I am today be have been laid off by this piece of shit firm. So DLA bills every full-rate hour recorded by every associate to the client and gets paid every dollar by the client. Then DLA pockets 15% of a third of the associates’ salaries (that they earned by billing that time that got DLA paid in the first place) when DLA arbirarily and automatically places a third of its associates in the bottom tier (and trust me, the review process is arbitrary). Riiight. Meanwhile, how does the firm propose to explain to its clients that they are getting billed full-rate for substandard work? Bet they didn’t think that one through.
I have never been happier than I am today be have been laid off by this piece of shit firm. So DLA bills every full-rate hour recorded by every associate to the client and gets paid every dollar by the client. Then DLA pockets 15% of a third of the associates’ salaries (that they earned by billing that time that got DLA paid in the first place) when DLA arbirarily and automatically places a third of its associates in the bottom tier (and trust me, the review process is arbitrary). Riiight. Meanwhile, how does the firm propose to explain to its clients that they are getting billed full-rate for substandard work? Bet they didn’t think that one through.
Midlaw-secure
I have never been happier than I am today be have been laid off by this piece of shit firm. So DLA bills every full-rate hour recorded by every associate to the client and gets paid every dollar by the client. Then DLA pockets 15% of a third of the associates’ salaries (that they earned by billing that time that got DLA paid in the first place) when DLA arbirarily and automatically places a third of its associates in the bottom tier (and trust me, the review process is arbitrary). Riiight. Meanwhile, how does the firm propose to explain to its clients that they are getting billed full-rate for substandard work? Bet they didn’t think that one through.
Midlaw-secure
I have never been happier than I am today be have been laid off by this piece of shit firm. So DLA bills every full-rate hour recorded by every associate to the client and gets paid every dollar by the client. Then DLA pockets 15% of a third of the associates’ salaries (that they earned by billing that time that got DLA paid in the first place) when DLA arbirarily and automatically places a third of its associates in the bottom tier (and trust me, the review process is arbitrary). Riiight. Meanwhile, how does the firm propose to explain to its clients that they are getting billed full-rate for substandard work? Bet they didn’t think that one through.
Midlaw-secure
I am an attorney at DLA and have been reading these comments all day. A few that really rang true were the following: (1) they already are making us pay a higher percentage of our benefits in 2010 than in years past; (2) this comes on top of the 10% cut earlier this year, so assuming a senior associate was making $265/year at the beginning of 2009, they will be making $203,000 in 2010 (which is roughly $77,000 less a year than at Paul Hastings I am told); and (3) once the bottom say 10% are weeded out after 2010, then those that are considered “good” in 2010 will be required to be put into the “bad” category in 2011 simply to keep with the curve. Another thing to think about: while DLA decided not to have a firmwide partners meeting in 2009 because of the 2008 debacle of sending all of its partners to Spain and spending millions of dollars at the same time as the market crash, they decided to bring it back for 2010. So they are taking money away from associates, but they will make sure they get their annual boondoggle reinstated. It’s absolutely unbelievable. They keep touting the line “we are not trying to save money with this program – most people are expected to make more”, but anyone with half a brain knows that isn’t true. It’s a travesty, and DLA should be very aware that the SECOND that the market opens up and there are jobs out there, the associates are going to leave in droves. You may be able to get away with this crap now, but no one here is happy and if given the opportunity, every single associate I know will leave in a heartbeat. Way to turn a good firm into a sinking ship.
129 through 132 here. Very sorry, I swear I did not repost 4 times. The internet really is a form of hell.
Exactly 92. Piper Marbury and then Piper Rudnick were wonderful midlaw environments and everyone was really happy. I LOVED that job. The DLA merger ruined everything, even during good times. Since the economic collapse, the asshats running the show over there have shown their true colors and turned a wonderful thing into the worst job in the business. Well done Frank, Lee, Nigel, et al, well done.
108 and 125 tie FTW
7- if you’re going to post a dumb quote that gets posted in every single one of these threads, at least get it right, you fucking moron.
#133 – if you don’t like it, leave.
how many of you whiners recall that associate turnover even during good times in biglaw avererages about 25% – yes, about 15% of you lateral out when times are good, and thebottom 10% are asked to consider other career alternatives.
leaving aside the 15% holdback, this system provides opportunities for the overachievers – and it seems most ATL readers, having a very high opinion of themselves and hailing as it seems from Lake Wobegone, fall into that category. Nothing to fear oif you are in the upper 70%. At any firm, the botom 30% would be on shaky ground – and likely would be gone in 2 years. If you are all so smart, talented, and exceptional, what are you afraid of? That this review process will be any more opaque than those used at lockstep firms to determine bonuses and dismissals? If you want certainty, predicatbility and lockstep, go inhoiuse at the givernmewnt – just mnalke sure you are in a union position. Otherwise, stop complaining:lockstep is an anolomy in today’s economy.
What a great move!! “Hey, clients, we expect 30% of the associates we might assign to work on your behalf to need improvement or be unsatisfactory! Now pay me $400+ an hour for each one please……”
Also, this modified compensation structure is creeping up in several firms at the same time in a suspicious manner. Anti-trust implications? Discuss…
Finally, this is going to be a treasure trove for lawsuits seeking statistics on employment discrimination patterns. Imagine this: Molly, Polly, and Janet all get 1’s and 2’s because they didn’t go to the titty bar like Tom, Dick, and Harry, who contributed greatly to the client relationship by buying the client three lap dances and therefore get 4’s.
Many lawyers have trouble making conversation, this leads to awkward silences, lost opportunities, and lost confidence. There are three main elements to great conversation that all revolve around taking an interest in other people. They are 1) Listening-listen to what the other person is saying and look for seeds (seeds-=things they may want to elaborate on) and ask questions about those seeds. 2)Asking/Answering Questions- If they ask a question, give an elaborate answer (more than one word) so they can ask you more questions OR if you are shy repeat the question back to them OR ask a question about one of the seeds they mentioned earlier. 3) Empathize – match experiences with a person, this really helps facilitate conversation.. If they tell you about a situation you respond with a story about a similar situation. If you practice the aforementioned skills every day with every conversation you have you will be able to converse easily with anyone, anywhere.
DLA did several rounds of layoffs – there should be no 1s or 2s left at the firm. The partners are going to be forced to classify good associates as 1s or 2s just to fill out the curve.
DLA is just trying to save money. The firm is reducing 20% of the firm’s associate salaries by 10%, and it is reducing 10% of the firm’s associate salaries by 15%.
This saves the firm more money than when it attempted to reduce many associates’ salaries by 20% in the spring. As of the spring 2009, the firm is reducing the worst performing attornies by almost 25%. 10% in the spring and 15% as of April 1, 2010.
Um, 139, I’m pretty sure that 133 is saying that he/she doesn’t like it and will be leaving (along with just about everyone else with exit opportunities next year). Why in the hell would you work for 15% less (on top of a 10% paycut) and hope that the firm will give it back to you at the end of the year when there are plenty of lockstep places that will treat you like you can actually do your job and pay accordingly? Lockstep may not be the best model, but DLA just showed that it is better than some alternatives.
I would like to see Amy Schulman withhold 15% of David Nachman’s allowance and see how he likes it.
I would also like to see how Nachman would fare if his “core competencies” were evaluated, without the benefit of his wife’s influence.
Shame on DLA management for putting this guy in charge of its associate compensation program. It would have been nice if they chose someone who actually works for a living.
#139 – you are a moron. I will leave when I can, and so will a good percentage of the other associates I know. And before you respond with some snide comment that DLA will be happy to get rid of us, I am talking about excellent attorneys that make the firm a ridiculous amount of money, get exceptional reviews and run the practices of many of the rainmakers here at DLA. The ones that DLA might try to weed out have already been cut. The few left, and I do mean few, are very competent and are generally fully-occupied. Yes, DLA will be able to hire others to take our places, but I will tell you right now none of the partners who lose their associates will be happy with getting a newbie to step in (and who knows how competent they will be if they are unemployed and willing to work at DLA). I am not concerned that the 15% will be paid back in my particular case. But the deferred comp aspect of this package is nothing more than a cost saver to DLA. They cannot point to anything to say it is being done for any reason other than to save money. Some (albeit I doubt 70%) will get it back, if they jump through all of the hoops that have been laid out (billables, pro bono, training, excellent reviews, etc.). But meanwhile, DLA has taken our pay (interest free), won’t be returning it until sometime in 2011, and won’t be returning it at all to at least 30% (which number will be higher due to departures prior to payout). And during that period, a lot of attorneys who are already living on reduced salaries (and many who are supporting spouses and other family members who are suffering in this economy) have to find a way to pay their bills with 15% less each paycheck. Well, I guess at least they are providing us with the ability to get loans (and pay interest on those loans) in order to deal with this shortfall. How generous. DLA – you should be ashamed. Unfortunately, at this point, all you are doing is short-sidedly providing more money in the pockets of your partners (many of which are big names in DC and NY who are being paid millions and millions and have yet to bring in a single deal or case) and alienating all of your associates (your self-decribed “biggest assets”). Ridiculous.
143: from the firm’s internal website FAQ on the the new compensation package:
“Is it designed to reduce associate compensation?
No. As we have said repeatedly, our new compensation structure is not intended to reduce our spending on associate compensation. Our projected 2010 average per capita spending on associate compensation will not be reduced; and we expect that the substantial majority of associates will be more highly compensated under our new compensation structure than would have been the case by simply progressing in our existing model of lockstep salaries and hours-driven bonuses.”
Don’t we all feel better now.
143: from the firm’s internal website FAQ on the the new compensation package:
“Is it designed to reduce associate compensation?
No. As we have said repeatedly, our new compensation structure is not intended to reduce our spending on associate compensation. Our projected 2010 average per capita spending on associate compensation will not be reduced; and we expect that the substantial majority of associates will be more highly compensated under our new compensation structure than would have been the case by simply progressing in our existing model of lockstep salaries and hours-driven bonuses.”
Don’t we all feel better now.
If I were the clients, I’d insist on being shown the year-end raking of the attorneys’ work that got billed to me and if even one of them is in the low tier, I’d demand a partial refund and refuse to allow that attorney to work my cases again.
DLA is a turd burglar, this firm burgles all of the turds. I am going to shit on Sam Isaacson’s desk on my out the door, why not give this piece of shit more of what it deserves.
All similarly situated firms are going to go to this model. No way DLA would come up with this ridiculous compensation model unless they knew their competition was doing the same thing.
147: Thank you for the information that DLA is providing but theoretically how does this increase a substantial majority of associates compensation, especially if you use present value calculations regarding the money that associates will receive at the end of the year?
146, I too am a Piper associate who polished up my resume earlier this evening, made some phone calls and plan to leave. The firm’s attitude is beyond reprehensible. Associates are not stupid and those of us with mobility are straight hitting the door. Surprise, surprise there still is mobility in this market . . . Piper management do you honestly think that the busy associates e.g. the desirable attorneys, do not have options? Go fuck yourselves because obviously you do.
139, I know your type and even though I will not be around to see it, I’m smiling a little knowing that you’re going to hang around Piper (probably because you have no options) long enough to be disappointed in early 2011.
FYI, the U.S. firm is about 2.2% off budget and approximately 5.5% off collections from last year as of November 30th. No reason to pull this stunt other than cheap, cheap (not fun, fun) management.
2010 is expected to be a tough year for law firms, including DLA. This gives the firm extra cash for 2010, in the form of 15% of its associate compensation. This is significant. They hope, I suppose, that 2011 will be better. But this is just a way to get more cash for 2010, when things are expected to be tight. It is a very creative way to get a very low interest loan–from your employees at 0%.
152, Bingo — under any rational economic calculation there is no increased benefit to associates.
153, nice dirt cheap reference. Remember the more of our wine she drinks, the better you’ll look. Timeless.
149,
I agree. If clients can specify that first year associates not work on their matters, then why can’t clients demand that no 1s or 2s (or even 3s) work on their matters? DLA surely cannot claim that all of their associates are “fully qualified” to do the work.
I think that DLA should commit to unfreezing salaries before the 15% salary cut.
Is Rowdy Rodney Piper still practicing law? How can he afford to hire all these law school grads?
So DLA associates will now be below their already below market salaries – and if they end up being in the top 70%, they’ll return to their below market salaries. I have to imagine associate morale is through the roof after this turn of events. Good thing they had a focus group work on this brilliant new structure for months.
This sounds like associate pay cuts across the board, and then instituting Kirkland’s old review system/merit based bonuses.
The powers that be at DLA Piper seemed to forget that any associate that would have qualified as a “4″ under the new system will be long gone by the end of next year – so whatever bonus they. Way to ensure that your best associates and largest profit generators will leave the firm. Hope your clients are happy knowing the bottom of the barrel associates service them.
The powers that be at DLA Piper seemed to forget that any associate that would have qualified as a “4″ under the new system will be long gone by the end of next year – so whatever bonus they may or may not receive is irrelevant. Way to ensure that your best associates and largest profit generators will leave the firm. Hope your clients are happy knowing the bottom of the barrel associates service them.
Adding insult to injury, all of the associates got a voicemail from one of the executive partners stating how excited the firm was about the new payment structure and how firm management hoped that we all shared in their enthusiasm.
I am an associate GC at a major financial institution. Let me tell you a big secret–if we really wanted, we could get our legal work done for a fraction of the cost if we went with midlaw or AmLaw 200 firms. But, I tend to hire Davis Polk because we can be reasonably sure they won’t fuck up, and if they do, I can point to it as a freak thing that nobody could have seen coming and thus not get fired. It doesn’t have to be Davis Polk, I can probably hire most of the V50 on all but the most sensitive transactions, but at core, my job is risk management so I want to look as good as I can if shit falls apart.
So, now if one of the bankers wants us to use DLA for something, this is the scenario which will play out in my head when I am deciding whether to hire DLA. GC: “Hey John, remember the XYZ mezz financing? ” Me: “Yeah, I hear the company went belly up. Good thing we were secured.” GC: “Don’t get me started. Turns out that they screwed up on that and didn’t perfect the lien. Next time I see Winthorpe at Davis Polk, make goddamn sure there aren’t any letter openers around!” Me: “Winthorpe?” GC: “Yeah, he fucked up. I am going to fucking curb stomp him and then skull fuck his wife. Is it too hard for him to fill out the goddamn form right? Plus, they missed a big fucking tax problem. What the fuck is a PFIC, and why is it pissed at me?” Me: “Well, I didn’t use Winthorpe.” GC:”Ok, then who fucked us? Was it Stan at Cleary? I told you he isn’t the best guy for mezz. Goddamn it, Stan….” Me: “No, I used DLA Piper.” GC: “Why in fuck’s name did you do that?!” Me:”They were cheap.” GC:”You asshole!! I have to tell the CEO that we used the firm that only hires dumbshits that can’t get a job anywhere else? Are you fucking kidding me? Ronson is going to piss in the CEO’s ear about how we may as well have just hired Jacoby and fucking Myers. Unless my blackberry says this is april fucking fools day, you are fucking fired and I will use the last 10 minutes of my own goddamn career to make sure you won’t even be able to get a job fighting traffic tickets.” (Last words I hear as I am walking out with my cardboard box and nursing a letter opener wound ) Newly minted GC: “Well, Mr. CFO we may not have to write down that much because we should be able to recover about 80% through a malpractice suit since it turns out that 30% of the associates on the project were rated sub-par….”
So, after this little daydream plays out, who thinks I will be hiring DLA?
So, now you can spend your life in cut-throat grad school with the Bell Curve’s sword held over your head until you’re 35-40. Frankly, I can’t imagine why anyone with half a brain and any maturity to them would want to sign up for this BS. Then again, reading most of the infantile, four-letter posts, it appears that many of those affected by this, at the very least, don’t have any maturity to them; so, I guess they are being treated like the spoiled, overgrown adolescents they are…
GROW THE FUCK UP MOTHERFUCKERS AND DEAL WITH IT YOUR BITCHTASTIC HOS.
This is so ridiculous. Avoid DLA at all cost. It isn’t worth the stress. They’re opening themselves up for litigation with this stupid policy. What a TTT decision??!!
As a 7th year associate at DLA I was contemplating the choice I made a few years ago when I lateraled over. I had quite a number of choices at the time, and for a completely arbitrary reason I picked DLA. Here are a few comparisons to some of the firms I could have moved to (as background, I entered the year as a rising 7th year having been paid $250k in 2008):
Level 1 firm (no freeze or pay cut in 2009): Had I picked this firm, I would have made $265k during 2009 and would be in line for $280k or so for 2010.
Level 2 firm (freeze in 2009, but unfreeze in 2010): Had I picked this firm, I would have remained at $250k in 2009, and moved up to $265 in 2010 (unless a Latham-esque double-bump would have put me at $280 or so).
Level 3 firm (freeze in 2009 being carried over into 2010): If I had picked this firm, I would still be making $250k in 2010.
DLA: Freeze in early 2009 turned into a 10% salary cut in June 2010, thus as a 7th year I make $225k. In 2010 I will get another 15% salary cut putting me at roughly $190k. This is just about $5k more than what a third year will make at a Level 1 firm in 2010. I think I’m entitled to feeling just a little bit screwed.
This analysis, of course, being separate and apart from what I will be paid in bonuses for 2009 (I already know what most of my midtown brethren will be paid).
The biggest source of revenue for these firms is savings on budgeted compensation for Associates and staff. The problem is after the deferrals, the lay offs, the lowered bonues, elimination of lock step raises, and salary cuts, where do they go for revenue next year.
Law firms used to be about relationships. And trust. Both have been broken by DLA Piper that willingly has traded its culture for currency. This model is not sustainable. It ignores what law firms need to fuel their engines: associates who are invested in the firm and the future of the institution. That is all.
As a DLA associate, I have always shrugged my shoulders when recruiters called because I got paid market rate and liked my job. Vault ratings meant nothing to me because my firm paid the same pretty much as every other Biglaw firm and I was content more or less. When the freeze happened, everyone knew times were tough and that other firms would probably follow because salaries had gotten a little out of hand. No sweat as long as we were making the same we were making before. Then, when the 10% cut happened, we winced but again figured that other firms would eventually follow or that we would readjust to market rate. Few followed, and we did not readjust. Now this. Our leadership is asking us to trust them… again. But, there is no reason to do so. They have treated us like a fungible commodity again and again. This is either a sign that the firm is in real financial trouble, which every indicator we have seen shows that is not the case, OR this is just a pathetic attempt to fuck associates because they think they can get away with it in this market. But, as an associate who has had a good billing year and consistently receives recruiter calls several times a week, I can tell you that they can’t get away with it. I also polished up my resume last night and will spend the next few days talking with recruiters. Who needs this shit? I can no longer shrug now that I work for what is essentially a third-tier paying firm. Unfortunately, this move will force out the door the few associates that are competent and busy, leaving DLA with only the associates who truly don’t have any other options. To take the place of the leaving associates, DLA will have to bring in unemployed lawyers or those from lesser firms, and/or risk losing their clients when partners can’t get the work done. To add insult to injury, the only associates left will be those in poor performing practice groups who really don’t have options. Those associates will be extremely disgruntled and the work product will show it, possibly losing further clients. And, when the market improves, those associates will split so fast it will make your head spin, hurting business relationships even more. Basically, this is just another step in a long downward cycle. Kind of like a big toilet bowl. Congrats DLA leadership… you have made us the crapper of law firms.
@ 168- The numbers are pathetic.
I am a 6th year at a Tier 1 firm and in January I will make $230K. A law school classmate who went to DLA because it was a “quality of life firm” in 2010 will make $161K under this new structure (but he can get up to $28K back in December 2010 if he is a top performing associate).
So much for quality of life.
CHECK YOU RECTUMS
150 – hilarious
Kirkland grades on a curve too – conservatives, women, and lapdogs get bumped up, the rest get the shaft.
Screw this. I am going to look for a way out too. Why make mid-tier firm salary when you are a top-tier firm attorney?
do clients who were served by the bottom 30% get a refund on their fees? Of course not.
do clients who were served by the bottom 30% get a refund on their fees? Of course not.
You highly paid associates need a reality check. Quit whining.
178 – do clients of lkockstep firm who were served by the bottom 30% get a refund on their fees? Of course not.
some client – even at Weil, Wachtel, Cravath, DPW, or any other T10 firm – is always being ’served’ by the lowest quartile, whther or not the associates know they have been ranked as such. clients ar also being ’served’ by associates who are running out their notice period or who have been told to consider other alternatives without having been guven a date certain to leave.
171 Do not believe all they are telling you about the soundness of the firm. All indications are that DLA Piper is behind budget in terms of hours, fees received and realization rate. They are actually laying the groundwork to increase rates another 4.7% next year, but the pushback is tremendous.
The largest client already receives such a large diiscount that leadership questions if it is worth having as a client.
The firm promoted non caps to “equity” level at the start of this year just to create a capital influx and to reduce the comp payout during the course of the year. These new “equity” partners still have greater than 50% of their comp as salary so that they do not count as equity partners for AM Law purpuses. By making the non-caps capital partners they have deffered 49% of the non-caps salary until 2010 to keep the numbers higher. That way they can try to keep the PPP up to continue to recruit lateral partners who do not see past the intial numbers. Now they are going to defer a percentage of the associates salary until 2011, again to keep the 2010 PPP high enough to attract laterals.
Used to be a great place to work. It is ashame what they did to this firm.
Ahh, Chapter 15, in which our protagonist DLA concedes that Jones Day really is five steps ahead of it on absolutely everything.
It takes a long time to sink a ship like DLA. I wonder if 2010 will result in major changes for it. Things are quite busy at a lot of shops. Mine picked up some lateral partners with big books because we were able to: (a) offer them a nice bump on what they are getting paid right now; and (b) show them that they will have competent associates to do the work that their clients generate, which is something that they were sorely missing at their old firms. Seems like DLA partners with big books are ripe for poaching.
Commetns 164 and 168 say it best — I think they explain very well why this was a horrible decision, and how DLA has fuc$ked over its associates in real $$$. Nevertheless, it was still done. Shows a lot about DLA’s crap management (and how hard up they are to save $$$ at any cost). Bye bye DLA.
@ 141 – I stopped listening, what were you saying?