Baker Botts will be throwing itself into the killing lockstep camp sometime in 2010. A tipster reports:

So, Baker Botts - Houston (should be firmwide, though I don’t have have all the details) is adopting a form of the Reed Smith pay structure. …

My understanding may be imperfect, but the notion is that it’s something like a three part system of junior associates, mid level associates, and senior associates, with pay discrepancies laid out among the three. No more lockstep. Unclear what the bonus structure is beyond the nebulous “merit” nonsense.

The Reed Smith structure has received a lot of attention. Last month, we mentioned that Reed Smith will categorize associates as junior, mid-level, or senior associates. But those classifications won’t necessarily be tied to how long an associate has been out of law school. So you could see a fourth-year classified as a senior associate making significantly more than a sixth-year classified as a midlevel associate.

Today, the Legal Intelligencer reports that the Reed Smith plan will also include a cut in associate salaries and billing rates:

Reed Smith has cut starting salaries by about 20 percent for the 51 first-year associates set to start in January and, in turn, is cutting their billing rates by the same margin.

You can read the full Reed Smith memo about its salary and billing rate reductions after the jump.

Will the Reed Smith system become the template for associate compensation at other firms? Let’s take a look at what Baker Botts is planning.

Yesterday the news broke that Steven Molo, of Shearman & Sterling, and Jeffrey Lamken, of Baker Botts, were leaving their respective firms to start a new litigation boutique. It will be called MoloLamken and start out with offices in New York and D.C. Am Law Daily reports that the firm represents the new recession model for business generation:

If there is a firm model built for the dawning post-recession era, it’s probably a litigation boutique with low overhead and a flexible billing structure….

The firm will start with four partners and two associates, and will work on both plaintiffs and defense cases. Within five years, Molo says he hopes to have around 50 lawyers. “Over time, clients have become far more sophisticated in hiring firms,” he said. “They understand how a firm like this can be small but every bit as efficient or even more so than a larger firm.”

But are they hiring? Details after the jump.

As we roll through the next segment of the 2010 Vault rankings, we get into some firms that have been caught testing the stealth layoff waters. To refresh your memory, here is the next list of firms:

31. Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy
32. Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker
33. Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld
34. Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson
35. Winston & Strawn
36. Allen & Overy
37. Willkie Farr & Gallagher
38. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
39. Baker Botts
40. Munger Tolles & Olson

Check out the big move by Munger. It’s up 11 spots on this year’s list. And let’s not forget about the firm’s #1 A-List ranking by Am Law earlier this year. Munger’s managed to do all of this without laying off a massive number of associates. Hopefully other Biglaw firms (and current 2Ls) will take note.

We know people have strong opinions about some of the firms on this list. Let’s get into them after the jump.

Thanks to all of the tipsters who are helping us put together numbers on the Baker Botts layoffs. Even though the firm doesn’t want you to know how many people it is letting go, our sources have been relentless in helping us expose the information.

Yesterday we reported that Baker Botts laid off at least twelve associates in Houston. Today we can report that at least seven other associates were laid off in Baker’s Washington office. One tipster has a colorful description of the action in D.C.:

Baker Botts DC canned 7 associates. They handled it so poorly that one found out from a secretary. … They laid off associates who had a lot of hours and were strong performers, so it was even more ridiculous. None of us feel safe now. Apparently, this firm has no loyalties to anyone but the dollar.

According to NALP, there are 65 associates in Baker Botts’s D.C. office. So the cuts represent around 10% of the associates in that office.

After the jump, we learn that the timing of these layoffs couldn’t have been worse for one Baker Botts associate.

Yesterday, we reported that Baker Botts no offered around 50% of its summer associate class. But while Baker Botts summers were learning whether they had a future with the firm, some Baker Botts associates were told to move out of the way. The Texas Lawyer reports:

This week, Baker Botts laid off lawyers for economic reasons, says firm spokesman Mike Cinelli, although the Houston-based firm will not disclose numbers or further details. The layoffs, Cinelli says, are an attempt by firm management to have “supply meet demand.” The layoffs are the result of market conditions and the lack of attrition this year, Cinelli says. “It was a difficult decision,” Cinelli says about the layoffs.

Above the Law has learned that 12 associates were let go from the Baker Botts Houston office. There are reports of additional casualties firm wide, but as you know Baker Botts doesn’t want you to know how many of its people it is putting out on the street.

For the 12 in Houston, one tipster had this to say:

Associates at Baker Botts have been surprised about some of the layoffs in the Houston office. Several high hours, good work product people are gone along with some who are not big surprises.

Should summers and incoming Baker Botts associates be concerned? Details after the jump.

Offer season (a.k.a. no offer season) is here in full force. The latest news comes from Baker Botts, and it appears that you didn’t have to be involved in a Texas scandal to get no-offered by the firm.

Multiple tipsters independently report that the offer rate at Baker Botts was between 50 to 55 percent firm-wide. The no offerees we spoke to felt the firm should have brought fewer people on for the summer if it was going to throw so many people back into the pool of 3L recruiting:

No offered. Man that sucked. Should have summered at a firm that wasn’t going to waste my time. At least I’m not alone.

But summers that received an offer understandably had a more positive take on the experience:

I got an offer, but I know a lot of people who didn’t. I suppose that is unfair, but I feel like we all knew that it was going to be a competitive summer and not everybody was going to make it.

Make it? Ask the class of 2009 whether getting an offer at the end of the summer bears any relation to actually having a full-time job upon graduation.

While Baker Botts made offers to about half of its summer class overall, the Baker Botts summers in the firm’s New York office were not nearly as lucky. Details after the jump.

When you are a kid, curiosity is a positive thing. Even as adults, we expect effective people to exhibit at least a modicum of intellectual curiosity.

But you shouldn’t confuse your legal employer for the man in the yellow hat. Not unless you want this to happen to you. A few weeks ago, a summer associate at Baker Botts learned an important lesson about curiosity and its proper place in law firm life.

Multiple tipsters report that a summer associate in one of Baker Botts’s Texas offices was dismissed after he logged onto the firm document system to get a sneak peak at the summer associate reviews that were being prepared for his class. He also allegedly poked around the full-time associate reviews that were available in the system. Our sources report that he was let go for these transgressions.

None of these documents were password protected.

After the jump, our tipsters ask why the summer was fired when the firm made no efforts to keep these associate and summer associate reviews secured.

* California lawyer Ryan Kent has accused Dahn Yoga of being a cult and filed a class action suit against the Brain Wave Vibrators. [San Francisco Chronicle]

* Ross Mitchell spent just $38,000 on his online law degree and became his own first client. He won his lawsuit to be admitted to the Massachusetts Bar. [Boston Herald]

* Richard Posner is bearish on newspapers and bullish on draconian copyright protection for online news. Permission to link? [The Becker-Posner Blog]

* Is 12 years enough for Bernie? [Am Law Daily]

* Law school is great preparation for doing something other than law. [Legal Intelligencer]

* Musical chairs: Morgan Lewis taps gas from Baker Botts. [Am Law Daily]

* Justice may be blind, but she needs to see your face in Michigan. [True/Slant]

* Lawyers for Allen Stanford, the Texas financier accused of a massive swindle, want Baker Botts off the case. [Reuters]

* Convicted terrorist Jose Padilla can sue John Yoo for the legal memos he wrote at the Justice Department defending torture. [San Francisco Chronicle]

* Renowned legal scholar Lawrence Lessig stars in a new film. Stanford Law is getting the publicity shout-out in the articles about the documentary, but Harvard recently snatched Lessig for its faculty. [DCist]

* Chapter 11 bankruptcy. So hot right now. [Wall Street Journal]

* Is this year’s cutthroat BigLaw environment worse for summer associates or for the hiring partners they are stalking? [Fulton County Daily Report]

* Does Obama have big plans for Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan? [Chicago Sun-Times]

Well, it appears Texas is starting to feel the burn of the global economic recession. And that is not good news at all. We received word from Baker Botts today that the firm has decided to fire attorneys. This is from a firm wide email that just went out:

We initially hoped that by imposing a hiring freeze last year, we would be able through attrition to match staffing levels to the business environment. The recession has been so deep and long lasti ng, however, that we regrettably have also had to reduce our lawyer and staff levels through selective layoffs, particularly in those areas most impacted by the reduction in demand. This has been a painful process for all of us involved. The individuals affected by these reductions are our colleagues and friends, and they have performed admirably for the Firm and our clients over the years.

The memo does not contain the overall number of people the firm will be letting go. Our sources tell us that the cuts will affect “around 30” attorneys. We don’t have any information on how deep the staff cuts will be. There is also no word on how these layoffs will affect incoming first years.

But don’t get us wrong, just because layoffs are coming to Texas, doesn’t mean that Texas isn’t maintaining its Texas sized sense of pride:

Back in 1933, when the Great Depression was at its peak, many who worked at the Firm feared what the year had in store for them. In January of that year, then-Managing Partner Walter Walne wrote a memo to partners dedicated to that topic. The closing paragraph of that memo is timely, relevant and speaks eloquently across the decades about who and what we are at Baker Botts:

“With the character and ability possessed by each person in the organization; the splendid spirit of cohesive team work that we know exists; the inspiration that comes from the efforts and lives of those who have gone before; the idealism which our creed and our traditions instill, we face the new year resolutely and with the assurance that in our hands the standard of this institution will not be lowered and that our forward steps will not falter.”

We date our Firm’s origins back nearly 170 years, to just after Houston was founded and when Texas was still a nation, not a state. We have been through the U.S. Civil War, two World Wars, the Great Depression and countless recessions, and together, we will get through this.

Update (4:19): We are now getting reports that Baker Botts is offering a three month severance package, but associates have to pack up and leave by tomorrow night. It looks like most associates were prepared for the news when the arrived to work this morning. According to a tipster:

When I go to work this morning and noticed that we were losing our free parking, I knew we were in or a long day.

Read the full statement after the jump.

Last week, we asked you to send us your stories about firms that are rescinding offers to 3Ls. Despite a lot of people calling us sensationalist while drenching themselves in a vat of Kool-Aid, hours after our report we learned that Lowenstein Sadler was rescinding 3L offers (and laying off associates).

But we received other tips as well.

Many people reported that they haven’t heard anything back about their summer program, despite pestering their firms for information. The consensus opinion was that firms had already priced in the market collapse when it came time to hire summer classes. Firms hired fewer people and many firms cut back on the length of the summer program.

But some people reported that their firms were rescinding offers.

We’ve now received reports that Baker Botts and Irell & Manella have both rescinded some 3L offers.

More details after the jump, including an update from Baker Botts.

Further Update: An internal communication from Irell, also after the jump.

We’re back with another installment in our series of open threads on the Vault 100. This is an opportunity for insiders to sound off on their firms for the benefit of wannabe potential first-year and lateral associates.

Here are the next ten on the Vault list, with prestige scores in parentheses:

41. Baker Botts LLP (6.096)
42. King & Spalding LLP (6.066)
43. DLA Piper (6.039)
44. Baker & McKenzie (5.982)
45. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (5.976)
46. Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP (5.974)
47. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP (5.941)
48. Dewey & LeBoeuf (5.924)
49. Fulbright & Jaworski LLP (5.906)
50. McDermott, Will & Emery (5.892)

The most interesting set of “notable perks” in this bunch can be found at Boies Schiller. On the upside, there is an annual trip to Jamaica for attorneys and their families — in December, no less — but on the downside, it’s a “sweatshop run by a genius.” This makes us think of David Boies as the legal profession’s Santa Claus — who likes to take the elves to Montego Bay.

We invite the curious to ask questions about these firms, and for those in-the-know to take pity.

Earlier: Vault 100 Open Threads - 2009

Hmm, not sure that we agree; it may be something of an overstatement. But that’s the allegation made in this posting from last week over at Infirmation / Greedy Texas:

Sexism and Racism synonomous [sic] with Baker Botts

The weekend before last was the annual “Baker Weekend” where summers get to listen to several speeches, etc. about BB and it’s [sic] inner-workings. [Former Secretary of State James] Baker says in his speech that this is an “unusual” election year because we have “a Black” running for president and he went on to refer to Obama [as] “a Black” at least three more times.

After that, a woman got up to ask a question and he attempted to brush her off, thinking that she was merely a member of attorney recruitment and not an associate. When Secretary Baker finally realized that the woman was in fact a summer associate with a question, he remarked “Oh, now I see why Hillary Clinton lost.”

Anyone surprised? Of course, a partner has apologized to all African-American and female summer associates but why has Secretary Baker not been the one to apologize?

Personally we prefer the term “African-American.” But is using the term “black,” while perhaps old-fashioned, really that offensive? People refer to Barack Obama all the time as the first black presidential nominee of a major political party. E.g., the New York Times (referring to Senator Obama as the “first black candidate to lead a major party ticket “). Is that problematic?

Does the addition of the indefinite article and use of the word as a noun rather than an adjective — i.e., “a black” vs. “black” — make such a big difference? One can think of other examples: “he’s an Asian” vs. “he’s Asian,” “he’s a gay” vs. “he’s gay,” “he’s a Jew” vs. “he’s Jewish,” “he’s an Italian” vs. “he’s Italian,” etc. The latter may sound better in each of the foregoing cases, but is the former actually offensive?

As for the Hillary quip, sure, it might have been somewhat un-PC / rude. But we’re talking about Jim Baker here. We’ve all seen Recount, right? Great performance by Tom Wilkinson, by the way.

We contacted Baker Botts for comment. They haven’t gotten back to us as of the time of this posting.

Some other posters’ reactions to the original item, plus a reader poll, after the jump.

In last month’s ATL / Lateral Link survey we asked you which holidays you worked on, or expected to work on, during 2007. About half of you reported that you had worked on Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Last week, we asked you how you fared this year. Did you take the day off to honor a champion of civil rights, or did you make it a “day on”?

We received just under 1,300 responses, and 44% of you reported that you took the day off. Associates in New York, Los Angeles and Boston were most likely to celebrate the holiday, while associates in Chicago, Atlanta, the Bay Area, and Texas were most likely to be working. (Respondents in the Bay Area were also most likely to work over Christmas and New Year’s. Is it time for them to get New York bonuses?)

How did it break down on a firm by firm basis? DLA Piper, Milbank, Sidley & Austin, Dechert, Hunton & Williams, Jones Day, Latham, Mayer Brown, McDermott, Hughes Hubbard, McGuire Woods, Morgan Lewis, Nixon Peabody, Paul Hastings, and Sullivan & Cromwell each had multiple happy associates who reported that they had taken the day off. Kirkland & Ellis, Baker Botts, Dewey & LeBoeuf, O’Melveny & Myers, Weil, and Winston & Strawn each had mixed responses. Associates at Skadden, however, uniformly reported that they had worked the holiday, as Martin Luther King Jr. day is a “floating” holiday for the firm.

Of those who spent the day at the office, about 54% reported that they weren’t actually asked to work the holiday, but had things they needed to get done. About a quarter reported that their offices were open. Another quarter said that partners told them to work on the holiday. About 8% were asked to work by clients. A surprising number of respondents wrote in that other associates had told them to work on the holiday.

A little over a third of respondents who worked on the holiday thought that the work did not justify the sacrifice.

That’s the conclusion suggested by this Houston Chronicle article, about the most fabulous law firm holiday parties thrown in that city.

In New York, the biggest and best law firm parties tend to be thrown by the biggest and best law firms. But they do things differently down in Texas, Land of the Plaintiffs’ Lawyers. From Mary Flood’s quite interesting article:

A random survey of about 100 Houston lawyers showed these to be the six hottest legal party tickets this holiday season:

• litigation firm Susman Godfrey’s art-studded office reception;
• plaintiffs lawyer Richard Mithoff’s traditional classy soiree;
• plaintiffs lawyer Mark Lanier’s family-friendly extravaganza;
• plaintiffs lawyer John O’Quinn’s sparkling gala;
• Abraham, Watkins, Nichols, Sorrels & Friend’s crowded office open house;
• defense lawyer David Beck’s high-quality in-home affair.

More excerpts and discussion, after the jump.

Yesterday we posted an open thread on law firms that screw over no-offer lots of their summer associates. This post is about the flip-side: firms that dole out summer associate bonuses.

This topic has been raised by two tipsters, in two different contexts. First, this tipster reports on two firms that pay bonuses to summer associates, regardless of whether you previously summered with them:

I’m just starting to get offers, as callbacks are rolling along. I have offers from Baker Botts and Fulbright & Jaworski, both in Dallas — and both are offering a week’s pay ($3077 and $2700, respectively) as a bonus! Baker pays out on the start date, and Fulbright pays if you spend the first half with them.

And from a second source, news of bonuses paid to 1L summers who return to the same firm:

I received an offer to come back for a second summer at Foley & Lardner… with a catch: If I come back for the whole summer, and do not split or spend time anywhere else, I receive a $5,000 bonus. The bonus pays out when I accept this fall, not next summer. I have no idea if all the offices do this, but I should add that I am not at all in a major market.

Interesting. Are you aware of other firms that either (1) pay bonuses to summer associates or (2) pay bonuses to 1L summer associates who return for a second summer (and don’t split)? Please discuss, in the comments. Thanks.

Earlier: Fall Recruiting Open Thread: No-Offer Factories

We’re pressing on with our series of open threads on Vault 100 law firms. We know that some of you are eager to discuss firms ranked in the 70’s, and we don’t want to disappoint you.

And a quick word from one of our sponsors, ATL’s Career Partner, Lateral Link:

“Lateral Link provides free access to the Vault firm information/career guides. Readers can get free access to the full information on our site as part of our career center.”

Without further ado, here are the five firms for this afternoon (in Vault 100 order, prestige scores in parentheses):

41. King & Spalding LLP (6.183)
42. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP (6.099)
43. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges LLP (6.080)
44. Baker & McKenzie (6.079)
45. Baker Botts LLP (6.061)

Please discuss them in the comments. Thanks.

The Vault Top 100 Law Firms [Vault]

Earlier: Vault 1-5; Vault 6-10; Vault 11-15; Vault 16-20; Vault 21-25; Vault 26-30; Vault 31-35; Vault 36-40

To $160K and $170K, for first- and second-years, respectively, effective August 1. Here’s the official table, which was an attachment to the email that just went around:

Update: One commenter notes: “They have taken compression to a whole new level with the $2,500 raise between 3rd and 4th year.”

We agree. Just give the fourth years a gift certificate to the Olive Garden, and call it a day!

Memo from managing partner Walter Smith, after the jump.

From a verified source in the Washington office of Baker Botts:

Today, Baker Botts DC’s associates started receiving raise notices in the mail. They all appear to match the “real” DC market, not this V&E crap. Retroactive to July 1.

The notices only refer to the recipient’s salary; there isn’t a formal memo outlining all salaries, at least not one that I’ve seen yet.

So… What about Baker Botts back in Texas? Our Baker-DC source said:

I’ve heard nothing so far. The firm switched to the no-summary-memo trend after your site got popular. Coincidence? I doubt it.

If you have information about whether Baker Botts has raised base salaries for its Texas associates, please email us (subject line: “Baker Botts”). Thanks.

Update (6 PM): Apparently Baker Botts associates in Dallas have NOT yet received memos about raises.

Earlier: Nationwide Pay Raise Watch: Texans Fill Their Ten Gallon Hats With Cash
Nationwide Pay Raise Watch: Is Texas Biglaw Raising — Finally?

Following closely on news of the Vinson & Elkins raise, Andrews Kurth has also raised salaries for first- and second-year associates, to $160,000 and $170,000, respectively. As explained in the memo, the firm is “still working on the details of the compensation structure for other associate classes.” Here’s an article from the Texas Lawyer.

What about other Texas firms? Here’s what we’ve been hearing:

Baker Botts: They should raise later this week or early next week. Prior to the V&E announcement, a Baker source speculated: “[T]hey seem to be waiting on V and E. I think they might be trying to leapfrog them, hoping V and E lowballs.”

Akin Gump: “They had an associates’ committee meeting [yesterday] and said there were working out a few details, but they would be raising in their Texas offices sooner rather than later. Who knows what any of that means.”

The Andrews Kurth memo, in the form of an email from managing partner Robert Jewell, appears after the jump.