The bad news continues to roll in. Becker & Poliakoff, which just announced across-the-board pay cuts for its lawyers, isn't the only Florida firm that's hurting.

From a report by Julie Kay, for the upcoming issue of the National Law Journal:

In another sign of the hard times facing the legal industry, particularly in real-estate heavy South Florida, two local law firms -- Holland & Knight and Shutts & Bowen -- have laid off non-lawyer staffers.

On a day that could be dubbed Black Friday in South Florida legal circles, Tampa-based Holland & Knight, one of Florida's largest and most venerable firms with 1,150 lawyers, laid off 70 staffers Friday, including legal secretaries, IT and accounting staff. No lawyers were laid off.

The layoffs of about four employees in each of Holland's 17 offices represented 5% of Holland's non-lawyer workforce.

Shutts & Bowen, a 200-lawyer, Miami-based firm, Friday laid off nine people, all entry level file clerks or paralegal clerks. No lawyers or legal secretaries were affected.

Holland & Knight spokeswoman Susan Bass told the Daily Business Review that the firm "had some redundancies and inefficiencies." Seventy staffers is a whole lot of redundancies.

Read more -- about prior layoffs at H&K, and the situation over at Greenberg Traurig -- below the fold.

Earlier this month, there was some discussion in the comments about law firms possibly cutting associate salaries to cope with the economic downturn. The scenario sounded far-fetched -- but maybe it's not as far-fetched as some might have hoped.

Look, we aren't saying that the sky is falling. There's a world of difference between a law firm based in Fort Lauderdale, with 128 lawyers and extensive exposure to Florida real estate, and the giants of Biglaw, with hundreds of millions (or even billions) in revenue, profits per partner well into the seven figures, and diversified practices.

But still, nobody would call this good news. From the Daily Business Review:

Attorneys at Becker & Poliakoff are being hit with a 12 percent pay cut for the foreseeable future to help the real estate-dominated firm deal with a drop in profitability and delays in collections.

Becker & Poliakoff is the first major South Florida firm to turn to its lawyers to make cuts to help it deal with the economic slowdown and real estate downturn. Other firms have trimmed staff jobs, including paralegals and secretaries, and cut back on other expenses to help cope with the economic landscape.

Alan Becker, the firm's managing shareholder, informed attorneys and support staff about the pay deferment plan via podcast Wednesday. The cut took effect Thursday and affects only lawyers. No layoffs are expected.

So that's the silver lining to the proverbial cloud. You've suffered a 12 percent haircut on your salary, but at least your job is secure.

We don't know what the Becker & Poliakoff pay scale is, but we're guessing it's well below the $160K scale. Back in 2003, it looks like their starting salaries were in the $63K-$70K range.

But just out of curiosity, what would Biglaw salaries look like if they were trimmed in this manner? If a 12 percent reduction were applied to the first three steps of the standard New York pay scale, salaries would go from 160-170-185 to 141-150-163.

More discussion, after the jump.

Most law firm name changes are pretty silly. The general approach: lop off all names after the first two. If you like, squish the surviving names together into one word, to make yourselves seem contemporary and cool. E.g., "WilmerHale." (A law firm marketing firm would charge you five figures for that advice.)

Okay, so how do you get anyone to care about your name change? You make a YouTube video, that's how! Here's a press release from Hanson Bridgett LLP, a northern California firm with about 130 lawyers:

The firm formally known as Hanson, Bridgett, Marcus, Vlahos, & Rudy LLP has a new tag line—"Inspired"—to go with its new logo and a new abridged name, Hanson Bridgett LLP. Breaking through the monotony of the legal landscape, the firm is employing a light-hearted video to help disseminate the re-branding roll-out by "word of mouse."

Seriously. As the press release notes, "[t]he video stars Hanson Bridgett Managing Partner Andrew Giacomini, who is seen banging a bass drum while walking down Market Street in Lederhosen and knee-highs."

The video, cutely entitled "The Law Accordion to Hanson Bridget," is kinda weird, and a bit too long; you really need just the first and last 30 seconds. But it's an interesting experiment in law firm marketing. Check it out:

Oh, and the firm has its own blog: the Infrastructure Law Blog. Infrastructure law sounds even more boring than ERISA may not be the sexiest practice area ever. But the firm deserves props for participating in, rather than fighting, the online revolution.

P.S. Yes, we've seen the Pillsbury Winthrop video. We'll be writing about it in a separate post.

The Law Accordion To Hanson Bridgett [YouTube]
Hanson Bridgett Launches New Look, Video to Match [press release]
Infrastructure Law Blog
Hanson Bridgett LLP [official website]

An interesting article in today's New York Times -- by Lynnley Browning, author of the earlier Biglaw perks piece -- focuses on the subprime mortgage mess and current investigations into the adequacy of disclosures to investors.

Investigators are focused on Wall Street, but lawyers involved in the securitization process may also face scrutiny. Government investigation is the last thing these struggling law firms need, as they try to retool in the face of a grim outlook for structured finance and real estate work.

The article focuses on McKee Nelson:

McKee Nelson burst onto the scene in 1999 and quickly grabbed lucrative Wall Street work from long-established rivals. William F. Nelson, one of its co-founders, said the firm, which is known for its sophisticated tax work, did not employ any special legal maneuvers to outflank its competitors. “There’s no secret, magic elixir that we sprinkled,” Mr. Nelson said.

In any case, the mortgage turmoil is now hitting the highly regarded McKee Nelson hard. The firm recently pared its structured finance department to 80 lawyers from about 115 through buyouts, sabbaticals and transfers to other departments. More cuts are unlikely, a spokeswoman said.

So that's good news. And the firm is trying to take lemons and make the proverbial lemonade:

[A]fter profiting from the mortgage boom, McKee Nelson is now positioning itself to profit from the bust by riding the coming wave of lawsuits. In January, the firm flew its partners and their spouses to Charleston, S.C., aboard four Delta commuter jets, to map out its strategy.

“We’re heavily committed to doing more litigation,” Mr. Nelson said. The firm hopes to represent investment banks, hedge funds and other financial companies, as well as their executives, in a variety of litigation, he said.

And maybe law firms, too, as lawsuits and investigations proliferate? See, e.g., Cadwalader, facing a $70 million lawsuit arising out of a securitization deal gone bad.

Small Law Firm’s Big Role in Bundling Mortgages [New York Times]

Our recent open thread about boutique law firms prompted another request for more beyond-Biglaw discussion:

Not really a tip, but how 'bout a thread on midsize firms -- not quite big law, which has been going on for a while, and not quite boutique, which you just recently posted. I'm talking 75-200 attorney type firms that still pay $125K-$150K base in New York (don't know much about other regions).

Our tipster provided a few examples of the firms in question, with starting salaries (note -- we have not independently verified these numbers):

pryor cashman - 140k
anderson kill - 140k
herrick feinstein - 150k
otterbourg - 150k
olshan grundman - 150k
fox rothschild (philly-based) - 125k

If you have information to share on year-end bonuses (or compensation more generally) at midsize / regional law firms, please share in the comments. It would be optimal if you could identify the firm by name; but if you can't, please provide as much information as possible. Thanks.

Earlier: Associate Bonus Watch: Beyond Biglaw

We resume our series of open threads about the lateral hiring process. After those bonus checks clear, associates clear out their desks. So 'tis the season to be talking about lateral moves.

Our prior posts addressed the why, when, and how of lateral moves. Now we get to what you really want to discuss: How much?

One tipster writes:

As someone thinking about feeling out the lateral market, I'd love to know: What sort of signing bonuses are firms giving out these days? What's the best way to negotiate one (other than using a headhunter)?

And from a different correspondent, who also has lateral money on the mind:

What firms offer signing bonuses for laterals, if any? Do they pro-rate bonuses for the following year, or do you basically give up a bonus cycle when you move from firm to firm?

Please discuss these topics in the comments. Information based on personal experience, as opposed to speculation and conjecture, is especially welcome. Thanks.

Earlier: Lateral Move Open Thread: When and Why?
Lateral Move Open Thread: This Is How You Do It

We continue our series of open threads on the lateral hiring process. Yesterday's post, which addressed the "why" and "when" of making a lateral move, generated almost 200 comments.

Here are the questions for today's open thread, concerning the "how" of the lateral process:

1. What are the benefits of headhunters / recruiters versus personal referrals versus blind emails / cover letters?

2. What is the lateral interview process like (as opposed to law school interviews)?

If you have information or opinions to contribute on these subjects, please share them in the comments. Thanks.

Earlier: Lateral Move Open Thread: When and Why?

Over the past few months, we've received several requests for a series of open threads on lateral moves -- i.e., how to move from one law firm to another (as opposed to moves from Biglaw to government, academia, or public interest).

We've decided to launch a series of open threads devoted to this subject, similar to our Fall Recruiting Open Threads, in which people can trade information and gossip about the lateral move process. From a tipster:

Please please please do a thread or series of threads on how to make a lateral move. With bonuses being paid, or coming soon, it seems like it might be lateral season, and there are a lot of people thinking of jumping ship. The market is shaky, which makes the decision more complicated than in the past.

There was a (very) little bit of useful information in the Headhunter from Hell thread, but it mostly got buried by people trashing the person who emailed you the story. You could break it down into a series of posts (like with Biglaw Perk Watch).

We like the idea of dragging things out over a series of posts (especially since we seem to be in a slow news period right now). Our correspondent helpfully laid out a series of possible topics related to lateral movement. We'll devote this thread to two of them, saving the rest for posterity:

1. When is the right time to move?

2. What are good reasons to move -- i.e., how do you avoid the "same s***, different office" problem?

If you have thoughts on these subjects, please share them in the comments. Thanks.

The American Lawyer just announced the results of its 2007 summer associate survey. Interestingly enough, the highest-scoring firms weren't necessarily the biggest firms with the most lavish programs. From Paul Jaskunas's article:

Small is beautiful, at least in the eyes of 2007's summer associates. While respondents to our Summer Associates Survey liked big firms, they liked life at small to midsize firms even better. Students craved juicy assignments, friendly offices, and lots of attention, and the firms that best satisfied these needs tended to be medium-sized shops with relatively small summer programs.

Of the top 20 firms, only four had summer programs with more than 100 clerks, while nine hired 30 or fewer summer associates. Students most commonly cited firm reputation as a factor influencing their clerkship decision, but that doesn't mean that the behemoths of the legal world always have the upper hand in winning over law students.

"They go out of their way to make you feel like a part of the family from day one," wrote an enthused summer at first-ranked Nutter McClennen & Fish, which had only 11 clerks.... One of the 17 summer associates at second-ranked Fox Rothschild called it "a big firm where you can live a small-firm lifestyle."

And a full-length firm photo, too!

Based on the proliferation of reader comments on today's Morning Docket, where we linked to the survey in passing, it's clear that many of you are dying to discuss the rankings. So here's an open thread for that purpose. Have at it!

Size Does Matter [American Lawyer Student Edition]
National Rankings: Summer Associate Survey 2007 [American Lawyer Student Edition]
Results By City: Summer Associate Survey 2007 [American Lawyer Student Edition]

Here's an interesting (and potentially lucrative) Biglaw benefit, which was recently brought to our attention:

How about a Biglaw perk watch thread on associate client fees? For example, at Kramer Levin, if an associate brings a new client to the firm, he or she gets 7 percent of all fees collected from that client.

The rule applies even if the associate isn't involved in the matter. So, for example, a litigator who brings in a corporate client would still get the percentage.

We have heard of such arrangements, although we think they tend to be more common among midsize and smaller firms, as opposed to the biggest of Biglaw shops. But even if you don't share in the fees, it obviously helps your partnership chances if you have the power to bring in a major client (e.g., because your mom is the CEO or GC of a Fortune 500 company).

If you have thoughts or information to share, please do so in the comments. Thanks.

The Atlanta firm Arnall Golden Gregory is refusing to match the recent round of raises to $145,000 for first year associates by Alson & Bird and several other competitor firms. They put a lot of thought into the decision:

AGG matched the February increase on March 1. Ever since, Kitchens said, he and his partners have been pondering their response to the inevitable next round of raises. "Before now, we didn't feel we needed to study the matter as much as we've studied this," he said.

[Fulton County Daily Report via Law.com]

Ultimately they decided that the best way to deal with the infamous Atlanta compression was to let first and second-years take the hit:

AGG's new salary plan tries to reward more experienced and productive associates, he said. "What we tried to do was to have a correlation between the economic value of an associate to the firm and the base compensation."

Kitchens declined to say how much his firm will raise pay for midlevel and senior associates, but said the base salaries are comparable to those set by Alston & Bird in August, with roughly $10,000 increases between classes.

Clients were concerned that additional salary increases for newer associates would increase their legal bills, said Kitchens. "We don't want to be in a position where we can't use first- and second-year associates. We don't want clients to think they're not getting value."

"We have to write off a portion of first- and second-year time because they're learning," Kitchens said. "We don't make a profit. It's a sunk investment, so adding the additional sunk investment of $15,000 didn't make sense."

"We're trying not to have our midyear and higher associates feel they're underpaid in the marketplace based on their situation and their peer group at other firms. Obviously, with first- and second-years there will be a differential."

Easy for us to say, since we're not in biglaw and certainly not one of those first-years taking the hit, but this actually seems like a good explanation for a reasonable course of action to us. What you do guys think?

Arnall Golden Gregory Holds the Line on Associate Pay [Fulton County Daily Report via Law.com]

Ah, the perils of office romance. This was passed along to us by a tipster, who wrote: "This new lawsuit involving one of Connecticut's largest and oldest firms caught my eye this morning."

Stephanie Ancillai; Thomas Diascro v. Michael Lamoureux

10/29/2007 HHD-CV07-5014300-S

Intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff Ancillai broke off relationship with defendant, who in turn sent emails to plaintiff and co-plaintiff's superiors at Shipman and Goodwin exposing their romantic relationship. As a result of the emails, both plaintiff and co-plaintiff lost their jobs in the marketing department of the law firm.

Sounds interesting. If you get your hands on the Complaint, please feel free to send it our way.

Is there such a thing as a "lifestyle" law firm? We've previously expressed skepticism: "[I]n every law school class, some people believe in kinder, gentler law firms. And lavender unicorns."

Interestingly enough, we've been hearing that this recruiting season, New York's top Biglaw shops aren't placing much emphasis on "lifestyle." While firms continue to talk about "collegiality" and say things like "there are no screamers here," recruits report being told, even at the kinder / gentler firms, "You WILL work hard here." Perhaps certain firms don't want to get criticized for pulling the old bait-and-switch: brag about the "lifestyle" to 2Ls, show them a great time as summer associates, and then sling them over a barrel and have your way with them, once they show up full time.

But that's at the largest law firms, in major markets like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. Could smaller firms, especially in other markets, offer more options?

More discussion, built around the case study of a 10-lawyer boutique in Atlanta, after the jump.

As noted recently in The American Lawyer, the credit market crisis isn't good news for firms with big securitization / structured finance practices. We previously discussed the topic here.

One firm mentioned in Ben Hallman and Aruna Viswanatha's AmLaw article was McKee Nelson. Hallman and Viswanatha wrote: "[S]maller niche firms are more vulnerable [to credit market problems]. About half of McKee Nelson's 200 lawyers, and almost forty percent of Thacher Proffitt & Wood's 350 attorneys, work in structured finance."

Today we received this tip about McKee Nelson:

Name partners Bill McKee and Will Nelson had a meeting with all associates and counsel on Monday afternoon. While the mantra "we are not going to have any layoffs" was repeated over and over, lawyers were encouraged to take sabbaticals, consider changing practice groups to tax or litigation, or "self-identify" to take a "change of venue" to another firm or field. They announced that each associate and counsel would meet individually with hiring partners in New York and DC.

At one such meeting, held yesterday, a first-year was told that, while there was no timeline required, the firm would help the associate find another job and was given the name and web address of a recommended recruiter to work with.

Sounds like a layoff to me! Oddly, despite encouraging these "changes of venue" the firm still intends to follow industry standard for bonuses for this year (whatever that means).

We reached out to the firm for comment. Founding partner William Nelson responded promptly to our inquiry:

The difference between a layoff and what we are doing is that no one is losing their job. As a result of the fundamental disruption in the credit markets, we do not have enough work to keep all of our structured finance lawyers fully busy. We want to keep these lawyers productively engaged while the market sorts itself out.

To do that, we have given people options that include moving into other areas of our practice where we have significant need for additional lawyers, possible secondment to clients, or taking sabbaticals (which many associates have requested in the past). In addition, we asked any lawyers who already are planning a near-term career change or change of venue (meaning moving to a different firm or in-house) to please let us know and we would help them make that move.

We thank Mr. Nelson for his response. While the credit slowdown and its consequences for law firms are certainly regrettable, McKee Nelson is taking reasonable and sensible steps to address a difficult situation. Nobody is being forced to leave the firm; people are just being encouraged to consider all their options.

A special request: please go easy on McKee Nelson in the comments. The firm should be commended for (1) its openness and transparency with respect to its current situation, and (2) responding to us so promptly and in such detail. We would like firms to feel "incentivized" to come forward with such information and to cooperate with ATL's inquiries. Thanks.

P.S. Please note that our filing of this post under the Layoffs category should not be construed as a statement that layoffs are taking place. We use this tag rather liberally, applying it to any post that arguably falls within the penumbra of layoff talk (which may or may not be founded).

Earlier: More Woe Ahead for Private Equity and Mortgage-Backed Securities Lawyers?

That's the question posed in this very interesting article, by Leigh Jones for the National Law Journal. It begins:

In recent weeks, some midsize firms have implemented drastic reductions to their billable-hour requirements for first-year associates in order to enhance training and to appease clients who are increasingly resistant to paying for new lawyers' starts and stumbles.

Such a strategy is something other law firms say they are contemplating and could represent the advent of a change in the industry that many contend is long overdue.

The piece is an excellent round-up of the new approaches being employed by midsize firms, as they try to deliver cost-effective legal representation while remaining attractive places to work for associates. The strategies include reducing billable hour requirements for first years to 1600 hours, to allow for more training; abandoning billable minimums for first-years altogether, previously discussed here; and greater use of two-track systems, in which associates can choose to work fewer hours for somewhat less money.

And there's a shout-out to ATL (which we're vain enough to speculate was linkbait for us -- if so, it worked):

As law firms have become bigger, so have associate salaries. First-year compensation jumped to $160,000 from $145,000 in January at many of the largest law firms, and law firm leaders are watching to see if speculation about pending increases to $190,000 reported on the blog Above the Law prove true.

NY to 190? Stay tuned. You can check out the full article over here.

P.S. Jones's NLJ piece does remind us a bit of this recent post, by Amir Efrati, from the WSJ Law Blog. But then again, Efrati's widely read Wall Street Journal story reminded us of Leigh Jones's earlier National Law Journal article.

Maybe every story about law-firm associate life has already been written before. Maybe Efrati and Jones should just keep rewriting each other's articles -- and then have them rewritten again by the Des Moines Register, just for good measure.

Midsize Law Firms Go for Big Changes [National Law Journal]
Tinkering with Billable-Hour Requirements [WSJ Law Blog]