Seyfarth Shaw is set to become the latest firm to flip its incoming associates the Bird. A very angry tipster reports:

[Seyfarth] just deferred all incoming associates to October 2010 with only $2000/month as a stipend beginning on our former start date of January 19, 2010! It’s a joke … we know for a fact that they were busy and could have afforded us. It is a firm managed by horrible, greedy, selfish individuals … This is amusing, in light of the fact that the firm turned a profit last year …

We would like to warn anyone considering accepting an offer from the firm to STAY AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is particularly disconcerting for those of us who turned down offers from Biglaw in favor of a firm that apparently “cared soooo much” about us. Go Vault or go home.

Whoa, tell us what you really think. You have to wonder if these deferred incoming associates will come up with any fun banners about their would-be employer.

As angry as the deferred incoming associates appear to be, it is not at all clear that Seyfarth could have afforded to bring on a new class of people at this time. In addition to telling the incoming associates to wait for almost another year, today the firm announced that it was cutting first year associate salaries.

Details and a statement from Seyfarth, after the jump.

Last week, we asked you if deferral stipends for incoming associates are too small. The reaction was mixed. Some people felt that incoming associates should be thankful for every penny they get. Others noted that it was extremely difficult to make loan repayments off of the deferral stipend.

But many people felt that deferred associates should just go out and get a job, any job.

I had assumed that most deferred associates were already actively engaged in the process of looking for work. Not just to defray the costs of their deferment, but for a long term position in case their firm never actually allows them to start working. But then this question came into the ATL inbox:

I am emailing because I think it would be useful to deferred associates to dialogue on how we should react to the situation we are in. I have an offer at a law firm that had initially deferred incoming associates until January 2010. Now incoming associates are being deferred until later in 2010. Are incoming associates (to all firms) being foolhardy for continuing to rely on these offers? What if we are deferred again, or worse, what if our offers are rescinded? Will we look back and question why we did not look for another job sooner? Will potential other employers think we were naive for relying on the offers for so long, making our chances of finding another job less likely? Is it enough that we received job offers from prestigious, competitive firms, but in the end it did not work out; will that get us another job? These are all questions we have to ask ourselves, but it is hard to come to any answers without the benefit of knowing the future…obviously. I think it would be useful to get the industry perspective, because in the end, it the industry perspective that will dictate how our decision to wait around or not wait around is viewed.

Let’s discuss and take a reader poll after the jump.

We receive a lot of interesting emails here at Above the Law. Once law firms started deferring their deferred incoming associates for a second time, we started getting emails like the one below. Since I don’t really know how to respond to the people who have been asking this type of question, I figured I’d throw it out to you guys for your expert advice:

Can you do a story about the size of deferral stipends? Particularly, breaking down the math of expenses showing that some firm’s stipends are too small. For instance, [Redacted] is paying deferred first years only $3300 per month before taxes. After taxes this only comes out to like $2600 per month. Most law students went to expensive schools with $150,000 debt (not to mention undergrad debt), and have $1,000 per month loan payments starting this month even if you select the maximum 30 year repayment plan. Under the 10 year payment plan, loan payments are $1500 per month. When you consider that rent in New York, DC, Chicago, LA, and San Francisco is at least $1,200 (being very very conservative), that leaves no money to pay for things like food or utilities. They expect us to basically spend more than we make for 3, 6, 9, 12+ months? This is practically a layoff. I don’t have the finances or rich parents to go 6+ months with no money. Firms like [Redacted] need to pay at least the market $5,000 per month so that the deferred first years have enough to live on. Especially when our original offer letter promised us “market compensation.”

Is there anything useful we can tell this person (and the other incoming associates in the same position)? Let’s try after the jump.

Katten Muchin is using every tool in the box when it comes to figuring out what to do with its incoming associates. If there is a plan for dealing with soon-to-be first years that has been discussed on Above the Law, Katten is using it.

A tipster reports that Katten has broken up its first year class into three groups:

Katten Muchin Rosenman rescinded several offers to 2008 summer associates today. From what I’ve heard about 1/3 were rescinded, 1/3 were re-deferred to October, and 1/3 will start in February as scheduled.

Essentially, Katten just turned itself into Alec Baldwin in Glengarry Glen Ross: “As you all know, first prize is a Cadillac Eldorado. Anybody want to see second prize? Second prize is a set of steak knives. Third prize is you’re fired.”

Let’s talk some more about the third prize after the jump.

So far, firms that have deferred their 2009 summer associates to 2011 have been noncommittal about whether they will be giving a deferral stipend. Many class of 2009 graduates received money from firms for the year long wait. It’s not clear that class of 2010 graduates will be as lucky.

With the market still up in the air, Shearman & Sterling is giving its incoming class of 2010 the same offer it gave to its incoming class of 2009. A tipster reports:

Shearman NY has announced deferral stipends of $65k.

After the jump, we compare Shearman to itself.

The signals seem mixed in terms of whether the legal profession is on the road to recovery. On the one hand, the pace of layoffs is certainly slowing. On the other hand, firms are taking other steps to keep headcount (and expenses) down. They are not yet in a mode where they need more hands on deck to handle all the work.

One of the popular approaches is deferral extension, i.e., pushing start dates for incoming associates back yet again. A number of firms have gone down this path. To view our prior coverage, click here and scroll down.

The latest firm to take this approach: Winston & Strawn. The firm’s incoming associates were previously scheduled to arrive on January 19, 2010. Now, according to a memo issued yesterday by hiring partner Joseph Torres, class of 2009 associates will be starting on one of three dates: February 1, 2010; June 1, 2010; or October 4, 2010.

Deferral extension details, including the full memo, plus other information about Winston — after the jump.

The big news out of Sidley Austin today involves Brian Schroeder, a 2009 Harvard Law School graduate who recently turned himself in for setting fire to a chapel housing the remains of 9/11 victims. Earlier today, the firm told ATL it was rescinding Schroeder’s job offer.

But there are other developments at Sidley too. Regarding start dates for class of 2010 graduates, a source reports:

Sidley Austin sent out letters regarding their deferral program. The details are a January 2012 start date, not optional. Health insurance coverage starting June 1, 2010 (thank goodness), and a stipend of $5000 / month starting January 2011. As usual, no stipend if we work for another law firm, and they reserve the right to call us back early if hell freezes over work picks up.

Sidley declined to comment on its deferral program.

On the subject of being summoned to work before 2011, we’d tell the tipster: hey, it might happen. As you may recall, some Sidley D.C. incoming associates were contacted over the summer and asked to start early.

A year and a half is a long time to be deferred. Hopefully members of the class of 2010 won’t get into as much trouble as Brian Schroeder during their time off.

CORRECTION: As noted in the comments, and confirmed by emails sent to us directly, Sidley is splitting up the class of 2010. Some are starting in January 2012 and some in January 2011 (which is apparently the earliest start date).

Speaking of Brian Schroeder, we wanted to draw your attention to one reader comment that struck us as funny, as well as yet yet another testimonial about him (to add to the prior ones).

Check them out after the jump.

Kaye Scholer has announced that its incoming first year associate will still be starting in January. All of them. But there is a catch. Kaye Scholer will split the class into two groups of full time associates. One group will work for the firm’s paying clients and get paid the normal first year starting salary. The other group — roughly half of the class — will work exclusively with the firm’s public interest group and will make $60,000.

Above the Law spoke with Kaye Scholer managing partner Barry Wilner about the program. He emphasized that the firm wanted to invite everybody in its first year class to start at the firm because the class is “excellent.” But he acknowledged that the demand for legal services isn’t what it used to be. Instead of sending half of its class back out on the street to look for public interest work, Wilner wanted to put them to work under the umbrella of Kaye Scholer’s pro bono efforts:

It’s incredibly difficult to get public interest work in this environment. … It’s a good thing from the standpoint that the firm is providing excellent public interest training and mentoring.

Wilner also told us that the public interest associates would still have access to all of the training other first year associates have, and they would be eligible for full firm benefits.

Associates weren’t asked to volunteer to be in the public interest group. Wilner said that the firm had to make difficult decisions about how to split the class. Practice group preference was one factor. But Wilner also said that because the incoming class was strong across the board, some amount of arbitrariness also played a role.

After the jump, incoming associates in the public interest group weigh in.

Earlier this month, we reported on layoffs at Foley & Lardner. Foley later confirmed the news.

Maybe Foley is just clearing out room so it can bring on its class of incoming associates? Right. Maybe if I had wheels I’d be a wagon? Foley has already deferred its incoming associates until February 2010. Now it is deferring associates again. Tipsters report:

I know every office has been talked to about the *possibility* of changing start dates. … [In Chicago] it’s complicated:

* all incoming IP associates are deferred until September, 2010, with a $5K/month stipend (no health care) beginning February 1;
* half the litigation associates will start in February as planned; the other half will actually start *earlier*, this December;
* the incoming transactional associates haven’t been told anything yet. My guess is they’ll be summarily shot.

The firm has not responded to our multiple requests for comment.

Incoming associates are asking firms to let them know when they will be starting. But does it really matter? Are there opportunities that incoming associates are really passing up this fall because they plan on starting this after the first of the year? Let us know in the comments.

Earlier: Nationwide Layoff Watch: Foley & Lardner Lays Off 39

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey already deferred its incoming class of 2009 to January 2010. Yesterday, the firm informed half of those incoming associates that they were getting the Bird — i.e., the firm indefinitely deferred half of its incoming class.

But before the firm decides what it will do with half of its incoming associates, Squire Sanders needs to make a decision about whether to keep its current associates. SSD’s chairman, James J. Maiwurm, told associates to expect layoffs over the next 45 days.

Above the Law has received the official Squire Sanders statement. Take a look after the jump.

As regular Above the Law readers know, there are a few firms that are offering “go away” money to their incoming associates. The deal, like ones at Stroock and Pillsbury, is that the firm will give incoming associates a large payment instead of a job, and the incoming associate will quietly go peruse other employment options.

We haven’t really gotten a sense of how many would-be associates would actually consider this offer — until now. Fenwick & West offered its incoming associates $60,000 to stay away. According to our sources, around 40 percent of Fenwick’s 2009 class took the money.

But there is a catch; there’s always a catch.

Details after the jump.

There’s an internal debate among your Above the Law editors about whether these green shoots we keep hearing about are real. I believe. Of course, I also believe that if I don’t clap very, very hard, Tinkerbell will die.

And I believe that there are signs that the legal economy is picking up as well. Check out the statement that incoming associates of Katten Muchin Rosenman received on Friday:

In March of this year, we made the difficult decision to defer start dates for our 2009 class of first-year associates until February 1, 2010, the beginning of our fiscal year. Since then, we are fortunate to have experienced an increase in demand for our legal services in a number of core practice areas that has enabled us to offer six of our deferred first-year associates the opportunity to begin their work at Katten this month, rather than waiting until February. These associates will practice in the areas of litigation and intellectual property and are spread across all firm offices.

Yay! With news like this, who can even notice the horrifying apocalyptic stupefying new unemployment numbers?

Earlier: Sidley D.C. Wants Some Incoming Associates to Start … Early!

Wildman Harrold has decided to give a majority of its incoming associates the Fox. Am Law Daily reports that the firm has rescinded offers to 10 of its 14 associates.

Unlike Arent Fox, Wildman will not be giving its would-be incoming associates any stipend.

On the Wildman Harrold career page, they really like numbers. They evidently haven’t had a chance to update their summer associate page; they’re probably busy with fall recruiting. So I figured I’d give them a hand.

Wildman, by the numbers:

* 10 - Number of offers rescinded to class of 2009 associates (out of 14).
* 4 - Number of offers extended to 2009 summer associates (out of 17).
* 10 - Number of lawyers laid off in January 2009.
* 10 - Number of lawyers laid off in April 2009.

HTH.

Wildman is a Chicago based firm. Yesterday, we told you that the Illinois bar results were out. You don’t think that Wildman rescinded offers right after the bar results came out do you? More details after the jump.

The closer we get to the time when incoming associates in the class of 2009 are supposed to start, the more deferral extensions we are likely to see. Over the weekend, news broke that Chadbourne & Parke had decided to push back half of its incoming class “indefinitely.”

We don’t have any information about whether the incoming associates on extended deferral will be offered any type of extended stipend.

Update: A spokesperson from Chadbourne responded to Above the Law’s inquires about the continuing stipend:

These deferred associates have already received $13,000 and will receive an additional $60,000 stipend beginning in February 2010.

The news shouldn’t be entirely surprising for incoming associates at Chadbourne. The firm laid people off in March, and cut salaries in April.

And remember, last October, Chadbourne instituted a hiring freeze. At the time, we had a few questions for Chadbourne:

In light of this hiring freeze, what does that mean for students who interviewed with Chadbourne? Are they de-facto canceling their 2009 summer program? If so, it seems like an awful waste of resources to send recruiters around the country for jobs that are no longer available….

And, of course, we have no idea how this will affect 2008 summers associates. We assume that any of them who received and accepted offers for full time employment next fall still have those offers.

Note to self: never assume.

There seem to be two options that firms are following. After the jump, let’s look at the options and take a reader poll.

We have done a lot of reporting on firms that have deferred their incoming class, and then extended the deferral period. At some firms, it has been an indefinite deferral extension.

So give Arent Fox a little bit of credit. Instead of continuing to string the class of 2009 along, the firm has cried “no más” and just revoked offers to several of its incoming associates.

Arent Fox has confirmed to Above the Law that it has decided to revoke offers to some 2009 graduates who have not yet started at the firm. The firm is giving them $20,000 for the inconvenience of believing they had already successfully secured post-graduate employment.

Maybe Arent Fox read Morning Docket today. We linked to a story in the Atlantic that asked why firms were doing deferrals instead of revoking offers outright.

There has been much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments by would-be Arent Fox first years on Facebook this morning. But we think this comment on a status update captures the general feeling:

I just sent them an envelope with powder in it. Don’t worry, I wore a ski mask when I walked to the mailbox so they can’t trace me.

Please, Arent Fox friends, do not blow your $20K on terrorist activities. Instead stock up on Ramen and a buy a good sleeping bag. It’s going to be a long winter.

UPDATE: We assume the Facebook commenter was joking. Clearly. The wearing a ski mask to the mailbox line is clear parody.

FURTHER UPDATE: Arent Fox Chairman Marc Fleischaker shared some numbers with the BLT:

In all, Fleischaker said, about 12 incoming associates were affected. Washington, which has the firm’s largest office, had “about eight,” New York had “between two and three,” and Los Angeles had one, Fleischaker said. The news was first reported on Above the Law.

Read Arent Fox’s full statement after the jump.

The contest of horror between the class of 2009 and the class of 2010 rages on. Based on Friday’s no offer thread, you’d think that the class of 2010 was surging ahead. We know 3L recruiting is depressed this year, so if you got no offered from your summer firm, your chances of snagging a job upon graduation seem greatly reduced.

But there are still scads of people from the class of 2009 that are desperately hoping that they will be able to start at some point. We have been covering the new spate of deferral extensions. Usually, the extensions try to comfort incoming associates that they will have a job with their firms at some point.

But lately, firms are being more forward with the class of 2009. Last week, Baker & McKenzie warned that if it was not able to find spots for incoming associates by June 2010, “the relationship will end.”

Today, Alston & Bird incoming associates received some bad news. A tipster reports:

Alston Bird just indefinitely deferred its incoming 2009 class … They were supposed to start January 2010. There is now no start date.

Alston & Bird didn’t immediately respond to our request for comment.

So, if 3L recruiting is bad this year, how is it going for 4Ls 2009 graduates who haven’t had a day of work so far? Is there anything their former law schools can do to help them out?

We’ll probably see more deferral extensions as the January 2010 start date looms large at firms that do not have enough work to go around.

Earlier: Baker & McKenzie: For Some, Deferral Extensions Could Lead to Offer Revocation

Way back in June, Above the Law heard rumblings about issues regarding the incoming first-year class at Baker & McKenzie. The class had already been deferred until January 2010, but in June some tipsters reported that Baker was “rescinding” offers. Others claimed that the firm was simply “strongly encouraging” incoming associates to consider alternatives.

Still, some associates poised to start at Baker hadn’t heard anything at all. At the time, we brought these reports to the attention of Baker & McKenzie management. In June, the firm said:

As we’ve already communicated, we have had to make some difficult decisions in a difficult economy. But we haven’t taken the actions you suggest, and our start dates remain January (and, in some cases, earlier).

But that was back in the heady days of early summer. Now, as autumn approaches, Baker seems to be preparing its incoming class for economic reality. This morning, tipsters reported that deferral extensions — or worse — were coming down on at least some members of Baker’s would-be incoming class:

Last night at 10:30, we received an email from the [redacted] simpleton, asking to set up a phone call for this morning. Phone call from hiring partner was as follows:

Economy blah blah blah limited amount of work blah blah blah majority of you will not be starting in January. Starting in January, 5k stipend plus benefits for up to six months. at ANY time during six months, MAY get a call from b&m, have 1-2 weeks to report to work, but absent a major bump in work, not likely to happen. If after June, no call from b&m, “the relationship will end.”

Twelve of 18 incoming associates got this lovely treatment

“The relationship will end” does not sound promising. After the jump, Baker responds to these reports.

My friends, we have a trend. Bryan Cave has become the third firm we know of to offer its incoming associates money to simply go away instead of starting at the firm.

Tipsters report that the firm is offering some associates $70,000 to “walk away” instead of showing up for work. That’s the carrot. This tipster reports the stick:

[A Bryan Cave letter] stated that they are unable to guarantee a start date at this time .. The letter [also] said was that they are unsure if they will need any first year associates before 2011. Shady, shady, shady…

Stroock — the first firm to offer incoming associates go away money — offered $75,000. Pillsbury offered $60,000. So Bryan Cave is keeping up with the market for these kinds of things.

After the jump, a reader poll, and Bryan Cave’s strategy for incoming associates.

On Friday, we reported that Sidley Austin was asking some of its deferred associates to start earlier than expected. Today, Mayer Brown keeps the good news rolling. Bloomberg reports:

The firm previously deferred the start dates of its first- year associates scheduled to join this fall. Because of the expanding work, Mayer Brown has asked about half of 12 deferred associates who are scheduled to work in New York to start working after Labor Day, according to [Richard Spehr, partner in charge of Mayer Brown’s New York office].

As far as we know, the rest of Mayer Brown’s incoming class is still on track to start on January 19, 2010.

Sidley had enough work that it needed to bring new people online earlier than expected; now Mayer is in the same position. Are these the fabled “green shoots” we’ve all been waiting for?

Mayer Brown Continues to Expand New York City Office [Bloomberg]

Earlier: Sidley D.C. Wants Some Incoming Associates to Start … Early!
New Management at Mayer Brown Delays Start Dates, Changes Bonus Threshold

Yesterday, we learned that Morgan, Lewis & Bockius came up with only one offer for the 17 second-year law students who summered in the firm’s D.C. office.

At Sidley Austin’s D.C. office, the news is very different. Above the Law has learned that Sidley D.C. is calling some of its incoming associates and asking them to start early. A Sidley-bound tipster reports:

Everybody in the D.C. office who expressed an interest has received a call from the D.C. office to start early — right after the Labor Day. Yay! Yay! Yay!

Sidley offered a voluntary deferral option to its incoming associates. The firm reports that about a third of their incoming class voluntarily decided to start in November 2010. The rest of the class is slated to begin work in November 2009. But a few people in D.C. will have the opportunity to start earning money even earlier. A Sidley spokesperson released this statement to Above the Law:

[A]bout 100 associates will start with the firm on November 16, 2009. Due to the needs of certain practice groups, a handful of fall associates will join the firm before November 16, 2009.

This is good news. Cherish it, my friends.

Earlier: News For Incoming Associates at Kirkland and Sidley Austin
Nationwide No Offer Watch: Zero Offer Extended At Morgan Lewis D.C.