V10 Layoffs Forum

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
TLSModBot

Diamond
Posts: 14835
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by TLSModBot » Sat Apr 29, 2017 4:40 pm

Stop asking people to out the firm in this or any thread

Every major firm does performance-based firing, along a spectrum of canning-actual-shitburgers to totally-just-pretext-but-actually-layoffs. Stealth layoffs are impossible to scope or predict, and random anecdata isn't going to meaningfully inform what your chances are for getting fired (for cause or otherwise).

It is gross voyeurism / selfish curiosity. Stop it.

eta: Better evidence is to look at firm financial health on AmLaw and talk with alumnae of the firm. Do good legwork and you'll be rewarded.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Apr 29, 2017 9:58 pm

Tiny Rick! wrote:
barcoach wrote:Layoff's are part of life in every business.

If you want security in your law firm bring in business. Start to Build your BOOK early!
I didn't know Donald trump posted on TLS.
Image

dixiecupdrinking

Gold
Posts: 3436
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by dixiecupdrinking » Sun Apr 30, 2017 12:38 am

Capitol_Idea wrote:Stop asking people to out the firm in this or any thread

Every major firm does performance-based firing, along a spectrum of canning-actual-shitburgers to totally-just-pretext-but-actually-layoffs. Stealth layoffs are impossible to scope or predict, and random anecdata isn't going to meaningfully inform what your chances are for getting fired (for cause or otherwise).

It is gross voyeurism / selfish curiosity. Stop it.

eta: Better evidence is to look at firm financial health on AmLaw and talk with alumnae of the firm. Do good legwork and you'll be rewarded.
Yeah I mean this is obviously right.

The people bleating about outting these firms are always clearly 2Ls.or 3Ls looking to justify their choices.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Apr 30, 2017 12:42 am

My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.

Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.

Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Apr 30, 2017 12:58 am

Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.

Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.

Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.

Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Apr 30, 2017 1:01 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.

Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.

Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.

Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
Edit: Also, moving to 11th in Vault after being a V10 for the last two decades doesn't suddenly make Weil not a V10 anymore (not that it really matters one way or the other). And Weil got a lot of flack for doing some layoffs in a period after the worst of the financial crisis had ended because of the counter-cylical nature of Weil's BFR practice. It's ironic that you would accuse Weil of stealth layoffs when they got crapped on for trying to conduct layoffs in a transparent nature, unlike many firms. Oh well

User avatar
bearsfan23

Gold
Posts: 1754
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 11:19 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by bearsfan23 » Sun Apr 30, 2017 1:21 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.

Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.

Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.

Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
Weil confirmed

Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Apr 30, 2017 1:36 am

Wow guess I stepped on some Weil toes. As I said, totally anecdotal--I wasn't trying to hide that fact. Didn't mean to imply Harvey lateralled, which is why I wrote "sadly"; nevertheless, the loss of a mega-rainmaker is a loss, particularly in the bk field where there aren't a ton of repeat customers and reputation is king. My point with the V10 comment was actually that OP couldn't have meant them since they aren't technically V10; again, that having been said, I think they moved down from like 5-6 when I was in LS to 11 now, which seems about right to me. Ordinarily vault is a crappy indicator but for NY corporate (which is my universe) it's actually pretty accurate.

Again, totally anecdotal--if I'm way off, all the better. I wish only the best for all of my fellow biglaw monkeys. Hell, they must be doing something right if their associates are white knighting this hard.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1986
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Npret » Sun Apr 30, 2017 7:06 am

Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.

Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.

Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
You are trying to "out" the firm with no evidence and ignoring the multiple people wh have said that all firms will do this so be prepared that it can happen.

How does making shit up based on your "gut" add anything?

Are you so desperate to hang onto your delusions about biglaw and some idea that V10 is a magic number?

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


User avatar
Rahviveh

Gold
Posts: 2333
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Rahviveh » Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:01 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.

Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.

Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.

Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
Edit: Also, moving to 11th in Vault after being a V10 for the last two decades doesn't suddenly make Weil not a V10 anymore (not that it really matters one way or the other). And Weil got a lot of flack for doing some layoffs in a period after the worst of the financial crisis had ended because of the counter-cylical nature of Weil's BFR practice. It's ironic that you would accuse Weil of stealth layoffs when they got crapped on for trying to conduct layoffs in a transparent nature, unlike many firms. Oh well
how mentally ill do you have to be to be this defensive about a law firm you work for. "...unlike many firms.." you sounds like someone from recruiting. i hope you are actually. these people dont give a shit about you.

User avatar
LaLiLuLeLo

Silver
Posts: 949
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:54 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by LaLiLuLeLo » Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:56 am

Rahviveh wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.

Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.

Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.

Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
Edit: Also, moving to 11th in Vault after being a V10 for the last two decades doesn't suddenly make Weil not a V10 anymore (not that it really matters one way or the other). And Weil got a lot of flack for doing some layoffs in a period after the worst of the financial crisis had ended because of the counter-cylical nature of Weil's BFR practice. It's ironic that you would accuse Weil of stealth layoffs when they got crapped on for trying to conduct layoffs in a transparent nature, unlike many firms. Oh well
how mentally ill do you have to be to be this defensive about a law firm you work for. "...unlike many firms.." you sounds like someone from recruiting. i hope you are actually. these people dont give a shit about you.
I just figured it was Barry Wolf's account.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Apr 30, 2017 1:06 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Wow guess I stepped on some Weil toes. As I said, totally anecdotal--I wasn't trying to hide that fact. Didn't mean to imply Harvey lateralled, which is why I wrote "sadly"; nevertheless, the loss of a mega-rainmaker is a loss, particularly in the bk field where there aren't a ton of repeat customers and reputation is king. My point with the V10 comment was actually that OP couldn't have meant them since they aren't technically V10; again, that having been said, I think they moved down from like 5-6 when I was in LS to 11 now, which seems about right to me. Ordinarily vault is a crappy indicator but for NY corporate (which is my universe) it's actually pretty accurate.

Again, totally anecdotal--if I'm way off, all the better. I wish only the best for all of my fellow biglaw monkeys. Hell, they must be doing something right if their associates are white knighting this hard.
Not the anon from above. Losing Harvey was definitely a big loss because the guy basically invented the practice of bankruptcy, but Weil's reputation is founded on the fact that they've done just about every major bankruptcy in history and not on any one person. They've had a few slow years recently where they lost some market share, but have poached a few major rainmakers from KE and Milbank and are as good as ever, if not better.

Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Apr 30, 2017 2:27 pm

Mid-level at a V10. My group/firm has pushed out a few junior/mids this year and I know of 2 other V10 (same group) that have been doing this as well. Haven't had a strong year to date and figure I will probably be given "the talk" at year end. I just hope I get the dignity of some lead time.

I don't think naming and shaming helps unless the firm is egregious in their behavior towards the associates they layoff (i.e., less than 3 months severance, 3-6 months website time, silence with regards to associates standing when asked, etc.). Silent-layoffs are a part of the deal in biglaw, if I wanted loud and consistent layoffs I would have become a banker (this line has blurred more and more in last 20 years however).

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


User avatar
rpupkin

Platinum
Posts: 5653
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by rpupkin » Sun Apr 30, 2017 2:36 pm

Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.

User avatar
Johann

Diamond
Posts: 19704
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:25 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Johann » Sun Apr 30, 2017 2:46 pm

Npret wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.

Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.

Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
You are trying to "out" the firm with no evidence and ignoring the multiple people wh have said that all firms will do this so be prepared that it can happen.

How does making shit up based on your "gut" add anything?

Are you so desperate to hang onto your delusions about biglaw and some idea that V10 is a magic number?
ALL Firms will slash and burn when they need to. HOWEVER not every firm positions themselves and LEVERAGES themselves to ass/part ratios that make the slash and burn more necessary. i.e. compare Latham to Simpson/Cleary. SImpson and CLeary with almost twice as many partners in the p:a ratio so they have the work providers to work leeches in case things dry up. I don't know this for sure, but I'd wager lots of money that Cleary and Simpson are stealthing way fewer people right now and laid off way less people/respected incoming associates budgeted in 2008 than Latham

User avatar
Johann

Diamond
Posts: 19704
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:25 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Johann » Sun Apr 30, 2017 2:47 pm

rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.
a V15 partner JUST SAID they were RIGHT SIZING on the previous page. stealth layoffs confirmed.

grades??

Silver
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:55 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by grades?? » Sun Apr 30, 2017 2:50 pm

Johann wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.
a V15 partner JUST SAID they were RIGHT SIZING on the previous page. stealth layoffs confirmed.
OP needs to out the firm

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29293
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by A. Nony Mouse » Sun Apr 30, 2017 3:16 pm

No, he doesn't.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Apr 30, 2017 4:09 pm

rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.
LOL? Pushing out low quality associates is not the same as "stealthing" juniors, possibly because the firms financials are at issue, which is what the OP was about. Firms fire people all the time, firms rarely stealth people the way the OP was talking about.

User avatar
rpupkin

Platinum
Posts: 5653
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by rpupkin » Sun Apr 30, 2017 4:22 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.
LOL? Pushing out low quality associates is not the same as "stealthing" juniors, possibly because the firms financials are at issue, which is what the OP was about. Firms fire people all the time, firms rarely stealth people the way the OP was talking about.
Part of your problem is that you're making an artificial distinction between "pushing out low quality associates" and "stealthing juniors." All big law firms have plenty of low-quality associates. When a practice group is making lots of money and has more work than it can handle, most of the associates—even the "low quality" ones—are kept around because the practice group needs bodies. When work slows down and a group becomes less profitable, a firm may decide that it needs to trim associates from that group—and the firm will, of course, start with the lower quality ones. But it's still basically a stealth layoff.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427954
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Apr 30, 2017 5:35 pm

Do firms at least stealth push out Partners that aren't bringing in business?

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


ballouttacontrol

Silver
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:00 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by ballouttacontrol » Sun Apr 30, 2017 5:38 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Do firms at least stealth push out Partners that aren't bringing in business?
definitely. and usually no even so much as "stealth" but more, GTFO. being partner seems way more ruthless than being a jr assoc

User avatar
trebekismyhero

Silver
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 5:26 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by trebekismyhero » Sun Apr 30, 2017 5:45 pm

ballouttacontrol wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Do firms at least stealth push out Partners that aren't bringing in business?
definitely. and usually no even so much as "stealth" but more, GTFO. being partner seems way more ruthless than being a jr assoc
For sure, but at least they have paid off their loans and most had a few years making 7 figures or close to it. So more cut throat, but still better than getting axed as a 2nd year associate with $100k+ of law school debt still

ballouttacontrol

Silver
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:00 pm

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by ballouttacontrol » Sun Apr 30, 2017 6:17 pm

trebekismyhero wrote:
ballouttacontrol wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Do firms at least stealth push out Partners that aren't bringing in business?
definitely. and usually no even so much as "stealth" but more, GTFO. being partner seems way more ruthless than being a jr assoc
For sure, but at least they have paid off their loans and most had a few years making 7 figures or close to it. So more cut throat, but still better than getting axed as a 2nd year associate with $100k+ of law school debt still
true but partners often has families unlike Jr. assocs. and most new partners dont make anywhere near 7 figs, plus u gotta figure in the partnership buy-in and all the costs associated w partnersip. neither spot seems enviable..

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1986
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: V10 Layoffs

Post by Npret » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:22 pm

Yeah everyone in the thread should be concerned about partners being pushed out for not bringing in enough business.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Legal Employment”