Which firms are safest/most dangerous? Forum

[NYAssociate]

.

[Anonymous User]

Cahill may be starting some '09 summers (c/o '10 that summered in '09) early in corporate and real estate. E-mail went out several weeks ago. Rest will start in Jan '11 as scheduled, so there isn't a huge deferral backup either. There was also only one "no-offer" that year. I don't know if this indicates anything overall, but it appears to be positive.

[NYAssociate]

.

[NYAssociate]

.

[doyleoil]

I just wouldn't consider it over WLRK, S&C, DPW, STB, Cleary, Debevoise, Kirkland, Paul Weiss, or Williams.

I'm assuming anyone considering Covington as a "safe" firm is considering its DC office. So probably half the firms in that list are utterly irrelevant to that conversation (the "safe DC firm" conversation).

[Anonymous User]

Who cares if their summer class is large?

Oh, shit, I don't know, maybe law students with a limited number of bids? Cravath can be the fanciest fucking firm in the world, if it's hiring 10% the summer class it used to then it's not doing me - as a law student - any good. Because a bid there won't go nearly as far as a firm that's actually hiring a decent sized summer class. Skadden can be making it rain for everyone that works there - doesn't help me if I'm deferred for 9 months hoping they'll actually take me on.

Once you are working for a firm full time, obviously salary/etc. will mean more than summer class size and deferals. But we're just trying to get our foot in the door...

But back to Cov - yeah, what awful financials. More money, more compensation, more equity partners: http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2010/ ... rling.html

Those poor bastards. I wonder how they sleep at night?

[NYAssociate]

.

[NYAssociate]

.

[romothesavior]

NYAssociate, I appreciate your thoughts. What would you say is a good indicator of firm health? Low attrition rates? Low partner to associate ratio? Low number of deferrals? PPP?

[NYAssociate]

.

[romothesavior]

NYAssociate, I appreciate your thoughts. What would you say is a good indicator of firm health? Low attrition rates? Low partner to associate ratio? Low number of deferrals? PPP?

Purely numbers-wise, in order: 1) RPL, 2) PPP, 3) Revenue. PPP is a distant second. Revenue is a distant, distant third. Leverage is also huge.

Clearly, the safest firm hasn't done:
1) Layoffs
2) Deferrals
3) Salary Freezes

Covington has done 1 and 3, so they can't be the safest. The only firms that haven't done any of the three are:
WLRK, Williams, Munger, Irell, and maybe one or two others that I can't think of right now.

RPL = Revenue per Lawyer?

[NYAssociate]

.

[drew]

Not safe: Cadwalader, Proskauer, White & Case. They started doing layoffs even before ITE really hit.
Also not safe: Latham. Because you'll get Lathamed.
Also not safe: Dechert. Just as I understand it.

Relatively safe: Skadden (kept market bonuses when everyone else dropped them), Weil (all that bankruptcy work), Jones Day (by all reports).

The contrarian in me is screaming that your "unsafe" firms are leaner and meaner this year (with PPP potentially rising). Nothing to that?

[mallard]

Not safe: Cadwalader, Proskauer, White & Case. They started doing layoffs even before ITE really hit.
Also not safe: Latham. Because you'll get Lathamed.
Also not safe: Dechert. Just as I understand it.

Relatively safe: Skadden (kept market bonuses when everyone else dropped them), Weil (all that bankruptcy work), Jones Day (by all reports).

The contrarian in me is screaming that your "unsafe" firms are leaner and meaner this year (with PPP potentially rising). Nothing to that?

I think there's something to this idea, but in general the firms that are fucked haven't particularly improved their management, their PPP was down recently, and they're unsafe because they treated associates badly and there's no reason to expect that to change.

[Anonymous User]

Dood doesn't know what he's talking about.

Re: Covington; how is the firm "bullet proof" when their HQ salaries are still frozen. Other offices were too, but they've since done raises.

No deferrals, nearly consistent (large) summer class sizes 08, 09, and '10. I challenge you to show me ANY other firm that can say that. Wachtell may be the only one. Even W&C reduced class size by a large amount for summer 2010. A few dollars and cents on the margin mean much less than getting a job to those of us entering the work force.


Edit: I just checked, W&C and Wachtell both reduced their (already small) summer class sizes by a greater percentage than Covington.

You used the term "bulletproof." Salary freeze does not imply bulletproof. And while that might not mean much to you, it sure as hell means a lot to associates working there. Did you even see their 2009 financials?

Just be quiet.

Every other law firm that I have heard of deferred associates and/or slashed summer class sizes ITE. Every single one. 100%. Can you really refute that Covington stands out in that context? If not be bulletproof, how about least-bullet-vulnerable-as-compared-to-every-other-law-firm-in-the-nation?

Uhh. Jones Day didn't and that is pretty well known. But then again someone put them in the not-safe list.

[Anonymous User]

Every other law firm that I have heard of deferred associates and/or slashed summer class sizes ITE. Every single one. 100%. Can you really refute that Covington stands out in that context? If not be bulletproof, how about least-bullet-vulnerable-as-compared-to-every-other-law-firm-in-the-nation?

Uhh. Jones Day didn't and that is pretty well known. But then again someone put them in the not-safe list.

nalpdirectory.com -> jones day slashed summer class sizes. NY from 50 to 19, Houston from 16 to 5, etc.

I realize that a smaller summer class doesn't imply 'not safe' - and that is/was stretching the parlance. But the only point I was ever trying to make is that Covington has 1) not done layoffs (large enough to be reported, I realize NYAssociate believes they have done so), 2) Has not deferred any associate start dates and 3) has had a more or less constant summer class for the past 3 years.

Those three factors combined, in the eyes of at least this law student, are staggering. Yes, they have pay freezes - and to be blunt, Covington (especially DC) has had grumbling about associate compensation since pre-crash as compared with other firms. And while their PPP undoubtedly fell, that's hardly shocking for a DC firm. Williams & Connolly has always had slender PPP compared to its peers too, it doesn't mean the firm is a festering TTT in decline, it means it doesn't do NYC-centric corporate mega-bucks law.

[imchuckbass58]

NYAssociate, I appreciate your thoughts. What would you say is a good indicator of firm health? Low attrition rates? Low partner to associate ratio? Low number of deferrals? PPP?

Purely numbers-wise, in order: 1) RPL, 2) PPP, 3) Revenue. PPP is a distant second. Revenue is a distant, distant third. Leverage is also huge.

Clearly, the safest firm hasn't done:
1) Layoffs
2) Deferrals
3) Salary Freezes

Covington has done 1 and 3, so they can't be the safest. The only firms that haven't done any of the three are:
WLRK, Williams, Munger, Irell, and maybe one or two others that I can't think of right now.

First, no credible outlet has reported that Covington has done layoffs. I realize that sometimes firms do layoffs and news outlets don't pick up on it, but considering that I have two friends who are associates at Covington right now and they have not seen anything resembling layoffs, I'm skeptical.

Second, I agree with you that RPL and PPP are very important, but they're not the be-all-end-all. Latham's and Cadwalader's PPP and RPL both went up last year. I don't think anyone's suggesting they're safer than Covington.

Covington's PPP and RPL decreased, but this was largely due to a big increase in the number of (1) lawyers in general, and (2) profits per partner. Indeed, in 2009, their profits per partner and RPL decreased much less than their increase in headcount, and they posted a 10% increase in revenue during a pretty horrible recession. There are two was to read this - (1) they planned badly and overexpanded, or (2) they decided to not interfere with their expansion plans and instead took a temporary hit to PPP rather than laying off large numbers of associates. I'm inclined to believe the latter given that the partner hiring pipeline is not as long as the associate one, so they could have turned it off easily as soon as they realized things were going south. (Source: http://abovethelaw.com/2010/02/covingto ... r-in-2009/)

I'm not saying Covington is the safest firm, and certainly some of the firms you mentioned might be considered "safer" (though by what tiny margin I don't know), but it strikes me as slightly ridiculous to suggest that Covington is not generally not "safe."

[Anonymous User]

Every other law firm that I have heard of deferred associates and/or slashed summer class sizes ITE. Every single one. 100%. Can you really refute that Covington stands out in that context? If not be bulletproof, how about least-bullet-vulnerable-as-compared-to-every-other-law-firm-in-the-nation?

Uhh. Jones Day didn't and that is pretty well known. But then again someone put them in the not-safe list.

nalpdirectory.com -> jones day slashed summer class sizes. NY from 50 to 19, Houston from 16 to 5, etc.

I realize that a smaller summer class doesn't imply 'not safe' - and that is/was stretching the parlance. But the only point I was ever trying to make is that Covington has 1) not done layoffs (large enough to be reported, I realize NYAssociate believes they have done so), 2) Has not deferred any associate start dates and 3) has had a more or less constant summer class for the past 3 years.

Those three factors combined, in the eyes of at least this law student, are staggering. Yes, they have pay freezes - and to be blunt, Covington (especially DC) has had grumbling about associate compensation since pre-crash as compared with other firms. And while their PPP undoubtedly fell, that's hardly shocking for a DC firm. Williams & Connolly has always had slender PPP compared to its peers too, it doesn't mean the firm is a festering TTT in decline, it means it doesn't do NYC-centric corporate mega-bucks law.

Eating my words re; cut class sizes.
I am on board with Covington being a relatively safe bet. Pay freezes are the least of people's problems.

[NYAssociate]

.

[NYAssociate]

.

[imchuckbass58]

Dood doesn't know what he's talking about.

Just be quiet

I just find this discussion comparing class sizes as indicative of firm health as complete, complete stupidity.

This whole conversation is so confusing, mostly because I can't understand why this point possibly matters as much as some of you think it does.

If I wasn't trying my hardest not to be snarky, I'd be calling you several unfavorable words for this post. For now, I'll just say that I pray, for your career's sake, that you don't show this level of reasoning doing intreview season.

If I wasn't trying my hardest not to be snarky, I'd do the same. For now, I'll just say that I pray, for your life's sake, that you're not this much of an insufferable, condescending douche when you're not on an anonymous internet message board.

I am perfectly fine with you disagreeing with what I said and pointing out where you think I'm wrong, or where I misunderstood what you said (both of which are definitely possible). But I think it's really unnecessary to malign the abilities or intelligence of people who disagree with you when you don't even know who they are or what sort of perspective they may (or may not) have to bring to the question.

[ziggysmarley]

Paul Hastings didn't have a "writing competition." Did everyone receive the same assignment? Yes, but the memos weren't ranked, weren't necessarily even read by the same attorneys, and was purposed on ensuring that people have enough substantive writing in their binders (since in years past kids focusing on transactional haven't always had a ton of writing in their binders). I would say that their LA office is safe, since people in at least some of the departments are extremely busy.

[let/them/eat/cake]

Paul Hastings didn't have a "writing competition." Did everyone receive the same assignment? Yes, but the memos weren't ranked, weren't necessarily even read by the same attorneys, and was purposed on ensuring that people have enough substantive writing in their binders (since in years past kids focusing on transactional haven't always had a ton of writing in their binders). I would say that their LA office is safe, since people in at least some of the departments are extremely busy.

thx for that information. good to know.