Brown Rudnick rescinds 10/23 offers rights before graduation Forum

[rad lulz]

Part of the problem is that hiring is done over two years before you start full time. That's a huge lead time.

But this firm could have done much more than this.

First, they had to have known there was an issue long ago.

Second, they could have issue deferrals.

Third, Brown Rudnick sounds like a dirty sex act.

Yeah, one thing I was wondering is why they didn't do deferrals

Maybe because since the recession there is now a different understanding that firms are really supposed to give a crap about anyone?

I dunno

The answer is probably that firms who treated their associates like shit didn't pay a penalty during the recession. Latham was "that place that fires you" for exactly 1 OCI period and then it was "a brona fide prefstigious firm."

Yeah this is a better/more eloquent version of what I was trying to say as I was voice poasting from the road

[rad lulz]

I understand why firms might get a pass for this 5 years ago...but how is this place going to manage to hire anyone next year, or the year after, or the year after that?

Because people want a shot at biglaw

If it's your only offer you take it

This. Not everyone has the luxury of choosing between biglaw firms. In fact most people don't even get to choose a single biglaw firm.

I guess. Just surprises me that a couple million dollars of associate salary is worth never being able to hire anyone with more than one offer again. I'd also like to see law schools stop letting them recruit on campus.

Yeah see, people are gonna forget, and lol if you think schools aren't gonna let em OCI on campus

[Anonymous User]

Yeah see, people are gonna forget, and lol if you think schools aren't gonna let em OCI on campus


This isn't as far fetched as you'd think. The rumor mill at a T10 school suggests that the school didn't invite back a firm that consistently failed to make callback offers. I think rescinding offers from a significant portion of students from that school would receive similar treatment.

[rad lulz]

Yeah see, people are gonna forget, and lol if you think schools aren't gonna let em OCI on campus


This isn't as far fetched as you'd think. The rumor mill at a T10 school suggests that the school didn't invite back a firm that consistently failed to make callback offers. I think rescinding offers from a significant portion of students from that school would receive similar treatment.

But see latham

[Anonymous User]

Yeah see, people are gonna forget, and lol if you think schools aren't gonna let em OCI on campus


This isn't as far fetched as you'd think. The rumor mill at a T10 school suggests that the school didn't invite back a firm that consistently failed to make callback offers. I think rescinding offers from a significant portion of students from that school would receive similar treatment.

But see latham

Latham is different because that occurred after the kids were hired and the school could still boast that they placed X% in firm jobs. Here, the kids won't get a chance to start in a big firm (in all likelihood at least not upon graduation).

[Jsa725]

.

[soj]

Shame on them. Hope those 10 people land on their feet. I'm sure they will, as the firm will likely go out of their way to help place them somewhere.

is that a joke or am i too cynical?

[84651846190]

People thought no one would go to Latham after they laid off 440 people. But, people with great credentials are still lining up.

Firms can no-offer, rescind offers, layoff lawyers, conduct stealth layoffs, whatever. It doesn't matter. They'll take a hit to who they can recruit for a couple years - but if they're pulling this they probably don't need many people for a couple years anyways. In 3 years it will seem like ancient history. And there will be other firms with more recent transgressions that are on everyone's mind.

I wouldn't go so far as saying "It doesn't matter." I think Latham did take a hit (and may still be taking a hit). If people have multiple offers from similar firms, Latham's past treatment of its associates may be a tiebreaker for them.

[84651846190]

Third, Brown Rudnick sounds like a dirty sex act.

The Brown Rudnick originated sometime during 2014 and is a slight variation from the Cleveland Steamer. During a sex act, and after you reach orgasm, your partner turns around and squats over you, takes a shit on your upper chest region and says "I am sorry, I can't do this anymore. Please get your stuff and leave. We are finished."

"Dude, did you hear what happened to Johnny? He was at his girlfriends house last night and she legit Brown Rudnicked him."
"Damn, well give him a call, I'm sure he's gonna be down for drinks later... she was a hottie."

14918741241

[PennBull]

Shame on them. Hope those 10 people land on their feet. I'm sure they will, as the firm will likely go out of their way to help place them somewhere.

is that a joke or am i too cynical?

IIRC Dewey went to great lengths for their incoming summer class, fwiw

[dixiecupdrinking]

Latham was/is also a top firm. Brown Rudnick appears to be a sinking shitboat.

[dixiecupdrinking]

oh but wait it's "Powered by 200 high-octane lawyers in key financial centers" never mind

[rad lulz]

oh but wait it's "Powered by 200 high-octane lawyers in key financial centers" never mind

Law is the polar opposite of high octane

[TTRansfer]

Part of the problem is that hiring is done over two years before you start full time. That's a huge lead time.

But this firm could have done much more than this.

First, they had to have known there was an issue long ago.

Second, they could have issue deferrals.

Third, Brown Rudnick sounds like a dirty sex act.

Yeah, one thing I was wondering is why they didn't do deferrals

Maybe because since the recession there is now a different understanding that firms are really supposed to give a crap about anyone?

I dunno

The answer is probably that firms who treated their associates like shit didn't pay a penalty during the recession. Latham was "that place that fires you" for exactly 1 OCI period and then it was "a brona fide prefstigious firm."

Yeah this is a better/more eloquent version of what I was trying to say as I was voice poasting from the road

I was envisioning you poasting from The Road (ala Cormac McCarthy's book).

[cdelgado]

I am waiting on K&L Gates to do the same. Already delaying incoming associates until January and revenue/ppp has been in decline for a few years.

[jkpolk]

People thought no one would go to Latham after they laid off 440 people. But, people with great credentials are still lining up.

Firms can no-offer, rescind offers, layoff lawyers, conduct stealth layoffs, whatever. It doesn't matter. They'll take a hit to who they can recruit for a couple years - but if they're pulling this they probably don't need many people for a couple years anyways. In 3 years it will seem like ancient history. And there will be other firms with more recent transgressions that are on everyone's mind.

I wouldn't go so far as saying "It doesn't matter." I think Latham did take a hit (and may still be taking a hit). If people have multiple offers from similar firms, Latham's past treatment of its associates may be a tiebreaker for them.

Yup

[Anonymous User]

People thought no one would go to Latham after they laid off 440 people. But, people with great credentials are still lining up.

Firms can no-offer, rescind offers, layoff lawyers, conduct stealth layoffs, whatever. It doesn't matter. They'll take a hit to who they can recruit for a couple years - but if they're pulling this they probably don't need many people for a couple years anyways. In 3 years it will seem like ancient history. And there will be other firms with more recent transgressions that are on everyone's mind.

I wouldn't go so far as saying "It doesn't matter." I think Latham did take a hit (and may still be taking a hit). If people have multiple offers from similar firms, Latham's past treatment of its associates may be a tiebreaker for them.

Yeah, I agree. I cancelled my Latham interview as soon as I got my first offer (V30) specifically because of how they screwed people over during the recession. I continued with others and ended up with another V10. I would only have gone to Latham if it was the only offer I got.

But then again, i would imagine that anyone who gets an offer at Latham can get another offer in the V50 or whatever and they clearly keep hiring full classes of credentialed people. So it's not killing them but I do think it makes a difference on the margins.

[gaud]

Wow. That's beyond fucked up.

[dead head]

I understand why firms might get a pass for this 5 years ago...but how is this place going to manage to hire anyone next year, or the year after, or the year after that?

Because people want a shot at biglaw

If it's your only offer you take it

This. Not everyone has the luxury of choosing between biglaw firms. In fact most people don't even get to choose a single biglaw firm.

I guess. Just surprises me that a couple million dollars of associate salary is worth never being able to hire anyone with more than one offer again. I'd also like to see law schools stop letting them recruit on campus.

In the unlikely event this ever becomes a problem (like everyone says, see Latham), the partners that mater will have no compunction in jumping ship to another firm.

[Anonymous User]

I got an offer from BR's NY office in fall 2012 (so if I accepted I would have been one of these 23). I could not have been less impressed with their showing. People were unfriendly/weird and it seemed like everyone hated working there. I also called over there on a Friday (during business hours) before my interview with some questions and their phones were down until the following Monday when I finally got in touch with a secretary who said they were doing maintenance on the building the entire weekend so phones were out of commission. It was bizarre.

They also didn't even call me with an offer-- I got a priority mail letter about 3 weeks after I interviewed. No call, no email. Like if they had made some mistake addressing the letter I never would have even found out. I had other NY offers thankfully and took one-- this would have been (and was) my last choice by far. I kind of feel bad being disparaging but I did callbacks with a lot of firms and comparatively it seemed like BR really did not have their shit together.

My heart goes out to those 10 summers but from what I recall about the interview experience, things didn't seem to be going all that well even two years ago.

Also LOL so much at the Cleveland Steamer post.

[PennBull]

it seemed like BR really did not have their shit together.

and yet, if BR is one's only offer, they'll take it 99 times out of 100.

[PrideandGlory1776]

Wow if this trend returns will associates have to have a back-up plan B in place in the event offers from their expected employer is recinded? This just strikes me as bizarre and difficult to plan for it this becomes more common - this would be truly devastating if your 200k+ in debt - where do you go from here?

[PennBull]

Wow if this trend returns will associates have to have a back-up plan B in place in the event offers from their expected employer is recinded? This just strikes me as bizarre and difficult to plan for it this becomes more common - this would be truly devastating if your 200k+ in debt - where do you go from here?

By all means this is particularly unusual, and the typical dick move is to just not give offers to an entire summer associate class (save for egregious errors). The latter scenario is also still quite unusual, but at least they can spend the whole year searching for other jobs (still suboptimal, particularly if one has spent two years in law school studying for a particular avenue in biglaw and thus incredibly unprepared to search for jobs in the public interest avenue).

From what we understand, BR is paying for bar fees and a modest transition payment. Those who get no-offered from a summer position don't get that, and often struggle to pay the enormous fees out-of-pocket (not all schools allow loans for bar fees). I think the BR situation is worse, but perhaps it's a closer distinction than we think.

[OutCold]

Wow if this trend returns will associates have to have a back-up plan B in place in the event offers from their expected employer is recinded? This just strikes me as bizarre and difficult to plan for it this becomes more common - this would be truly devastating if your 200k+ in debt - where do you go from here?

The obvious answer is to not go deep into debt in the first place. There is no such thing as stability in big law. Even if you get a job at a stable firm, you can get fired or burn out quickly. I feel hypocritical saying that, given that I have loans that are approaching the 300k mark, but if anything, I have a better understanding of just how risky it is to take out that much debt on something that is far from sure bet.

[Dafaq]

After reading the nightmare Rudnick story (and others like it), it makes me wonder how firms decide who stays and who goes. At some point the firms must have liked all the SAs they offered.

But now it’s chop time. For sake of argument let’s say they have two superstars and two who are marginal… those are easy calls, but what about the others? A coin flip or do partners fight for their favorites? Partners probably have equal votes, but perhaps some partners are more equal than others.

Has anyone here been a part of the deciding process?