Tracking COVID-19's effect on V100 associate pay/layoffs Forum

[QContinuum]

billable year =/= calendar year. billable year starts in august.

Ah, okay, thanks, makes much more sense.

Also: Updated titular post with Freshfields' pay freezes/bonus review deferral (at least Freshfields isn't laying anyone off or cutting pay, so it's one of the - relatively speaking - "best" firms to appear on this tracker so far).

[Anonymous User]

I care because I am being asked to do more work (and my life is therefore worse) as a consequence for being a team player, work that could be given to others who are doing less. I have enough hours for the billable year already, this is about sharing in the sh*t work that is coming through the door right now instead of hiding out until M&A deals return.

You're claiming that you've already billed, what, 2000 hours in the first four-and-half months of 2020? That's what, 450 billables per month? Meaning >5300 billables per year? I find it difficult to believe that, especially with the K&E partner who recently confirmed that K&E associates average under 2000 billables per year.

I sympathize here; my billable year starts in the fall, currently annualizing around 2600 hours due to some crazy months earlier this year and still in the top 20 billers for the firm. slow right now (making up for it on non-billable but otherwise around 30-40 billable hours a week) but worried if trend slower it'll be viewed as a negative, irrespective of my earlier success on billables. frankly just shifting to saving more in case of a pay cut or layoff, but nothing has been done as of yet.

[Anon115523]

Not yet affecting associates, but Quinn is pausing partner distributions and cutting draws.

[parkslope]

Not yet affecting associates, but Quinn is pausing partner distributions and cutting draws.

DLA Piper is missing from the list. https://abovethelaw.com/2020/04/top-ran ... d-bonuses/

[Joachim2017]

I don't understand this part. You signed up for a non-lockstep comp system. The more you work the more you are paid. The less you work the less you are paid. Some people have very good reasons for not ramping up right now, they're not necessarily "hiding out." And even if they were, why should you care? Again, isn't this exactly the sort of comp system you signed up for?

The way you're feeling would make perfect sense at a lockstep place like DPW or S&C, where everyone gets the same comp at the end of the year. But unless I'm misunderstanding something, it seems like you are not entitled to this specific complaint about your peers not working as hard as you at a place like Kirkland.

This is a bad take.

Kirkland has lockstep base and bonus compensation with generally relatively minor multipliers on the latter component. This means that the outlay on a 1st year associate is 100-110% the outlay on a 1st year at Cravath. At minimum, you better be working as hard as a Cravath attorney then. "Hiding out" is not doing that.

It's pretty clear from every Kirkland data point ever posted on this site that Kirkland's above-market bonus is not proportionate to hours billed. Someone billing 2300 might get 1.3x while someone billing 2700 is also getting 1.3x. Kirkland's compensation system stops rewarding more $ for more hours at a certain point and relies on other metrics to determine an associate's multiplier.

OP has every right to complain. OP signed up for more hours at Kirkland; OP, nor does any lawyer, sign up to have to take on more work than is reasonable due to lazy co-workers.

Your take is premised on the notion that other associates are "hiding" or being "lazy." We're in the middle of a fucking global pandemic. Can you really not see reasons other than laziness why other associates are not able to ratchet up work?! Especially at a place like KE, people come in knowing that peers will not be working equal amounts anyway!

[target_corp]

Your take is premised on the notion that other associates are "hiding" or being "lazy." We're in the middle of a fucking global pandemic. Can you really not see reasons other than laziness why other associates are not able to ratchet up work?! Especially at a place like KE, people come in knowing that peers will not be working equal amounts anyway!

It seems like a lot of the offense around the internet taken at the email is this assumption, but idk, man. If restructuring partners are going around saying, "Hey, can you help out?" and a bunch of corporate associates are like, "Nah, I'm too busy," and the billing reports show that a portion of corporate associates aren't billing the normal amount, then I can understand the frustration from partners and associates working a lot these days. It's not like this is a tremendously cynical or unfair take, unless someone has a pressing reason not to work the normal amount (e.g., sick family member). Everyone else is on the same footing these days.

[QContinuum]

Not yet affecting associates, but Quinn is pausing partner distributions and cutting draws.

DLA Piper is missing from the list. https://abovethelaw.com/2020/04/top-ran ... d-bonuses/

We discussed DLA earlier ITT. It looks like their cuts only apply to non-US (EMEA) offices. Our list only tracks U.S. changes.

[Anonymous User]

I know this isn’t a V100, but does anyone know which practices at Schiff Hardin had 50% salary cuts? I’m planning to move to Chicago and I thought Schiff Hardin would be a good midsize firm to look into but I just read about the 50%.

[Anonymous User]

Anecdotally, friend who was furloughed from one of the firms listed says furlough term is indefinite.

[Anonymous User]

Anecdotally, friend who was furloughed from one of the firms listed says furlough term is indefinite.

Yep, same at my firm, really scary as other firms have at least given a timeframe where they will "revaluate," it really just feels like a soft layoff without being paid out for vacation or a severance package, feel like they aren't really planning on bringing them back, but rather waiting until they quit or otherwise find another job, would have rather just been laid off....

[Wild Card]

Faegre Drinker (V95): 15% pay cut for associates

Note: Faegre was unranked, but Drinker was V95; they merged on February 1, 2020.

https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/megafir ... ff-others/

[wisdom]

Perkins Coie, Vault 49, 15% associate pay cut:

https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/am-law- ... efinitely/

[nahumya]

It's not related to associates, but Ropes offers staff buyouts. https://www.law360.com/articles/1273802 ... s-salaries

[QContinuum]

It's not related to associates, but Ropes offers staff buyouts. https://www.law360.com/articles/1273802 ... s-salaries

Thanks. We're only tracking U.S. associate developments. Law firms have been reducing staff headcount for years, as younger attorneys use staff less and less and older attorneys retire, and so staff developments don't necessarily presage attorney pay reductions or layoffs.

ETA: Updated with additional info on Goodwin's layoffs (now reported by ATL) and Reed Smith's alleged layoffs (not yet reported).

[GoldenPuppy]

Not yet affecting associates, but Quinn is pausing partner distributions and cutting draws.

DLA Piper is missing from the list. https://abovethelaw.com/2020/04/top-ran ... d-bonuses/

DLA Piper? But I hardly know her!

[Wild Card]

It's not related to associates, but Ropes offers staff buyouts. https://www.law360.com/articles/1273802 ... s-salaries

Thanks. We're only tracking U.S. associate developments. Law firms have been reducing staff headcount for years, as younger attorneys use staff less and less and older attorneys retire, and so staff developments don't necessarily presage attorney pay reductions or layoffs.

Four secretaries used to sit in front of me. I.e., in the wing in front of my office. Suddenly, none of them was around. I thought it was strange, but I didn't think anything of it. The partners in my group did make full use of them, and they also were there to help three or four of us at a time. They had good attitudes.

[QContinuum]

Four secretaries used to sit in front of me. I.e., in the wing in front of my office. Suddenly, none of them was around. I thought it was strange, but I didn't think anything of it. The partners in my group did make full use of them, and they also were there to help three or four of us at a time. They had good attitudes.

Yeah, the staff cuts have, sadly, gotten to the point where partners are increasingly being asked (forced) to adapt to reduced secretarial support.

Though I envy you for your positive experiences with multiple secretaries. My current secretary, who I make very little use of, has a great attitude, but the previous secretaries I worked with - gah. (One actually ended up getting fired for cause, which I thought was long overdue.)

[Anonymous User]

Goodwin Procter (V37) is doing stealth layoffs. 3 months for affected people to quit or move on, and being done for "performance" reasons. In my corporate practice group, can anecdotally say about 15% of associates affected but not sure how widespread it is across the firm and practice groups.

Can also confirm that Goodwin is doing stealth layoffs. Looking like ~25-30% of associates in my corporate group.

Wow either my group at Goodwin either got lucky or I'm just out of touch... probably the latter. I thought it was associated with mid-year reviews, which are usually reserved for laterals or people with performance issues? Was this not the case?

What office?

I can verify that this is happening in Boston, and for people that have not previously been dinged in performance reviews as a mid-level/early senior associate.

Also happening in New York. Makes a lot more sense why Goodwin moved to an unlimited vacation policy in January - they don't have to payout vacation days for the people they stealthed.

That policy stopped any more vacation days from accruing. But if you had accrued vacation, they still have to pay you out for it. Speaking for a friend.

[nolifeloser]

"[W]hile salary cuts shore up a firm’s finances, they don’t fix the underlying problem: too many lawyers, specifically more lawyers than can be kept growing professionally at the required pace given the volume of work available to them. With the level of U.S. economic activity not expected to regain its Q4 2019 level until the first half of 2022, this is more than a short-term challenge. Unchecked, it creates a post-recession existential risk for firms: clients decamping to rivals to avoid being served by under-experienced associate cohorts. Hence, we should expect layoffs when lawyers return to their offices (you can’t reasonably lay someone off over Zoom)." by Hugh Simons the COO of Ropes & Gray. https://www.law.com/2020/05/15/as-salar ... ppens-next

[hdr]

Hence, we should expect layoffs when lawyers return to their offices (you can’t reasonably lay someone off over Zoom)." by Hugh Simons the COO of Ropes & Gray. https://www.law.com/2020/05/15/as-salar ... ppens-next

Is that really true? All of the announced layoffs and stealth layoffs we've been hearing about surely had to occur via zoom/phone, right?

Perhaps if firms think we'll be back in the office in June (lol) they'll delay layoffs until then but I doubt they will wait this out several months if the work isn't there.

[smile0751]

I don’t think that guy is the current COO of Ropes. I was surprised someone in a management position of a firm would say layoffs are coming so obviously (hurts moral to say the least), but it seems he’s the former COO of Ropes so he may have no real insight.

[nealric]

Hence, we should expect layoffs when lawyers return to their offices (you can’t reasonably lay someone off over Zoom)." by Hugh Simons the COO of Ropes & Gray. https://www.law.com/2020/05/15/as-salar ... ppens-next

You absolutely can lay someone off over the telephone or zoom. My company laid off 15% of its workforce remotely last month.

[Anonymous User]

"Hence, we should expect layoffs when lawyers return to their offices (you can’t reasonably lay someone off over Zoom)." by Hugh Simons the former COO of Ropes & Gray. https://www.law.com/2020/05/15/as-salar ... ppens-next

You forgot a key word there. He's an opinion writer who hasn't been employed by a firm in several years and who is currently rewarded for generating more anxious clicks. Evaluate accordingly.

Edit: Beaten to the punch by smile0751

[sms18]

"[W]hile salary cuts shore up a firm’s finances, they don’t fix the underlying problem: too many lawyers, specifically more lawyers than can be kept growing professionally at the required pace given the volume of work available to them. With the level of U.S. economic activity not expected to regain its Q4 2019 level until the first half of 2022, this is more than a short-term challenge. Unchecked, it creates a post-recession existential risk for firms: clients decamping to rivals to avoid being served by under-experienced associate cohorts. Hence, we should expect layoffs when lawyers return to their offices (you can’t reasonably lay someone off over Zoom)." by Hugh Simons the COO of Ropes & Gray. https://www.law.com/2020/05/15/as-salar ... ppens-next

LOL what a clickbait.

As a couple of posters noted, this guy retired ~4 years ago and writes about the law business as a hobby and "does some consulting for old friends." https://www.linkedin.com/in/hugh-a-simons-153a839/

[Anonymous User]

I work at Ropes and that post made my stomach drop until I read the actual article and realized that guy doesn't currently work here. Firm management hasn't said anything about pay cuts or salaries so hopefully this guy is just out of touch with what's currently happening here.