Top Law Schools

That's disconcerting...

Notice the conspicuous use of the phrase "new normal"

What a bullshit excuse. They're laying off staff to increase PPP. Greedy fucking boomers

http://www.americanlawyer.com/PubArticl ... 0524105951

PPP down and Revenue Flat is a recipe for this.

"Right-sizing" is easily my least favorite phrase in the English language.

Have incoming Weil associates received starting stipends and start dates?

guano wrote:What a bullshit excuse. They're laying off staff to increase PPP. Greedy fucking boomers

And 7% of associates.

Bad timing on Weil's part. Don't firms try to avoid news like these when they have summer associates?

legalese_retard wrote:Bad timing on Weil's part. Don't firms try to avoid news like these when they have summer associates?

Not to mention with OCI looming

2014 wrote:

legalese_retard wrote:Bad timing on Weil's part. Don't firms try to avoid news like these when they have summer associates?

Not to mention with OCI looming

Summer's slow

You don't want to conduct layoffs when stuff is tryin to get finished

And yet so many of you still want BigLaw.

shutterbug wrote:And yet so many of you still want BigLaw.

I think most want big law for the salary to be able to pay off the massive amount of debt, then maybe move inhouse if not partnership track....I could be wrong, but that seems to be the consensus.

shutterbug wrote:And yet so many of you still want BigLaw.

Explain why the possibility of layoff would make you not want to work at a large firm

This is surprising. My best (relatively uninformed, random) guess is it has to do with the end of Lehman work (for which I'd imagine they staffed up majorly) and generally slow M&A markets.

I'm at a peer firm and lots (maybe most?) of our practices are brutally, relentlessly busy. Litigation is fast, most non-M&A corporate practices are slammed, etc. so I definitely didn't see this coming.

Weil was always in a somewhat shakier position, but I had assumed things had righted.

Any word on what class year(s) are affected? This isn't a "lathaming" is it?

Am I reading the memo correct in that the layoffs will be in Houston and Boston but not NY?

They have too many people to do the work. Obviously the firm isn't worried about recruiting. Part of me thinks that we will see this happening at more firms whose corporate practices aren't recovering and aren't expected to recover.

There is nothing in this article that doesn't reflect the market realities that have been discussed constantly here.

We all know that most firms do stealth layoffs continuously. At least these people are being let go with 6 months of a large salary and a good excuse for losing their job. Being stealthed is much worse because you can't explain why you were fired.

rad lulz wrote:

shutterbug wrote:And yet so many of you still want BigLaw.

Explain why the possibility of layoff would make you not want to work at a large firm

Not getting another job?

All these 0Ls are making their budgets for their hypothetical future biglaw jobs as justification for going into huge debt from law school. They aren't calculating the risk of losing that job or not getting a job after leaving biglaw.

Is Weil still worth bidding after this? They already had the triple-defferals going on before. I just wonder how many summers they'll actually take on given these layoffs.

NYstate wrote:

rad lulz wrote:

shutterbug wrote:And yet so many of you still want BigLaw.

Explain why the possibility of layoff would make you not want to work at a large firm

Not getting another job?

All these 0Ls are making their budgets for their hypothetical future biglaw jobs as justification for going into huge debt from law school. They aren't calculating the risk of losing that job or not getting a job after leaving biglaw.

Your criticism is a really good criticism. Entirely fair

But I don't know how much this really says "Oh big firms do layoffs, hence I don't want to work at any big firm"

Anonymous User wrote:This is surprising. My best (relatively uninformed, random) guess is it has to do with the end of Lehman work (for which I'd imagine they staffed up majorly) and generally slow M&A markets.

I'm at a peer firm and lots (maybe most?) of our practices are brutally, relentlessly busy. Litigation is fast, most non-M&A corporate practices are slammed, etc. so I definitely didn't see this coming.

Weil was always in a somewhat shakier position, but I had assumed things had righted.

Any word on what class year(s) are affected? This isn't a "lathaming" is it?

No this doesn't seem to be a lathaming. I think you are correct that after Latham there is too much staff. Announcing partner salary cut is another major move. They are working to be a sustainable firm.

Anonymous User wrote:Is Weil still worth bidding after this? They already had the triple-defferals going on before. I just wonder how many summers they'll actually take on given these layoffs.

If you're hell-bent on Restructuring, absolutely. If you're unsure, probably still a yes. If you have another job choice when offers start rolling out, that's when you decide to pass on Weil. But an offer from Weil > zero offers at OCI.

Anonymous User wrote:Is Weil still worth bidding after this? They already had the triple-defferals going on before. I just wonder how many summers they'll actually take on given these layoffs.

If you have a realistic shot at better options in the bidding, then do those. But if it's either Weil or nothing in hand...

NYstate wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:This is surprising. My best (relatively uninformed, random) guess is it has to do with the end of Lehman work (for which I'd imagine they staffed up majorly) and generally slow M&A markets.

I'm at a peer firm and lots (maybe most?) of our practices are brutally, relentlessly busy. Litigation is fast, most non-M&A corporate practices are slammed, etc. so I definitely didn't see this coming.

Weil was always in a somewhat shakier position, but I had assumed things had righted.

Any word on what class year(s) are affected? This isn't a "lathaming" is it?

No this doesn't seem to be a lathaming. I think you are correct that after Latham there is too much staff. Announcing partner salary cut is another major move. They are working to be a sustainable firm.

"Latham-ing" is not just the laying off of associates, but the laying off of first years..

Seems to be the case that they avoided the harshness of 2008 economy because of their restructuring work. They're just facing the same problems that all the other firms did, just a few years later, because that work is drying up.