Top Law Schools

http://abovethelaw.com/2013/07/nationwi ... avis-polk/

...and here I thought this firm was one of the untouchables. Yikes!

No firm is untouchable.

1) this was weeks ago

2) the buyouts are insanely generous

3) this is not a big deal whatsoever

Get back to me when they do mass layoffs of attorneys. Staff layoffs have been extremely common. DPW probably just delayed them longer than other firms.

Anonymous User wrote:1) this was weeks ago

2) the buyouts are insanely generous

3) this is not a big deal whatsoever

1. And your point is?

2. As if that makes the stark reality of changes withing BIGLAW any better.

3. Oh, but it is. Proof that the ship is sinking.

First Dewey, then Weil now DPW. Next up Skadden or Cravath? Crazy times.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Get back to me when they do mass layoffs of attorneys.

Possibly closer than most thought.

If this happened to any other leading firm in any other industry, noone would bat an eye. It'd be entirely meaningless if not for the (false) impression of some that any tiny sign of weakness means a firm (and the industry as a whole) is going down in flames.

AAJD2B wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:1) this was weeks ago

2) the buyouts are insanely generous

3) this is not a big deal whatsoever

1. And your point is?

2. As if that makes the stark reality of changes withing BIGLAW any better.

3. Oh, but it is. Proof that the ship is sinking.

First Dewey, then Weil now DPW. Next up Skadden or Cravath? Crazy times.

You're a 0L so get out of this forum.

But to add support to the fact that you don't understand nearly as much as your stupid attitude would suggest (and I'm not the above poster):
Weil and DPW are not Dewey. Weil conducted layoffs in particular practice areas and geographic locations (bankruptcy, a practice that is countercyclical and largely why Weil fared better than its peers during the worst of the downturn, and commercial lit, which was tied to the now closed Houston office where it was struggling to compete). That firm is not going anywhere and their NY office is still among the very best. DPW, like many others, conducted staff layoffs. Now, if you had ever worked in a law firm or even talked to lawyers, you would realize that there is simply less of a need for support staff than in the past. Yes, it sucks for the people who were laid off, but there doesn't need to be a secretary for every lawyer and IT/mail can be trimmed.


TLDR; don't share your uneducated, 0L opinion in this forum.

Also let's be clear that these were generous voluntary buyouts - no one was laid off.

never understand why people want to defend a law firm, law firms would not hesitate to fire any one of you to increase PPP.

Anonymous User wrote:never understand why people want to defend a law firm, law firms would not hesitate to fire any one of you to increase PPP.

Who is doing this? People are defending the viability of the legal profession and the financial stability of Davis Polk. Nobody's arguing that firms won't fire their employees to increase profits. That's literally the whole point of this discussion. We all realize that firms will only employ us so long as it remains profitable to do so. That's why we care about the strength of the legal market.

Anonymous User wrote:never understand why people want to defend a law firm, law firms would not hesitate to fire any one of you to increase PPP.

it's not defending a law firm, it's defending against the ridiculous notion that generous buyout offers (which are not layoffs) for often redundant support staff is a sign that the ship is sinking.

nobody said to worship at the alter of biglaw, but to suggest this means anything of import? please.