Top Law Schools

What's everyone prediction for layoffs and the effects on biglaw, medium/boutique firms, and small firms? Do we think they are guaranteed, or will the unprecedented stimulus packages be able to curb this enough to allow firms to move through the next 3 months until we see a bounce back? Will firms be as quick to lay off given this is generally viewed as not a financial crisis and rather an external one? Anyone heard of any layoffs yet?

Too soon to tell. Very different scenarios, depending on how long the NY/CA lockdowns persist, and how quickly the economy recovers after the lockdowns are lifted. It's conceivable that the lockdowns are lifted in April and the economy bounces back quickly, in which case there'd be minimal impact on legal hiring. It's also conceivable the lockdowns go into summer and the economy tanks, which would obviously be a totally different ballgame.

QContinuum wrote:Too soon to tell. Very different scenarios, depending on how long the NY/CA lockdowns persist, and how quickly the economy recovers after the lockdowns are lifted. It's conceivable that the lockdowns are lifted in April and the economy bounces back quickly, in which case there'd be minimal impact on legal hiring. It's also conceivable the lockdowns go into summer and the economy tanks, which would obviously be a totally different ballgame.

Lifting NY/CA lockdowns in April is extremely imprudent on the gov. Doing so would put so many people's health in danger for the sake of "rescuing" the economy. But knowing Trump, he doesn't care about anything other than the perception of economy and getting re-elected, this might happen. He will lie and gamble on the idea that the virus will die down when summer hits. But what's realistically going to happen is probably a second wave of infections will surface after the lift in probably 2-3 weeks, and that's when the economy will really collapse.

hatelawandgoinghome wrote:

QContinuum wrote:Too soon to tell. Very different scenarios, depending on how long the NY/CA lockdowns persist, and how quickly the economy recovers after the lockdowns are lifted. It's conceivable that the lockdowns are lifted in April and the economy bounces back quickly, in which case there'd be minimal impact on legal hiring. It's also conceivable the lockdowns go into summer and the economy tanks, which would obviously be a totally different ballgame.

Lifting NY/CA lockdowns in April is extremely imprudent on the gov. Doing so would put so many people's health in danger for the sake of "rescuing" the economy. But knowing Trump, he doesn't care about anything other than the perception of economy and getting re-elected, this might happen. He will lie and gamble on the idea that the virus will die down when summer hits. But what's realistically going to happen is probably a second wave of infections will surface after the lift in probably 2-3 weeks, and that's when the economy will really collapse.

Right now, even the experts have a pretty wide variety opinions on what will happen. There's just a lot of uncertainty because this is not a disease science has had a lot of time to study. Frankly, even the social distancing and lockdown measures are pretty novel.

Even a few decades ago, we wouldn't have been aware of any cases that did not send someone to the hospital because we wouldn't have had a test so soon, and most bad cases would have been chalked up to a bad flu season. This is the first time we've tried to stop something like this before it really gets bad (other than arguably SARS and MERS in some areas). Nobody really knows how effective it will be.

Layoffs are going to be very dependent on what happens with the economy. If I knew that, I could make my fortune trading options and would have no need for legal employment.

QContinuum wrote:Too soon to tell. Very different scenarios, depending on how long the NY/CA lockdowns persist, and how quickly the economy recovers after the lockdowns are lifted. It's conceivable that the lockdowns are lifted in April and the economy bounces back quickly, in which case there'd be minimal impact on legal hiring. It's also conceivable the lockdowns go into summer and the economy tanks, which would obviously be a totally different ballgame.

With respect, it is totally inconceivable that the lockdowns lift in April.

Or, at least, to do so would be a public health risk of catastrophic proportions.

MSUN5 wrote:With respect, it is totally inconceivable that the lockdowns lift in April.

You're clearly not familiar with President Trump. He regularly does 10 'totally inconceivable' things per hour.

And even putting the Trump wildcard aside, no one really knows how Americans will react to a lockdown that goes for longer than a few weeks. There has been significant stockpiling of weapons in recent days. This is a fast-developing situation and there's no way to know what's "totally inconceivable" and what isn't. As recently as two-three weeks ago, our current lockdowns were "totally inconceivable".

QContinuum wrote:

MSUN5 wrote:With respect, it is totally inconceivable that the lockdowns lift in April.

You're clearly not familiar with President Trump. He regularly does 10 'totally inconceivable' things per hour.

And even putting the Trump wildcard aside, no one really knows how Americans will react to a lockdown that goes for longer than a few weeks. There has been significant stockpiling of weapons in recent days. This is a fast-developing situation and there's no way to know what's "totally inconceivable" and what isn't. As recently as two-three weeks ago, our current lockdowns were "totally inconceivable".

(1) There's a qualifier in my comment you've left off;
(2) The lockdowns are not being enforced by the federal government, but rather by the various States -- Cuomo and Newsom are the relevant parties here, not Trump;
(3) I would grant you that the lockdowns were inconceivable to the general population three weeks ago. However, to those who have followed this closely, they have seemed more-or-less inevitable for at least the past month-and-a-half.

I think the earliest we will see easing of restrictions is late May. Testing is still catching up and everyone is probably looking at China to see if cases come back now Chinese people are going back to work.

Since most experts expect cases to return, we are probably looking at a prolonged “flattening the curve” until we get what amounts to herd immunity, either by infecting or vaccinating everyone.

I'm currently a 3L who accepted a return offer. My firm (One of the big non-DC based firm with a major DC office) just confirmed our start and bonuses with no mention of the virus. Seems like full speed ahead for class of 2020. No idea what it means for layoffs.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm currently a 3L who accepted a return offer. My firm (One of the big non-DC based firm with a major DC office) just confirmed our start and bonuses with no mention of the virus. Seems like full speed ahead for class of 2020. No idea what it means for layoffs.

They confirmed what your bonus will be right now? That's odd. I'd have expected bonuses, at the very least, will be way down. Firms will just not get new business later this summer, and that will effect the December bonus. Or are you referring to some other type of bonus?

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm currently a 3L who accepted a return offer. My firm (One of the big non-DC based firm with a major DC office) just confirmed our start and bonuses with no mention of the virus. Seems like full speed ahead for class of 2020. No idea what it means for layoffs.

They confirmed what your bonus will be right now? That's odd. I'd have expected bonuses, at the very least, will be way down. Firms will just not get new business later this summer, and that will effect the December bonus. Or are you referring to some other type of bonus?

Some firms do signing bonuses. That may be what the poster is referring to.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm currently a 3L who accepted a return offer. My firm (One of the big non-DC based firm with a major DC office) just confirmed our start and bonuses with no mention of the virus. Seems like full speed ahead for class of 2020. No idea what it means for layoffs.

They confirmed what your bonus will be right now? That's odd. I'd have expected bonuses, at the very least, will be way down. Firms will just not get new business later this summer, and that will effect the December bonus. Or are you referring to some other type of bonus?

Probably means bar stipend.

Elston Gunn wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm currently a 3L who accepted a return offer. My firm (One of the big non-DC based firm with a major DC office) just confirmed our start and bonuses with no mention of the virus. Seems like full speed ahead for class of 2020. No idea what it means for layoffs.

They confirmed what your bonus will be right now? That's odd. I'd have expected bonuses, at the very least, will be way down. Firms will just not get new business later this summer, and that will effect the December bonus. Or are you referring to some other type of bonus?

Probably means bar stipend.

Annon from above. We get a signing bonus, bar stipend, and relocation stipend a few months before our start date. Ends up being around $18k.

Can confirm layoffs at a v100. Associates in years 1-4 mostly. DC office of a non-DC HQ firm.

Anonymous User wrote:Can confirm layoffs at a v100. Associates in years 1-4 mostly. DC office of a non-DC HQ firm.

another v100

No confirmation of layoffs but compensation cut coming

Sorry to hear about both situations. "Please stay safe" and please report to ATL to the extent there's little risk of you outing yourselves.

Anonymous User wrote:Can confirm layoffs at a v100. Associates in years 1-4 mostly. DC office of a non-DC HQ firm.

That is just so incredibly short-sighted to layoff this early in the game. Firm must have had prior problems and this is the straw that broke the back.

Any more details you can provide re the overall situation and severance arrangements?

legalpotato wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Can confirm layoffs at a v100. Associates in years 1-4 mostly. DC office of a non-DC HQ firm.

That is just so incredibly short-sighted to layoff this early in the game. Firm must have had prior problems and this is the straw that broke the back.

Any more details you can provide re the overall situation and severance arrangements?

I don’t have all the information across each person, but the firm has been doing well recently. The layoffs are in corporate groups and severance is just website time (not anywhere close to 6 months). People are pretty devastated.

Anonymous User wrote:

legalpotato wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Can confirm layoffs at a v100. Associates in years 1-4 mostly. DC office of a non-DC HQ firm.

That is just so incredibly short-sighted to layoff this early in the game. Firm must have had prior problems and this is the straw that broke the back.

Any more details you can provide re the overall situation and severance arrangements?

I don’t have all the information across each person, but the firm has been doing well recently. The layoffs are in corporate groups and severance is just website time (not anywhere close to 6 months). People are pretty devastated.

No cash severance? That's just cruel. Need to out these firms on ATL to the extent able to do so without compromising identity.

Yugihoe wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

legalpotato wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Can confirm layoffs at a v100. Associates in years 1-4 mostly. DC office of a non-DC HQ firm.

That is just so incredibly short-sighted to layoff this early in the game. Firm must have had prior problems and this is the straw that broke the back.

Any more details you can provide re the overall situation and severance arrangements?

I don’t have all the information across each person, but the firm has been doing well recently. The layoffs are in corporate groups and severance is just website time (not anywhere close to 6 months). People are pretty devastated.

No cash severance? That's just cruel. Need to out these firms on ATL to the extent able to do so without compromising identity.

No severance and not even 6 months of website time is unfathomably cruel.

Accidental anon it’s lllll

Well, market severance is now 2 months.

Maybe boomer partners are thinking, "You've already sat around doing nothing for 2 months! Why should I pay you anything? GTFO!"

Wild Card wrote:Well, market severance is now 2 months.

Maybe boomer partners are thinking, "You've already sat around doing nothing for 2 months! Why should I pay you anything? GTFO!"

Yeah. If only you could go take a stroll in Manhattan and then give the boomer a vigorous handshake to thank them for the opportunity and experience.

But alas.

Yugihoe wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

legalpotato wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Can confirm layoffs at a v100. Associates in years 1-4 mostly. DC office of a non-DC HQ firm.

That is just so incredibly short-sighted to layoff this early in the game. Firm must have had prior problems and this is the straw that broke the back.

Any more details you can provide re the overall situation and severance arrangements?

I don’t have all the information across each person, but the firm has been doing well recently. The layoffs are in corporate groups and severance is just website time (not anywhere close to 6 months). People are pretty devastated.

No cash severance? That's just cruel. Need to out these firms on ATL to the extent able to do so without compromising identity.

Absolutely. Firms like this need to be held accountable in the marketplace. They shouldn't be able to ramp down cause things slow down for a few weeks with the expectation that they will ramp up again in 3 months once ppl are ready to do deals again just to save a few bucks. Also, in this current environment/uncertainty, website time should be for as long as reasonably needed for laid off associated to find a new job.

What on earth is the rationale for denying website time? If anything it seems mutually beneficial to keep available as long as possible for the same reason firms give cold offers.

So what happened in 2008 to lawyers who got let go from big law? Is it just a year of unemployment and then can go back into big law, or is it a whole generation of lawyers who never quite saw the same level of income again? I'm in-house right now (just recently left big law pretty junior) and if laid off I don't think I could get another job that pays 50% of my income to be honest. Might end up having to just leave the law in that case.