What's going on at Paul, Weiss? Forum

[dabboyexpress]

Title says it all - what's going on at PW?

Seems like they're losing lots of (senior) partners without gaining any big rainmakers in the last year or two. Krishna Veeraghavan was probably their biggest poach, but that was back in 2021.

I've generally been hearing more negative things about them than positive, so curious if anyone has any inside scope. Is it the new leadership? Something more?

[Anonymous User]

Title says it all - what's going on at PW?

Seems like they're losing lots of (senior) partners without gaining any big rainmakers in the last year or two. Krishna Veeraghavan was probably their biggest poach, but that was back in 2021.

I've generally been hearing more negative things about them than positive, so curious if anyone has any inside scope. Is it the new leadership? Something more?

People I know there (in corp) seem quite happy. I thought they actually did pretty well last year--relatively lower dips in PPP/PPL/etc. than peer firms--though maybe that's because they're so strong in lit. Also, they poached Forrest from Cravath recently, so that's something, no?

[Anonymous User]

Probably just older partners upset at the allocation of shares under a new regime and leaving? They’ve had a fair number of big deals in M&A lately, so I think the group is fine/going strong. Fwiw I don’t work at PW and based on anecdotes from multiple friends who left it sounds awful to be a corporate associate there.

[Anonymous User]

PW is doing just fine. In litigation, they recently recruited a very senior Cravath partner. In M&A, they just relocated Dotun Obadina from Jones Day MN. Kreesh was a huge score and has been unbelievably busy in winning work from Amazon and GSK. In finance, they got David Tarr (who is excellent) in 2021. They also poached two of Apollo's preferred partners from Akin Gump in 2021. Sure, they lost Rachel Coffey but she was toxic and none of the associates liked her. She was also way low on the totem pole from Kyle and Laura who were Scott's real deputies. Who else of consequence have you noticed is leaving?

It is admittedly very hard to be a corporate associate there only because there is so much work at all times. Centralized staffing basically calls you every day after a closing to load you up with new auction mark-ups or issues lists that turn into deals. The senior corporate lawyers there are cordial and polite, but they are demanding--and that is because their clients are demanding. Every public company transaction is a critical moment for the client, so those deals are very rigorous and PW has more than their fair share of them. And aside from the loyal stable of PE clients (Apollo, GA, Oak Hill, etc.), PW is in fights to solidify their relationships with sponsors like Ares and Kohlberg. So that puts pressure on deal teams working for those clients.

[Anonymous User]

PW is doing just fine. In litigation, they recently recruited a very senior Cravath partner. In M&A, they just relocated Dotun Obadina from Jones Day MN. Kreesh was a huge score and has been unbelievably busy in winning work from Amazon and GSK. In finance, they got David Tarr (who is excellent) in 2021. They also poached two of Apollo's preferred partners from Akin Gump in 2021. Sure, they lost Rachel Coffey but she was toxic and none of the associates liked her. She was also way low on the totem pole from Kyle and Laura who were Scott's real deputies. Who else of consequence have you noticed is leaving?

It is admittedly very hard to be a corporate associate there only because there is so much work at all times. Centralized staffing basically calls you every day after a closing to load you up with new auction mark-ups or issues lists that turn into deals. The senior corporate lawyers there are cordial and polite, but they are demanding--and that is because their clients are demanding. Every public company transaction is a critical moment for the client, so those deals are very rigorous and PW has more than their fair share of them. And aside from the loyal stable of PE clients (Apollo, GA, Oak Hill, etc.), PW is in fights to solidify their relationships with sponsors like Ares and Kohlberg. So that puts pressure on deal teams working for those clients.

Anon because I used to be at PW, a long time ago.

Jeff Saferstein, Ariel Decklebaum, Larry Wee, and Catherine Goodall are all recent departures off the top of my head. They were all long-timers, so it was interesting to see their departures.

I hadn't heard anything negative about Rachel. In fact, I always heard the exact opposite (that associates really liked her).

It generally seems like there's a ton of turnover there - more so than other peer firms that are also swamped with work, so curious if there's additional factors making it a tough place to work than sheer workload. The allocation of shares point seems like one.

[Anonymous User]

I did not realize Ariel had left. That move was not very well-publicized.

[Anonymous User]

Austin Witt is another departure. Right after he started the special sits group, too.

I agree that the firm appears to be doing fine financially. Lots of big public deals recently, and I'm sure their private equity base is/continues to be fine (though they're probably more impacted with the rate hikes and going on). Fortunately, they have a strong distressed team that is more than able to take on any resulting restructuring work.

HOWEVER, on the "culture" / environment front (and please note that is is for corporate), I think there are a few things that are impacting the firm:

1 - Barshay vs. Schumer: Barshay joined in ~2016 and took over as corporate chair in ~2020. Excellent lawyer, with a book of business that may well be unparalleled. However, he's just generally not the most pleasant of people. I haven't directly worked with him, but I have yet to hear someone (from either Cravath or PW) that speaks well of him personally. Schumer, on the other hand, was a very likable and pleasant chair. Given culture comes from the top (and that Barshay has an especially heavy style of leadership), I can imagine it permeates down the chain. If anyone has specific Barshay stories, feel free to weigh in.

2 - "Kirklandization": I understand that partner compensation has moved from modified lockstep to essentially modified eat-what-you-kill. This ties in with what one of the posters above mentioned re: allocation of shares. I imagine this modification especially affects senior partners, who helped build their groups/the firm, but may not be as active in business development these days. Note that part of the reason Barshay (and other big rainmakers) left Cravath is because of the strict lockstep system, and how it was "unfair" to the partners in their ~40s.

Similarly, PW introduced a bonus multiplier/add-on for a couple years. Imagine this was intended to stem the tide of departures, but the roll-out wasn't as smooth as it could've been. They announced it late in the year (and made it retroactive) without clear guidelines (though associates were able to figure out the hours-based requirements by talking amongst themselves). PW has historically been a "we all get paid the same amount and row in the same direction" kind of place, for better or worse, so I know this fly-by-night change irked a number of people (including partners and associates who got the multiplier!).

3 - Culture Change: this is a catch-all for anything not captured above, but it's an effect of 1 and 2. PW used to be a pleasant place to work. Everyone in corporate knew one another, worked hard, etc. In the last couple years, it's became a "bill bill bill" kind of place, but hiding behind the veneer of the older days. As a result, most of the associate departures were either to places like Cooley/Gunderson (which were, for true reasons or not, known to have better cultures) or Kirkland (where if you were going to work that hard, you might as well get the big lateral signing bonus).

Long and short of it, the firm is doing well and printing money. There are rifts in the culture as of recent years, mostly felt by the associates but also affecting (some) partners. Whether that leads to a mass exodus or decreased revenue/PPP, we'll see. But certainly something in the water - and as the history of law firms has taught us, small things can avalanche.

[Anonymous User]

Austin Witt is another departure. Right after he started the special sits group, too.

I agree that the firm appears to be doing fine financially. Lots of big public deals recently, and I'm sure their private equity base is/continues to be fine (though they're probably more impacted with the rate hikes and going on). Fortunately, they have a strong distressed team that is more than able to take on any resulting restructuring work.

HOWEVER, on the "culture" / environment front (and please note that is is for corporate), I think there are a few things that are impacting the firm:

1 - Barshay vs. Schumer: Barshay joined in ~2016 and took over as corporate chair in ~2020. Excellent lawyer, with a book of business that may well be unparalleled. However, he's just generally not the most pleasant of people. I haven't directly worked with him, but I have yet to hear someone (from either Cravath or PW) that speaks well of him personally. Schumer, on the other hand, was a very likable and pleasant chair. Given culture comes from the top (and that Barshay has an especially heavy style of leadership), I can imagine it permeates down the chain. If anyone has specific Barshay stories, feel free to weigh in.

2 - "Kirklandization": I understand that partner compensation has moved from modified lockstep to essentially modified eat-what-you-kill. This ties in with what one of the posters above mentioned re: allocation of shares. I imagine this modification especially affects senior partners, who helped build their groups/the firm, but may not be as active in business development these days. Note that part of the reason Barshay (and other big rainmakers) left Cravath is because of the strict lockstep system, and how it was "unfair" to the partners in their ~40s.

Similarly, PW introduced a bonus multiplier/add-on for a couple years. Imagine this was intended to stem the tide of departures, but the roll-out wasn't as smooth as it could've been. They announced it late in the year (and made it retroactive) without clear guidelines (though associates were able to figure out the hours-based requirements by talking amongst themselves). PW has historically been a "we all get paid the same amount and row in the same direction" kind of place, for better or worse, so I know this fly-by-night change irked a number of people (including partners and associates who got the multiplier!).

3 - Culture Change: this is a catch-all for anything not captured above, but it's an effect of 1 and 2. PW used to be a pleasant place to work. Everyone in corporate knew one another, worked hard, etc. In the last couple years, it's became a "bill bill bill" kind of place, but hiding behind the veneer of the older days. As a result, most of the associate departures were either to places like Cooley/Gunderson (which were, for true reasons or not, known to have better cultures) or Kirkland (where if you were going to work that hard, you might as well get the big lateral signing bonus).

Long and short of it, the firm is doing well and printing money. There are rifts in the culture as of recent years, mostly felt by the associates but also affecting (some) partners. Whether that leads to a mass exodus or decreased revenue/PPP, we'll see. But certainly something in the water - and as the history of law firms has taught us, small things can avalanche.

This is pretty accurate. Am close with some of the departing partners and worked at PW in my past life.

PW is one of those firms that’s moving more towards a Kirkland mindset but is still trying to preserve the country club image and culture. They’ve always been more open to poaching lateral talent but everything has become more competitive. Just growing pains. It will hit the other white shoe shops soon too. Natural evolution of how the profession has changed.

[Anonymous User]

Former PW corporate associate. I'm not surprised by any of this. I like the term "Kirklandization" because it's fitting. It's also amusing because while I was there, the firm leaders almost always advocated that PW is specifically NOT Kirkland.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

I’m a senior associate (2014-2016 grad) in big law NYC and have been getting contacted by recruiters left and right about applying to PW for some associate search that is like 2nd-7th year which seemed weird to me and I interpreted to mean they need to hire multiple associates.

[Anonymous User]

I did not realize Ariel had left. That move was not very well-publicized.

It was in a bunch of the press pieces, and Ropes certainly made some noise about it. And while it feels like a lifetime ago, Hamill only moved four years ago, took the Endeavor IPO with him, has managed to steal Silver Lake work from STB, and is now head of M&A at Latham.

That’s sad, too, if the Kirklandization claims are true - but I guess it would have needed a big dollar amount/guarantee to get Krishna away from S&C. PW is right at the top of the few public deals that are happening right now, though: I’m seeing them as often as S&C and Skadden, and more often than CSM, DPW, STB, K&E, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Austin Witt is another departure. Right after he started the special sits group, too.

I agree that the firm appears to be doing fine financially. Lots of big public deals recently, and I'm sure their private equity base is/continues to be fine (though they're probably more impacted with the rate hikes and going on). Fortunately, they have a strong distressed team that is more than able to take on any resulting restructuring work.

HOWEVER, on the "culture" / environment front (and please note that is is for corporate), I think there are a few things that are impacting the firm:

1 - Barshay vs. Schumer: Barshay joined in ~2016 and took over as corporate chair in ~2020. Excellent lawyer, with a book of business that may well be unparalleled. However, he's just generally not the most pleasant of people. I haven't directly worked with him, but I have yet to hear someone (from either Cravath or PW) that speaks well of him personally. Schumer, on the other hand, was a very likable and pleasant chair. Given culture comes from the top (and that Barshay has an especially heavy style of leadership), I can imagine it permeates down the chain. If anyone has specific Barshay stories, feel free to weigh in.

2 - "Kirklandization": I understand that partner compensation has moved from modified lockstep to essentially modified eat-what-you-kill. This ties in with what one of the posters above mentioned re: allocation of shares. I imagine this modification especially affects senior partners, who helped build their groups/the firm, but may not be as active in business development these days. Note that part of the reason Barshay (and other big rainmakers) left Cravath is because of the strict lockstep system, and how it was "unfair" to the partners in their ~40s.

Similarly, PW introduced a bonus multiplier/add-on for a couple years. Imagine this was intended to stem the tide of departures, but the roll-out wasn't as smooth as it could've been. They announced it late in the year (and made it retroactive) without clear guidelines (though associates were able to figure out the hours-based requirements by talking amongst themselves). PW has historically been a "we all get paid the same amount and row in the same direction" kind of place, for better or worse, so I know this fly-by-night change irked a number of people (including partners and associates who got the multiplier!).

3 - Culture Change: this is a catch-all for anything not captured above, but it's an effect of 1 and 2. PW used to be a pleasant place to work. Everyone in corporate knew one another, worked hard, etc. In the last couple years, it's became a "bill bill bill" kind of place, but hiding behind the veneer of the older days. As a result, most of the associate departures were either to places like Cooley/Gunderson (which were, for true reasons or not, known to have better cultures) or Kirkland (where if you were going to work that hard, you might as well get the big lateral signing bonus).

Long and short of it, the firm is doing well and printing money. There are rifts in the culture as of recent years, mostly felt by the associates but also affecting (some) partners. Whether that leads to a mass exodus or decreased revenue/PPP, we'll see. But certainly something in the water - and as the history of law firms has taught us, small things can avalanche.

Posts like these are why I like TLS. One question - are you saying the bill bill bill culture will lead to an avalanche because you’ve seen the bill bill culture collapse other firms? I haven’t heard of this, seemed like most demises come from being too relaxed, so I’m curious your take.

[Anonymous User]

Austin Witt is another departure. Right after he started the special sits group, too.

I agree that the firm appears to be doing fine financially. Lots of big public deals recently, and I'm sure their private equity base is/continues to be fine (though they're probably more impacted with the rate hikes and going on). Fortunately, they have a strong distressed team that is more than able to take on any resulting restructuring work.

HOWEVER, on the "culture" / environment front (and please note that is is for corporate), I think there are a few things that are impacting the firm:

1 - Barshay vs. Schumer: Barshay joined in ~2016 and took over as corporate chair in ~2020. Excellent lawyer, with a book of business that may well be unparalleled. However, he's just generally not the most pleasant of people. I haven't directly worked with him, but I have yet to hear someone (from either Cravath or PW) that speaks well of him personally. Schumer, on the other hand, was a very likable and pleasant chair. Given culture comes from the top (and that Barshay has an especially heavy style of leadership), I can imagine it permeates down the chain. If anyone has specific Barshay stories, feel free to weigh in.

2 - "Kirklandization": I understand that partner compensation has moved from modified lockstep to essentially modified eat-what-you-kill. This ties in with what one of the posters above mentioned re: allocation of shares. I imagine this modification especially affects senior partners, who helped build their groups/the firm, but may not be as active in business development these days. Note that part of the reason Barshay (and other big rainmakers) left Cravath is because of the strict lockstep system, and how it was "unfair" to the partners in their ~40s.

Similarly, PW introduced a bonus multiplier/add-on for a couple years. Imagine this was intended to stem the tide of departures, but the roll-out wasn't as smooth as it could've been. They announced it late in the year (and made it retroactive) without clear guidelines (though associates were able to figure out the hours-based requirements by talking amongst themselves). PW has historically been a "we all get paid the same amount and row in the same direction" kind of place, for better or worse, so I know this fly-by-night change irked a number of people (including partners and associates who got the multiplier!).

3 - Culture Change: this is a catch-all for anything not captured above, but it's an effect of 1 and 2. PW used to be a pleasant place to work. Everyone in corporate knew one another, worked hard, etc. In the last couple years, it's became a "bill bill bill" kind of place, but hiding behind the veneer of the older days. As a result, most of the associate departures were either to places like Cooley/Gunderson (which were, for true reasons or not, known to have better cultures) or Kirkland (where if you were going to work that hard, you might as well get the big lateral signing bonus).

Long and short of it, the firm is doing well and printing money. There are rifts in the culture as of recent years, mostly felt by the associates but also affecting (some) partners. Whether that leads to a mass exodus or decreased revenue/PPP, we'll see. But certainly something in the water - and as the history of law firms has taught us, small things can avalanche.

Posts like these are why I like TLS. One question - are you saying the bill bill bill culture will lead to an avalanche because you’ve seen the bill bill culture collapse other firms? I haven’t heard of this, seemed like most demises come from being too relaxed, so I’m curious your take.

Great question, and one I didn't articulate well. I have a few thoughts on this generally - this may all seem a bit scattered, so bear with me.

1 - Kirklandization - this model of hiring young rainmakers into a competitive EWYK culture, all predicated on being the richest and most profitable firm is a fairly new development at Kirkland. Let's say, the last 10-15 years or so. I graduated law school around 2015, and it was still known as a rising star than one of the hyperelites for corporate/transactional. It was more known as a Chicago firm, especially renowned for its litigation prowess.

I say that to stress the relative recency of this model. Certainly, other firms have tried before (like Dewey) and lateral poaching isn't new. And Kirkland has put some smart twists on their recruiting (shorter timeframes for guarantees, re-assessing shares more frequently (every other year, I believe), etc.). But we have yet to see the long(er)-term viability/consequences of the "build a firm of mercenaries" approach. Perhaps it's smooth sailing, it's simply the new reality of law firm life, and in 10 years, there's only one law firm across America: Kirkland. Perhaps, like other firms that grew rapidly, it has its failures. TBD.

2 - Relating to the above, there's a delta between the "old" PW and the "new" PW. A poster above referred to "growing pains", which I think is the case. Perhaps there's nothing wrong with the Kirkland model, but as it's being implemented at PW, we're seeing departures from partners who preferred the older culture. If there's an exact even exchange of departures and arrivals, then obviously shouldn't be a problem. But if there continues to be departures without getting fresh blood, could be a problem.

3 - Speaking of that delta, "culture" is an interesting thing to navigate. I don't profess to have a degree in organization psychology or even an MBA, so bear with me. But I think trying to be a little bit of everything is often a road to failure (and, life advice, I think that's true for people on an individual scale!). I think if PW wants to be Kirkland, it should lean more strongly into it. I think they're hiding behind the veneer of the more "genteel" pre-pandemic/pre-Barshay days right now, which is disingenous and doesn't work. Figure out what you want to be, and lean into it.

And this relates to the departures, both associates and partners. Certain partners (who, to be clear, are fantastic lawyers, done their share of business development, and have serviced clients well) want to focus on lawyering and getting their fair compensation. Some of them have left to go to firms that have more lockstep cultures. Others figure, that if it's solely about money, then go to whoever is the highest bidder. Again, PW seems to kind of be in no man's land between those extremes.

Associates feel kind of similarly. PW used to be a fantastic place, where people worked hard but weren't getting killed, knew they'd get compensated fairly without politicking, and generally enjoyed the work environment. It was a place that was a little bit more "holistic" in how they viewed/treated associates (though there was always an emphasis on billing a lot!). It was a good hybrid of great culture and great work. The culture changes are certainly apparent, so that leaves great work. And one of the responses above that talks about all the great deals PW has seems to be proving my point - the focus is solely on the work these days. Associates used to very rarely leave PW Corp to lateral to another NY BigLaw firm. Folks left to get promotions at other firms, certainly, but lateral moves weren't that common. That obviously changed and only really in the last 3 years.

So people who wanted great culture are going elsewhere to try to find it (to the extent it exists). You can find great work at any of the V25 (and below) - so, again, if it's only about money, then go out to the market and find the highest bidder.

4 - There was a thread on Kirkland the other day that made an interesting point. The executive committee there are all laterals from other firms who came to Kirkland, motivated primarily (or entirely) by the money. So that mindset is going to permeate throughout the firm. PW Corporate is in a similar place - it's now headed up by a guy who was mostly motivated to leave Cravath because he didn't like the pure lockstep model.

I'm not trying to debate the merits of lockstep or EWYK. And certainly, we all want to make money. But it's not the singular most important thing for a lot of partners, but they can become the silent majority.

Kirklandization at PW Corp may also be tough, because of its dedication to Apollo. Kirkland has a much varied base of clients, so they're not reliant on keeping one specific client happy. PW needs to keep Apollo happy (and certainly get compensated accordingly for doing so). But I think that relationship puts a hamper on the possibility of the PE growth that the firm can do. Perhaps not - STB has KKR and Blackstone, and also does lender-side work. But if PW can't figure it out, then there becomes a limit on the war chest that PW can build to attract the lateral elites (especially as they continue to have partner departures).

Conclusion - if I knew how to run a law firm (or even just a business), I wouldn't be posting on TLS, so take this all with a grain of salt. Growing pains is perhaps the way to sum it all up. PW is changing very, very quickly. Maybe they'll stick the landing, maybe they won't.

Contrary to the general view on TLS, I think there are great firms out there that are also pleasant places to work. LW is one that comes to mind (and, incidentally, a place where a few PW laterals have headed). I think that once you become like Kirkland and singularly focus on making as much money as you can for the equity partners, it can become a race to the bottom - you lose culture, you lose associates, you lose partners.

[Anonymous User]

Hearing rumors that Tracey Zaccone is leaving. So the two people who started the hybrid capital/special sits group less than a year ago will be gone.

[Anonymous User]

Hearing rumors that Tracey Zaccone is leaving. So the two people who started the hybrid capital/special sits group less than a year ago will be gone.

That’s wild. They’ve basically fully retreated from that space. Losing Wee, Witt and Zaccone in 12 months? Dunno who’s going to originate and do that work now. Seems like a total fumble. Or they should have spent the money to close that partner from Akin.

[Anonymous User]

Hearing rumors that Tracey Zaccone is leaving. So the two people who started the hybrid capital/special sits group less than a year ago will be gone.

That’s wild. They’ve basically fully retreated from that space. Losing Wee, Witt and Zaccone in 12 months? Dunno who’s going to originate and do that work now. Seems like a total fumble. Or they should have spent the money to close that partner from Akin.

Right when there's a wave of restructuring/distressed activity on the horizon too...

[Anonymous User]

PW is doing just fine. In litigation, they recently recruited a very senior Cravath partner. In M&A, they just relocated Dotun Obadina from Jones Day MN. Kreesh was a huge score and has been unbelievably busy in winning work from Amazon and GSK. In finance, they got David Tarr (who is excellent) in 2021. They also poached two of Apollo's preferred partners from Akin Gump in 2021. Sure, they lost Rachel Coffey but she was toxic and none of the associates liked her. She was also way low on the totem pole from Kyle and Laura who were Scott's real deputies. Who else of consequence have you noticed is leaving?

It is admittedly very hard to be a corporate associate there only because there is so much work at all times. Centralized staffing basically calls you every day after a closing to load you up with new auction mark-ups or issues lists that turn into deals. The senior corporate lawyers there are cordial and polite, but they are demanding--and that is because their clients are demanding. Every public company transaction is a critical moment for the client, so those deals are very rigorous and PW has more than their fair share of them. And aside from the loyal stable of PE clients (Apollo, GA, Oak Hill, etc.), PW is in fights to solidify their relationships with sponsors like Ares and Kohlberg. So that puts pressure on deal teams working for those clients.

From what friends have told me, it’s not limited to corporate. You’ll have non lawyers (not that there’s anything inherently wrong with that) in the staffing department demanding that you take on more work and matters even after 250-300 (or more) hour months, and sometimes not even being fully apprised or aware of how underwater someone is when doing so.

I don’t have as many friends that work or worked at places like Skadden, DPW or STB where I would guess the overall workloads are similar, so idk if it’s done the same way at other peer firms, but everyone I know that once worked at PW mentioned their unhappiness with how staffing is handled and felt like it was a lot, even for biglaw at a very strong/elite firm.

[Anonymous User]

PW culture is not great and many attorneys are underwater. With that said, I haven't seen a whiff of layoffs. As a current PW associate, I'm very confused why PW is getting the smoke here while Kirkland and Ropes are getting away with tanking people's careers.

[Sackboy]

PW culture is not great and many attorneys are underwater. With that said, I haven't seen a whiff of layoffs. As a current PW associate, I'm very confused why PW is getting the smoke here while Kirkland and Ropes are getting away with tanking people's careers.

This is a thread dedicated to PW...

[Anonymous User]

PW culture is not great and many attorneys are underwater. With that said, I haven't seen a whiff of layoffs. As a current PW associate, I'm very confused why PW is getting the smoke here while Kirkland and Ropes are getting away with tanking people's careers.

Kirkland getting no smoke? Half this forum is threads bashing Kirkland.

[Anonymous User]

I like the point about "growing pains" [from Kirklandization] coming for all white shoe firms. DPW seems to be managing it very well so far, with an incredibly aggressive lateral hiring regimen that's literally turned Cravath into a partner farm but that hasn't [yet?] seemed to affect its old school, genteel culture. STB stemmed the losses to Kirkland maybe 5-6 years ago, hasn't lost [any?] major corporate partners recently, and is only now starting to wade into the lateral partner market for more niche/non-corporate roles. Though, will note that the security is largely attributable to the firm starting a non-equity tier to prop up profits and keep equity partners happy (at least imo). S&C general corporate has remained largely untouched since Krishna left, so I'd say they've been the most aloof and "safest" from Kirklandization thus far. They also haven't done much lateral hiring, except Blass, which is super recent. Cravath made big bets with its D.C. office and the hiring of those two partners from Shearman (idk what the play is there). They've already lost on the Portilla bet and profits in recent years, while superb, are starting to lag behind their peers and falling more in line with Weil or Debevoise (still printing cash, of course!), so who knows if they'll have enough firepower to attract lateral stars going forward. Wachtell...well, they're special, so I guess we don't need to talk about them.

Viewed in light of its peers, then, PW doesn't seem to be doing "bad" or suffering anything particularly concerning. It still only has a single tier of equity partners and its core strengths in PE and public M&A remain pretty robust. But it definitely needs to figure out where it stands on the "lockstep/genteel" to "EWYK/money is king" spectrum, bc like someone else said, it's difficult--and unwise, from a business/hiring perspective--to straddle the nebulous no man's land.

[Anonymous User]

PW culture is not great and many attorneys are underwater. With that said, I haven't seen a whiff of layoffs. As a current PW associate, I'm very confused why PW is getting the smoke here while Kirkland and Ropes are getting away with tanking people's careers.

Kirkland getting no smoke? Half this forum is threads bashing Kirkland.

That’s right, and now it’s P,W’s turn in the barrel.

[Anonymous User]

PW is doing just fine. In litigation, they recently recruited a very senior Cravath partner. In M&A, they just relocated Dotun Obadina from Jones Day MN. Kreesh was a huge score and has been unbelievably busy in winning work from Amazon and GSK. In finance, they got David Tarr (who is excellent) in 2021. They also poached two of Apollo's preferred partners from Akin Gump in 2021. Sure, they lost Rachel Coffey but she was toxic and none of the associates liked her. She was also way low on the totem pole from Kyle and Laura who were Scott's real deputies. Who else of consequence have you noticed is leaving?

It is admittedly very hard to be a corporate associate there only because there is so much work at all times. Centralized staffing basically calls you every day after a closing to load you up with new auction mark-ups or issues lists that turn into deals. The senior corporate lawyers there are cordial and polite, but they are demanding--and that is because their clients are demanding. Every public company transaction is a critical moment for the client, so those deals are very rigorous and PW has more than their fair share of them. And aside from the loyal stable of PE clients (Apollo, GA, Oak Hill, etc.), PW is in fights to solidify their relationships with sponsors like Ares and Kohlberg. So that puts pressure on deal teams working for those clients.

From what friends have told me, it’s not limited to corporate. You’ll have non lawyers (not that there’s anything inherently wrong with that) in the staffing department demanding that you take on more work and matters even after 250-300 (or more) hour months, and sometimes not even being fully apprised or aware of how underwater someone is when doing so.

I don’t have as many friends that work or worked at places like Skadden, DPW or STB where I would guess the overall workloads are similar, so idk if it’s done the same way at other peer firms, but everyone I know that once worked at PW mentioned their unhappiness with how staffing is handled and felt like it was a lot, even for biglaw at a very strong/elite firm.

Which is worse as a corporate associate, PW or Kirkland?

[Anonymous User]

PW is doing fine. It's solidly in the tier just below Cravath and Wachtell

[Anonymous User]

PW is doing fine. It's solidly in the tier just below Cravath and Wachtell

it's literally in the same tier as csm these days...