lol what.LaLiLuLeLo wrote:loooooooooooolAnonymous User wrote:This is a weird comment considering Latham’s bankruptcy group has been going gangbusters for the past year + and is now pretty firmly the #3 shop behind Weil/KE.Anonymous User wrote:At Kirkland -- I think we are somewhat better positioned than most huge firms because we have a large bankruptcy practice (and that practice spins off lawsuits that the litigators can handle, etc.). It's a significant difference between us and Latham.
"Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic" Forum
- DoveBodyWash
- Posts: 3177
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
-
- Posts: 428403
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
Don’t really want to sidetrack this thread with this point, but I can assure you that as a midlevel in restructuring that has worked at two of these firms this is the case.DoveBodyWash wrote:lol what.LaLiLuLeLo wrote:loooooooooooolAnonymous User wrote:This is a weird comment considering Latham’s bankruptcy group has been going gangbusters for the past year + and is now pretty firmly the #3 shop behind Weil/KE.Anonymous User wrote:At Kirkland -- I think we are somewhat better positioned than most huge firms because we have a large bankruptcy practice (and that practice spins off lawsuits that the litigators can handle, etc.). It's a significant difference between us and Latham.
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 3:06 pm
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
Not even remotely true. https://www.wsj.com/graphics/bankruptcy-power-players/Anonymous User wrote:Don’t really want to sidetrack this thread with this point, but I can assure you that as a midlevel in restructuring that has worked at two of these firms this is the case.DoveBodyWash wrote:lol what.LaLiLuLeLo wrote:loooooooooooolAnonymous User wrote:This is a weird comment considering Latham’s bankruptcy group has been going gangbusters for the past year + and is now pretty firmly the #3 shop behind Weil/KE.Anonymous User wrote:At Kirkland -- I think we are somewhat better positioned than most huge firms because we have a large bankruptcy practice (and that practice spins off lawsuits that the litigators can handle, etc.). It's a significant difference between us and Latham.
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 10:29 pm
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
You are delusional. The WSJ article as well as a mountain of other evidence clearly show that Weil/KE are handling the vast majority of debtor-side work. Everyone else (including Latham lmao) is very far behind.Anonymous User wrote:Don’t really want to sidetrack this thread with this point, but I can assure you that as a midlevel in restructuring that has worked at two of these firms this is the case.DoveBodyWash wrote:lol what.LaLiLuLeLo wrote:loooooooooooolAnonymous User wrote:This is a weird comment considering Latham’s bankruptcy group has been going gangbusters for the past year + and is now pretty firmly the #3 shop behind Weil/KE.Anonymous User wrote:At Kirkland -- I think we are somewhat better positioned than most huge firms because we have a large bankruptcy practice (and that practice spins off lawsuits that the litigators can handle, etc.). It's a significant difference between us and Latham.
Last edited by QContinuum on Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Outed for anon abuse.
Reason: Outed for anon abuse.
- Man from Nantucket
- Posts: 133
- Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:31 pm
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
The group is basically 2 years old so it isn’t particularly surprising that it isn’t a focus in an article examining bankruptcies over the past decade +. Latham has been performing very well on the debtor side including what I think was the second biggest filing of the pst year after PG&E.txhill wrote:Not even remotely true. https://www.wsj.com/graphics/bankruptcy-power-players/Anonymous User wrote:Don’t really want to sidetrack this thread with this point, but I can assure you that as a midlevel in restructuring that has worked at two of these firms this is the case.DoveBodyWash wrote:lol what.LaLiLuLeLo wrote:loooooooooooolAnonymous User wrote:This is a weird comment considering Latham’s bankruptcy group has been going gangbusters for the past year + and is now pretty firmly the #3 shop behind Weil/KE.Anonymous User wrote:At Kirkland -- I think we are somewhat better positioned than most huge firms because we have a large bankruptcy practice (and that practice spins off lawsuits that the litigators can handle, etc.). It's a significant difference between us and Latham.
FWIW: https://www.law360.com/articles/1232607 ... ear-latham
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Wild Card
- Posts: 988
- Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 6:48 pm
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
No one old enough will ever forget that Latham massacred a generation of young associates and that accordingly it is a festering TTT in decline no matter how much money it makes and how many partners it buys.
-
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:08 pm
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
This. Getting axed during publicly announced layoffs due to economic reasons is actually far less stigmatizing and confidence-draining for a young attorney than being gaslit with an out-of-the-blue performance review where you are suddenly told that it turns out you aren’t meeting expectations and that you need to find a job within 1-3 months if lucky (which is lol when there are literally no jobs and peeps in NYC can’t even leave their apartments.) The former also come with severance pay, whereas the latter do not. I expect most firms will go with stealthing because it keeps the bad press away and does minimal harm to a firm’s reputation among law students and therefore keeps the recruits coming.Wild Card wrote:No one old enough will ever forget that Latham massacred a generation of young associates and that accordingly it is a festering TTT in decline no matter how much money it makes and how many partners it buys.
Last edited by QContinuum on Wed Apr 01, 2020 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Outed for anon abuse.
Reason: Outed for anon abuse.
-
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:22 pm
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
I suspect very few of the posters here are old enough to know what TTT even means.Wild Card wrote:No one old enough will ever forget that Latham massacred a generation of young associates and that accordingly it is a festering TTT in decline no matter how much money it makes and how many partners it buys.
-
- Posts: 3594
- Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:52 am
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
I like how you begin your post by pretending to agree with Wild Card, while the rest of the post actually disagrees 100%.TMJ2017 wrote:This. Getting axed during publicly announced layoffs due to economic reasons is actually far less stigmatizing and confidence-draining for a young attorney than being gaslit with an out-of-the-blue performance review where you are suddenly told that it turns out you aren’t meeting expectations and that you need to find a job within 1-3 months if lucky (which is lol when there are literally no jobs and peeps in NYC can’t even leave their apartments.) The former also come with severance pay, whereas the latter do not. I expect most firms will go with stealthing because it keeps the bad press away and does minimal harm to a firm’s reputation among law students and therefore keeps the recruits coming.Wild Card wrote:No one old enough will ever forget that Latham massacred a generation of young associates and that accordingly it is a festering TTT in decline no matter how much money it makes and how many partners it buys.
I fall on both sides of this. On the one hand, I agree that being publicly laid off due to economic reasons is (comparably) much less damaging, both psychologically and career-wise, than being "stealthed" for bogus performance reasons. On the other hand, (i) I seem to recall some reporting on ATL (which, to be clear, I have no firsthand knowledge of) that Latham also "stealthed" significant numbers of associates, both before and after the headline-grabbing layoff. And, (ii) again based on ATL reporting (with no firsthand knowledge on my part), the sheer number of associates laid off by Latham, as a fraction of their class year, was unusually high amongst its peer firms.
This kind of feeds back to CWT's salary cuts right now. If, in fact, CWT doesn't end up laying anyone off, then I totally agree the 25% salary cut is much preferable to laying off 25% of CWT's associates. As others have pointed out ITT, while it's probably pretty easy to identify, say, the lowest-performing 10% at any firm, and probably makes sense to let those go, there is a broad, mushy middle, and I've gotta think there'd be a significant amount of randomness and politics involved in identifying a full quarter of associates to cut.
-
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:44 am
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
What % of its total US associates were actual axed during the infamous Latham lay-off?
-
- Posts: 6874
- Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:32 am
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
12%, at least publicly https://abovethelaw.com/2009/02/nationw ... 250-staff/objctnyrhnr wrote:What % of its total US associates were actual axed during the infamous Latham lay-off?
-
- Posts: 1044
- Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 2:14 am
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
I have a minor nitpick. Cutting 25% of associate salary saves the firm much less than laying off 25% of attorneys. If you lay off 25% of your attorneys, you also lose any healthcare and other benefit expenses that you subsidize for each attorney.QContinuum wrote:
If, in fact, CWT doesn't end up laying anyone off, then I totally agree the 25% salary cut is much preferable to laying off 25% of CWT's associates.
-
- Posts: 3594
- Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:52 am
Re: "Cadwalader Cuts Pay [By 25%] Across The Firm To Weather Pandemic"
While I agree there are some non-salary expenses, I don't think it's that significant. Maybe cutting 25% of associate salary = same savings as cutting 22% of associates? Salary is still by far the most significant expense - it's not like law firms match 401ks for associates, and many don't even subsidize medical coverage that much.Sackboy wrote:I have a minor nitpick. Cutting 25% of associate salary saves the firm much less than laying off 25% of attorneys. If you lay off 25% of your attorneys, you also lose any healthcare and other benefit expenses that you subsidize for each attorney.QContinuum wrote:
If, in fact, CWT doesn't end up laying anyone off, then I totally agree the 25% salary cut is much preferable to laying off 25% of CWT's associates.
In addition, with a pay cut, the firm also gets the "insurance policy" of having manpower in place (not to mention saving on lateral recruiting and hiring expenses) should the economy come roaring back in relatively short order, which isn't impossible if, say, any of the myriad of drugs in clinical testing right now proves to be a miracle treatment that results in the lockdowns getting lifted in the next few weeks.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login