Is Kirkland pushing back incoming associate start dates? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I thought Cravath was a ticket for working harder for less money? Unless you can direct deposit prestige; maybe I missed that innovation

Last I checked, a salary was more money than no salary. So unless Cravath is doing similar layoffs, maybe there's value to (relative) job security that outweighs a 5% extra bonus.

[Anonymous User]

I thought Cravath was a ticket for working harder for less money? Unless you can direct deposit prestige; maybe I missed that innovation

Last I checked, a salary was more money than no salary. So unless Cravath is doing similar layoffs, maybe there's value to (relative) job security that outweighs a 5% extra bonus.

Does Kirkland pay associates more than Cravath? If so, shook.

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

If the Kirkland SP believes that Kirkland's "performance reviews" resulting in multiple firings across multiple offices weren't layoffs, including first years, I'm not sure we can trust their objectivity here.

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

Tis better to be feared than loved.

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

If the Kirkland SP believes that Kirkland's "performance reviews" resulting in multiple firings across multiple offices weren't layoffs, including first years, I'm not sure we can trust their objectivity here.

He knows they were layoffs he's just trying to gaslight us and the laid off associates. I'm sure all the SPs got like the list of talking points informally or formally of what to say.

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

If the Kirkland SP believes that Kirkland's "performance reviews" resulting in multiple firings across multiple offices weren't layoffs, including first years, I'm not sure we can trust their objectivity here.

He knows they were layoffs he's just trying to gaslight us and the laid off associates. I'm sure all the SPs got like the list of talking points informally or formally of what to say.

That is Tucker Carlson-levels of conspiracy theorizing. You must think 1/6 was a peaceful demonstration

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

If the Kirkland SP believes that Kirkland's "performance reviews" resulting in multiple firings across multiple offices weren't layoffs, including first years, I'm not sure we can trust their objectivity here.

He knows they were layoffs he's just trying to gaslight us and the laid off associates. I'm sure all the SPs got like the list of talking points informally or formally of what to say.

That is Tucker Carlson-levels of conspiracy theorizing. You must think 1/6 was a peaceful demonstration

Are you insane? You think the SPs aren't coordinate and aligned 100% on a narrative and everything is just happening organically?

Here is a conspiracy theory for you: I know 100% that share partners were calling up NSPs asking them to change their review of a person that the SPs had on their list to chit can. Ask me how I know....

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

If the Kirkland SP believes that Kirkland's "performance reviews" resulting in multiple firings across multiple offices weren't layoffs, including first years, I'm not sure we can trust their objectivity here.

He knows they were layoffs he's just trying to gaslight us and the laid off associates. I'm sure all the SPs got like the list of talking points informally or formally of what to say.

That is Tucker Carlson-levels of conspiracy theorizing. You must think 1/6 was a peaceful demonstration

Lmao you think it is a conspiracy theory that share partners of Kirkland & Ellis will stick by the official communications of their firms in how they characterize laid off associates?

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

If the Kirkland SP believes that Kirkland's "performance reviews" resulting in multiple firings across multiple offices weren't layoffs, including first years, I'm not sure we can trust their objectivity here.

He knows they were layoffs he's just trying to gaslight us and the laid off associates. I'm sure all the SPs got like the list of talking points informally or formally of what to say.

That is Tucker Carlson-levels of conspiracy theorizing. You must think 1/6 was a peaceful demonstration

Are you insane? You think the SPs aren't coordinate and aligned 100% on a narrative and everything is just happening organically?

Here is a conspiracy theory for you: I know 100% that share partners were calling up NSPs asking them to change their review of a person that the SPs had on their list to chit can. Ask me how I know....

I'll bite. How do you know?

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

If the Kirkland SP believes that Kirkland's "performance reviews" resulting in multiple firings across multiple offices weren't layoffs, including first years, I'm not sure we can trust their objectivity here.

He knows they were layoffs he's just trying to gaslight us and the laid off associates. I'm sure all the SPs got like the list of talking points informally or formally of what to say.

That is Tucker Carlson-levels of conspiracy theorizing. You must think 1/6 was a peaceful demonstration

Deranged comment. It's not a conspiracy theory to think partners at a firm are given talking points. It's just basic PR.

In this situation it's obvious the firm has decided the message to clients that all is well and we're just clearing out deadwood to better serve you is more important than their reputation to students and associates.

[Anonymous User]

Still no update. Kirkland doesn't care about their 500 incoming associates.

[Anonymous User]

Still no update. Kirkland doesn't care about their 500 incoming associates.

Sadly, employers very rarely care about their entry level employees, particularly when they can gin up 500 more bodies willing to throw themselves at said employer.

[Anonymous User]

Still no update. Kirkland doesn't care about their 500 incoming associates.

Sadly, employers very rarely care about their entry level employees, particularly when they can gin up 500 more bodies willing to throw themselves at said employer.

My experience with Kirkland is that the faithful will contort themselves into all kinds of explanations for why Kirkland won’t do exactly what everyone expects and then Kirkland just does what everyone suspected.

This is a very simple place. If profits are growing, they’ll aggressively hire and invest in talent to keep the ball rolling. If profits are flat or declining, bonuses disappoint, cut associates + reduce hiring.

Note I’m focusing on profit growth, not firm performance. We killed it last year. But if firm committee expects headwinds this year, then it’s belt tightening time.

Also outsiders don’t understand how embarrassingly little intel/influence a rank and file share partner has here. They might get the announcement a week earlier than the rest of us. But there are only 15 or so ppl that see how the sausage is made.

[Anonymous User]

Not surprised. Kirkland has always been a soulless biglaw mill obsessively focused on maximizing profits to the detriment of its associates. Sorry Kirkland, you will never be Cravath or Wachtell

K&E SP again - I laughed heartily at that, thank you. The mindset of a preftige obsessed law student. Cravath and Wachtell are great firms but we really aren't looking to become like them at all. We do totally different work, have 10x the headcount and are beating the piss out of at least one of them in profitability.

[Anonymous User]

Not surprised. Kirkland has always been a soulless biglaw mill obsessively focused on maximizing profits to the detriment of its associates. Sorry Kirkland, you will never be Cravath or Wachtell

K&E SP again - I laughed heartily at that, thank you. The mindset of a preftige obsessed law student. Cravath and Wachtell are great firms but we really aren't looking to become like them at all. We do totally different work, have 10x the headcount and are beating the piss out of at least one of them in profitability.

Yeah we really compare ourselves against Latham the most often given size and scale.

[Anonymous User]

Still no update. Kirkland doesn't care about their 500 incoming associates.

Sadly, employers very rarely care about their entry level employees, particularly when they can gin up 500 more bodies willing to throw themselves at said employer.

My experience with Kirkland is that the faithful will contort themselves into all kinds of explanations for why Kirkland won’t do exactly what everyone expects and then Kirkland just does what everyone suspected.

This is a very simple place. If profits are growing, they’ll aggressively hire and invest in talent to keep the ball rolling. If profits are flat or declining, bonuses disappoint, cut associates + reduce hiring.

Note I’m focusing on profit growth, not firm performance. We killed it last year. But if firm committee expects headwinds this year, then it’s belt tightening time.

Also outsiders don’t understand how embarrassingly little intel/influence a rank and file share partner has here. They might get the announcement a week earlier than the rest of us. But there are only 15 or so ppl that see how the sausage is made.

This is right - I'm a fairly new SP and have no sway in firm-wide governance. I just manage my own little fiefdom and have pull in my office. Even most of the firm committee members don't have much pull - real decisions are made by 3-5 ppl.

[2013]

For people who keep pointing out that Kirkland “killed it” last year v other firms, isn’t part of it because it has like a 9/30 fiscal year end so it leaves out the three most atrociously slow months of last year and includes 3 busy 2021 months?

[Anonymous User]

Still no update. Kirkland doesn't care about their 500 incoming associates.

Sadly, employers very rarely care about their entry level employees, particularly when they can gin up 500 more bodies willing to throw themselves at said employer.

There's only part truth to this - at the macro level the firm doesn't care about individual new associates - there are literally hundreds and they aren't really useful yet. But I (and other SPs in other offices) care about who we hire for our summer programs and the 1st year general corp pool because they're staffed on my projects and I want them to have good training. I also care about them on a human level, and I want them to enjoy working here as much as that's possible. Sometimes it is tough, but nobody here's going out of their way to make the experience harder than it needs to be.

[Anonymous User]

For people who keep pointing out that Kirkland “killed it” last year v other firms, isn’t part of it because it has like a 9/30 fiscal year end so it leaves out the three most atrociously slow months of last year and includes 3 busy 2021 months?

I'm not really understanding this - the fiscal year is always the same every year so we're not gaming the months we include or anything of that sort for rankings or any other purpose.

[Anonymous User]

Back on topic, Kirkland SP from earlier in the thread, please ask your illustrious peers to say something and calm the nerves of the serfs

Again, I'm just a peon SP but I've not heard anything about pushing back start dates. We're actually doing some remodeling and the last ops committee meeting I attended we discussed trying to get enough offices ready in time for when the new associates arrive in the fall.

[2013]

For people who keep pointing out that Kirkland “killed it” last year v other firms, isn’t part of it because it has like a 9/30 fiscal year end so it leaves out the three most atrociously slow months of last year and includes 3 busy 2021 months?

I'm not really understanding this - the fiscal year is always the same every year so we're not gaming the months we include or anything of that sort for rankings or any other purpose.

Not saying that Kirkland is gaming anything. But comparing the economy from 10/1/2021-9/30/2022 is very different than comparing it from 1/1/2022-12/31/2022 given that deal work went to shit at the end of 2022. I’m just saying the Kirkland numbers look a lot rosier because it has a different fiscal year.

[Anonymous User]

Not surprised. Kirkland has always been a soulless biglaw mill obsessively focused on maximizing profits to the detriment of its associates. Sorry Kirkland, you will never be Cravath or Wachtell

K&E SP again - I laughed heartily at that, thank you. The mindset of a preftige obsessed law student. Cravath and Wachtell are great firms but we really aren't looking to become like them at all. We do totally different work, have 10x the headcount and are beating the piss out of at least one of them in profitability.

Ah yes, the PPP that Kirkland just sacrificed so many associates to protect.

[Anonymous User]

Not surprised. Kirkland has always been a soulless biglaw mill obsessively focused on maximizing profits to the detriment of its associates. Sorry Kirkland, you will never be Cravath or Wachtell

K&E SP again - I laughed heartily at that, thank you. The mindset of a preftige obsessed law student. Cravath and Wachtell are great firms but we really aren't looking to become like them at all. We do totally different work, have 10x the headcount and are beating the piss out of at least one of them in profitability.

Ah yes, the PPP that Kirkland just sacrificed so many associates to protect.

Yes and your point is? We're running a business. There are tons of mediocre to plain bad associates. Even during busy times we want to fire them but we can't because the work needs to get done. When there's less work we have our chance. What would you have us do? Let them stay on indefinitely?

[Anonymous User]

For people who keep pointing out that Kirkland “killed it” last year v other firms, isn’t part of it because it has like a 9/30 fiscal year end so it leaves out the three most atrociously slow months of last year and includes 3 busy 2021 months?

I'm not really understanding this - the fiscal year is always the same every year so we're not gaming the months we include or anything of that sort for rankings or any other purpose.

Not saying that Kirkland is gaming anything. But comparing the economy from 10/1/2021-9/30/2022 is very different than comparing it from 1/1/2022-12/31/2022 given that deal work went to shit at the end of 2022. I’m just saying the Kirkland numbers look a lot rosier because it has a different fiscal year.

OK I see your point. Yes it could hurt the numbers but I don't think it would pull them down all that much. And I don't think we're the only ones with the off fiscal year - the other firm I was at had something similar.