V10 Layoffs Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
- TLSModBot
- Posts: 14835
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
Stop asking people to out the firm in this or any thread
Every major firm does performance-based firing, along a spectrum of canning-actual-shitburgers to totally-just-pretext-but-actually-layoffs. Stealth layoffs are impossible to scope or predict, and random anecdata isn't going to meaningfully inform what your chances are for getting fired (for cause or otherwise).
It is gross voyeurism / selfish curiosity. Stop it.
eta: Better evidence is to look at firm financial health on AmLaw and talk with alumnae of the firm. Do good legwork and you'll be rewarded.
Every major firm does performance-based firing, along a spectrum of canning-actual-shitburgers to totally-just-pretext-but-actually-layoffs. Stealth layoffs are impossible to scope or predict, and random anecdata isn't going to meaningfully inform what your chances are for getting fired (for cause or otherwise).
It is gross voyeurism / selfish curiosity. Stop it.
eta: Better evidence is to look at firm financial health on AmLaw and talk with alumnae of the firm. Do good legwork and you'll be rewarded.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
Tiny Rick! wrote:I didn't know Donald trump posted on TLS.barcoach wrote:Layoff's are part of life in every business.
If you want security in your law firm bring in business. Start to Build your BOOK early!
-
- Posts: 3436
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
Yeah I mean this is obviously right.Capitol_Idea wrote:Stop asking people to out the firm in this or any thread
Every major firm does performance-based firing, along a spectrum of canning-actual-shitburgers to totally-just-pretext-but-actually-layoffs. Stealth layoffs are impossible to scope or predict, and random anecdata isn't going to meaningfully inform what your chances are for getting fired (for cause or otherwise).
It is gross voyeurism / selfish curiosity. Stop it.
eta: Better evidence is to look at firm financial health on AmLaw and talk with alumnae of the firm. Do good legwork and you'll be rewarded.
The people bleating about outting these firms are always clearly 2Ls.or 3Ls looking to justify their choices.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
Edit: Also, moving to 11th in Vault after being a V10 for the last two decades doesn't suddenly make Weil not a V10 anymore (not that it really matters one way or the other). And Weil got a lot of flack for doing some layoffs in a period after the worst of the financial crisis had ended because of the counter-cylical nature of Weil's BFR practice. It's ironic that you would accuse Weil of stealth layoffs when they got crapped on for trying to conduct layoffs in a transparent nature, unlike many firms. Oh wellAnonymous User wrote:110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
- bearsfan23
- Posts: 1754
- Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 11:19 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
Weil confirmedAnonymous User wrote:110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
Wow guess I stepped on some Weil toes. As I said, totally anecdotal--I wasn't trying to hide that fact. Didn't mean to imply Harvey lateralled, which is why I wrote "sadly"; nevertheless, the loss of a mega-rainmaker is a loss, particularly in the bk field where there aren't a ton of repeat customers and reputation is king. My point with the V10 comment was actually that OP couldn't have meant them since they aren't technically V10; again, that having been said, I think they moved down from like 5-6 when I was in LS to 11 now, which seems about right to me. Ordinarily vault is a crappy indicator but for NY corporate (which is my universe) it's actually pretty accurate.
Again, totally anecdotal--if I'm way off, all the better. I wish only the best for all of my fellow biglaw monkeys. Hell, they must be doing something right if their associates are white knighting this hard.
Again, totally anecdotal--if I'm way off, all the better. I wish only the best for all of my fellow biglaw monkeys. Hell, they must be doing something right if their associates are white knighting this hard.
-
- Posts: 1986
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
You are trying to "out" the firm with no evidence and ignoring the multiple people wh have said that all firms will do this so be prepared that it can happen.Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
How does making shit up based on your "gut" add anything?
Are you so desperate to hang onto your delusions about biglaw and some idea that V10 is a magic number?
- Rahviveh
- Posts: 2333
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
how mentally ill do you have to be to be this defensive about a law firm you work for. "...unlike many firms.." you sounds like someone from recruiting. i hope you are actually. these people dont give a shit about you.Anonymous User wrote:Edit: Also, moving to 11th in Vault after being a V10 for the last two decades doesn't suddenly make Weil not a V10 anymore (not that it really matters one way or the other). And Weil got a lot of flack for doing some layoffs in a period after the worst of the financial crisis had ended because of the counter-cylical nature of Weil's BFR practice. It's ironic that you would accuse Weil of stealth layoffs when they got crapped on for trying to conduct layoffs in a transparent nature, unlike many firms. Oh wellAnonymous User wrote:110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
- LaLiLuLeLo
- Posts: 949
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:54 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
I just figured it was Barry Wolf's account.Rahviveh wrote:how mentally ill do you have to be to be this defensive about a law firm you work for. "...unlike many firms.." you sounds like someone from recruiting. i hope you are actually. these people dont give a shit about you.Anonymous User wrote:Edit: Also, moving to 11th in Vault after being a V10 for the last two decades doesn't suddenly make Weil not a V10 anymore (not that it really matters one way or the other). And Weil got a lot of flack for doing some layoffs in a period after the worst of the financial crisis had ended because of the counter-cylical nature of Weil's BFR practice. It's ironic that you would accuse Weil of stealth layoffs when they got crapped on for trying to conduct layoffs in a transparent nature, unlike many firms. Oh wellAnonymous User wrote:110% is not Weil. Weil, specifically BFR, is as busy as it has ever been if not more. Weil is actually doing a ton of 3L hiring because it is so busy. Instead of posting your garbage speculation, maybe you should follow Cap's idea and look at the Am Law financials and see how much growth Weil had last year in revenues and profits.Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
Also Weil has been adding some big name partners in various groups while losing others, like all firms...Really, you're going to say Weil lost Harvey Miller in a way that implies he went to a different firm. He DIED, so I guess he lateralled to that big firm in the sky.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
Not the anon from above. Losing Harvey was definitely a big loss because the guy basically invented the practice of bankruptcy, but Weil's reputation is founded on the fact that they've done just about every major bankruptcy in history and not on any one person. They've had a few slow years recently where they lost some market share, but have poached a few major rainmakers from KE and Milbank and are as good as ever, if not better.Anonymous User wrote:Wow guess I stepped on some Weil toes. As I said, totally anecdotal--I wasn't trying to hide that fact. Didn't mean to imply Harvey lateralled, which is why I wrote "sadly"; nevertheless, the loss of a mega-rainmaker is a loss, particularly in the bk field where there aren't a ton of repeat customers and reputation is king. My point with the V10 comment was actually that OP couldn't have meant them since they aren't technically V10; again, that having been said, I think they moved down from like 5-6 when I was in LS to 11 now, which seems about right to me. Ordinarily vault is a crappy indicator but for NY corporate (which is my universe) it's actually pretty accurate.
Again, totally anecdotal--if I'm way off, all the better. I wish only the best for all of my fellow biglaw monkeys. Hell, they must be doing something right if their associates are white knighting this hard.
Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
Mid-level at a V10. My group/firm has pushed out a few junior/mids this year and I know of 2 other V10 (same group) that have been doing this as well. Haven't had a strong year to date and figure I will probably be given "the talk" at year end. I just hope I get the dignity of some lead time.
I don't think naming and shaming helps unless the firm is egregious in their behavior towards the associates they layoff (i.e., less than 3 months severance, 3-6 months website time, silence with regards to associates standing when asked, etc.). Silent-layoffs are a part of the deal in biglaw, if I wanted loud and consistent layoffs I would have become a banker (this line has blurred more and more in last 20 years however).
I don't think naming and shaming helps unless the firm is egregious in their behavior towards the associates they layoff (i.e., less than 3 months severance, 3-6 months website time, silence with regards to associates standing when asked, etc.). Silent-layoffs are a part of the deal in biglaw, if I wanted loud and consistent layoffs I would have become a banker (this line has blurred more and more in last 20 years however).
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- rpupkin
- Posts: 5653
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
- Johann
- Posts: 19704
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:25 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
ALL Firms will slash and burn when they need to. HOWEVER not every firm positions themselves and LEVERAGES themselves to ass/part ratios that make the slash and burn more necessary. i.e. compare Latham to Simpson/Cleary. SImpson and CLeary with almost twice as many partners in the p:a ratio so they have the work providers to work leeches in case things dry up. I don't know this for sure, but I'd wager lots of money that Cleary and Simpson are stealthing way fewer people right now and laid off way less people/respected incoming associates budgeted in 2008 than LathamNpret wrote:You are trying to "out" the firm with no evidence and ignoring the multiple people wh have said that all firms will do this so be prepared that it can happen.Anonymous User wrote:My gut says Weil. Totally speculation/anecdotal, but I feel like in the last few years they went from S&C/DP peer to a poor man's K&E/Latham and have been losing partners (including, sadly, Harvey Miller). Plus they already laid some people off a couple years ago.
Agree that OP should definitely not out the firm, as curious as I am.
Edit: Apparently Weil isn't even a V10 any more. I guess my anecdotal observation has played out a bit already.
How does making shit up based on your "gut" add anything?
Are you so desperate to hang onto your delusions about biglaw and some idea that V10 is a magic number?
- Johann
- Posts: 19704
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:25 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
a V15 partner JUST SAID they were RIGHT SIZING on the previous page. stealth layoffs confirmed.rpupkin wrote:LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
-
- Posts: 985
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
OP needs to out the firmJohann wrote:a V15 partner JUST SAID they were RIGHT SIZING on the previous page. stealth layoffs confirmed.rpupkin wrote:LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
LOL? Pushing out low quality associates is not the same as "stealthing" juniors, possibly because the firms financials are at issue, which is what the OP was about. Firms fire people all the time, firms rarely stealth people the way the OP was talking about.rpupkin wrote:LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
- rpupkin
- Posts: 5653
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
Part of your problem is that you're making an artificial distinction between "pushing out low quality associates" and "stealthing juniors." All big law firms have plenty of low-quality associates. When a practice group is making lots of money and has more work than it can handle, most of the associates—even the "low quality" ones—are kept around because the practice group needs bodies. When work slows down and a group becomes less profitable, a firm may decide that it needs to trim associates from that group—and the firm will, of course, start with the lower quality ones. But it's still basically a stealth layoff.Anonymous User wrote:LOL? Pushing out low quality associates is not the same as "stealthing" juniors, possibly because the firms financials are at issue, which is what the OP was about. Firms fire people all the time, firms rarely stealth people the way the OP was talking about.rpupkin wrote:LOL. You don't understand how law firms operate.Anonymous User wrote: Edit: Just wanted to add, it seems incredibly unlikely to me that any firm in the V10.. V20.. V30.. is truly stealthing juniors given the years they've all had (with the exception of WLRK and I'm not particularly worried about them). There's a difference between normal attrition in the up or out law firm model and truly stealthing people.
-
- Posts: 428122
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
Do firms at least stealth push out Partners that aren't bringing in business?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 676
- Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:00 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
definitely. and usually no even so much as "stealth" but more, GTFO. being partner seems way more ruthless than being a jr assocAnonymous User wrote:Do firms at least stealth push out Partners that aren't bringing in business?
- trebekismyhero
- Posts: 1095
- Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 5:26 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
For sure, but at least they have paid off their loans and most had a few years making 7 figures or close to it. So more cut throat, but still better than getting axed as a 2nd year associate with $100k+ of law school debt stillballouttacontrol wrote:definitely. and usually no even so much as "stealth" but more, GTFO. being partner seems way more ruthless than being a jr assocAnonymous User wrote:Do firms at least stealth push out Partners that aren't bringing in business?
-
- Posts: 676
- Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:00 pm
Re: V10 Layoffs
true but partners often has families unlike Jr. assocs. and most new partners dont make anywhere near 7 figs, plus u gotta figure in the partnership buy-in and all the costs associated w partnersip. neither spot seems enviable..trebekismyhero wrote:For sure, but at least they have paid off their loans and most had a few years making 7 figures or close to it. So more cut throat, but still better than getting axed as a 2nd year associate with $100k+ of law school debt stillballouttacontrol wrote:definitely. and usually no even so much as "stealth" but more, GTFO. being partner seems way more ruthless than being a jr assocAnonymous User wrote:Do firms at least stealth push out Partners that aren't bringing in business?
-
- Posts: 1986
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am
Re: V10 Layoffs
Yeah everyone in the thread should be concerned about partners being pushed out for not bringing in enough business.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login