• Home
  • News
  • Layoffs’ Toll: At White & Case, a ‘Melancholy Pall’ and Fear of Sick Days

Law Firms

Layoffs’ Toll: At White & Case, a ‘Melancholy Pall’ and Fear of Sick Days

Posted Jun 8, 2009 7:05 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Layoffs are taking a heavy toll on law firm jobs, but the aftermath also leaves psychological scars on the people who remain on the job in an atmosphere of fear and ambiguity.

The New York Times highlights White & Case as something of a case study. The firm has laid off almost 600 people, including 279 lawyers, with the bulk of the pink slips being handed out on March 9. As the news broke, commenters on Above the Law referred to a “bloodbath” and “Armageddon.” Young lawyers at a nearby bar drank tequila and devised a “whack list” containing their guesses of those likely to soon be unemployed, the story says.

Now tensions are rising, camaraderie is waning and some lawyers are so fearful that they don’t want to stay home when they are sick, the Times says, relying on reports from lawyers who want to remain anonymous. Even after the cuts, there is not enough work to do, the story says.

“Months later, the corridors of White & Case are quiet, the happy buzz of business having gradually been replaced by a melancholy pall of diminished billable hours,” the Times says. “Many office doors are shut — not because of meetings, but, as one associate put it, so that ‘the man with the ax’ cannot find the occupants. Type-A partners, once glued to their BlackBerrys, suddenly have time for their spouses and their children; ladder-climbing junior lawyers linger over lunch.”

“People are shellshocked,” one partner told the Times. “If they survived the first two rounds, they’re happy to have a job, but are still very nervous. And if their phones don’t ring, if their work doesn’t come back with a vengeance, they fear they aren’t long for this world.”

In the newspaper’s view, the change is emblematic of a change in law practice. “The gentleman’s profession of the law is becoming a vestige of the past, removed enough from reality to be remembered, like phone booths or fedoras,” the story says.

In big law firms, “the natural order of this world has been set on end by the economic crisis and the possible disappearance of fixtures like the pyramid system (under which associates are thrown en masse at certain cases, fattening the fees), and the billable hour itself (increasingly replaced by flat rates or retainers in a client’s market). The tectonic plates have begun to shift in a nauseating manner, bringing fear, ambiguity and psychological scars.”

Comments

1.

B. McLeod
Jun 8, 2009 8:19 AM CST

This is the downside of leveraging marketing and image to charge a lot more than you’re really worth.  Although they could make hay while the sun was shining, now they must dread, in every waking moment, that clients have discovered (and more yet will discover) the truth.  Closing the doors won’t help, because the real “men with the axes” are the clients, and when they swing those axes, the whole firm will be shorn.  Perhaps soon, only ghostly echoes of faded footfalls will be heard in the yawning corridors, as the wind blows a few, lonely, rolling tumbleweeds past the long rows of empty offices.

Flag this comment

2.

rebellionisgood
Jun 8, 2009 1:45 PM CST

Dead business model leads to decimation of law firms. Economic crisis blamed. Morale suffers. Legal community surprised. Still get paid to advise businesses.

Flag this comment

3.

Associate
Jun 12, 2009 7:30 AM CST

I’m sure it’s tough for the average W&C Partner whose share of the profits may have dwindled from $3M a year down to $2.5M.

Flag this comment

4.

I Knew This Would Happen
Jun 12, 2009 8:10 AM CST

I knew from high school that I would become an attorney.  I was Prez of my Senior Class, placed in a debating contest, wrote for the school paper, etc.  In short, I was good on my feet, loved to debate and write, and knew the law was tailor made for this Alpha Male.  So I ended up at a great college and top tier (five) law school, where I met plenty of smart kids who lacked the social skills, the well-roundedness, and other traits that make for great attorneys; in short, their emotional IQs were pretty limited (esp. the Ivy Leaguers).  Now those are the types who are not natural born leaders and have great difficulty landing or keeping clients because they are the last person on Earth you’d want to have a drink or party with.  (But they sure knew how to land federal clerkships and even a couple on the Supremes.)  I have no sympathy for them because 80 percent should not be practicing law.  So get out of the profession and teach or practice medicine.  Make room for those like I who actually enjoy the practice of law.

Second, I blame Cravath for this mess.  Back in the early 1980s most attorneys were making a decent salary (in the mid 30s), but certainly not enough to attract hoards of college grads.  Law Schools were not as difficult to get into, even the top ones.  Then in the mid-1980s (around 1984-85) Cravath decided to break the traditional model and shift salaries up a maginitude, to at least $50k, which caused other top firms to do the same to attract the top law school grads.  That move, unwittingly, created a pyramid scheme in BigLaw, where partners quickly learned that if they hired enough associates, they could gradually increase per partner profits on an annual basis.  Cravath’s move also caused a rethinking among college grads that the law was an end-run around climbing a corporate ladder toward financial success.  So long as they graduated from a good law school, they were assured about $20k more than if they merely worked their way up a corporate ladder. 

BigLaw, in the meantime, thought that most associates would leave within five years, making room for those behind them who would do the work and increase profits.  The model worked for decades, until the firms essentially priced themselves out of the market.  Now that they have priced themselves out, the pyramid scheme in BigLaw is collapsing, exacerbated by the hoards of law schools that keep pumping out far too many grads to be absorbed into the marketplace.

What is happening is merely an adjustment caused by market forces.  While BigLaw’s pyramid scheme is collapsing, ha ha, the rest of the legal market is doing relatively well (i.e., small and mid-sized firms or large insurance defense firms) because they have not priced themselves out. 

BigLaw, in the meantime, will have to return to the “good old days” and significantly reduce its hiring, force partners to take a HUGE cut in profits and work harder, and reduce incoming salaries significantly.  The cannibalism is to be expected and I have no sympthathy for W&C.  This just goes to show you now stupid attorneys can be from a business sense—again demonstrating how even stellar credentialed attorneys lack emotional intelligence.

I’m a business lawer who works in-house….

Flag this comment

5.

Steve Perkins
Jun 12, 2009 8:34 AM CST

Can we get a separate ABA Journal for the 80%+ of lawyers who do not work for large firms, and/or students who don’t anticipate working for one either?  I just don’t get the massive ongoing coverage in ABA Journal of gossip and grievances that only apply to 10-20% of the audience.  I envy their salaries, don’t envy their environment or culture, and otherwise don’t really care or find it interesting.

Flag this comment

6.

Peyton M
Jun 12, 2009 8:45 AM CST

BIGLAW is dead, long live BIGLAW!  These firms didn’t become behemoths by being stupid.  Heads will roll (as they are now), they will restructure and come back with a vengeance.  There will be no shortage of talented young lawyers to readily heed the call for BIGLAW because what else can those unemployed youths do to pay their monster student loans and living expenses.  And when these firms stabilize, which they will, don’t expect the culture to be better.  If anything, it will be even worse, with attorneys working longer hours for less money, often with less ‘perks’ than they had in the good ol’ days. 

Why any talented twenty-something would ever want to become a BIGLAW lawyer is this climate befuddles me other than they love emotional masochism or they’ve spent the prior 3 years of law school prepackaging their soul for sale to the highest bidder.

Flag this comment

7.

AndytheLawyer
Jun 12, 2009 8:52 AM CST

A relative of mine remained an active partner at White & Case right up to his death a couple of years ago at age 83.  I expect that if he’d lived a few years longer, he’d have been defenestrated.

Flag this comment

8.

Josh
Jun 12, 2009 8:53 AM CST

“.....I was Prez of my Senior Class, placed in a debating contest, wrote for the school paper, etc.  In short, I was good on my feet, loved to debate and write, and knew the law was tailor made for this Alpha Male.  So I ended up at a great college and top tier (five) law school….”

You forgot to tell us about your hot wife and athletic skills there shooter.

Flag this comment

9.

I Knew This Would Happen
Jun 12, 2009 9:05 AM CST

Hey Josh, you are right!  I played football, basketball and tennis, and my wife is a hottie—blonde/blue and ten years younger than I too!

Flag this comment

10.

Ariadne
Jun 12, 2009 9:05 AM CST

I wouldn’t count W&C down & out yet.  I was there in ‘95 when a third of the litigation department defected to Dewey, and the atmosphere described in the artilcle was pretty much how it was in the litigation department for quite some time.  But the firm retooled, focused on antitrust and other specialized areas, and rebuilt the department.  W&C used to be managed very conservatively, by NY standards.  We were always the last to get the big raises, our bonuses were never as spectacular as the firms on the Street, and we only allowed three pens at a time from office supply.  Unless there’s been sea change in management since the late 90’s, I think W&C will pull through.  However, they may want to work on building office morale, which was never their strong point.

Flag this comment

11.

R
Jun 12, 2009 9:37 AM CST

Excellent analysis by commenter #4 above (I Knew This Would Happen). Thanks for taking the time.

Flag this comment

12.

incredulous
Jun 12, 2009 10:37 AM CST

Poster #4 - Hang on to your ego. Hang on, but I know you’re going to lose the fight.

Flag this comment

13.

Charis P
Jun 12, 2009 10:39 AM CST

Although it is way before my time, I do recall an older attorney who used to work at Cravath explain to me how they made the first big salary jump decades ago that triggered the cycle of overinflated salaries pretty much exactly as #4 has described.

Flag this comment

14.

I Knew This Would Happen
Jun 12, 2009 10:44 AM CST

I have an ego, but you know what?  Those partners at W&C, with their arrogant, condescending, smug demeanors—have you ever interviewed with a partner at the NYC offices of Cravath, W&C, Skadden, or Paul Weiss, for e.g., sitting behind their desks with hands folded while they pontificate about the law??? I have and trust me, as a group they are not the nicest people.  If you want to see a big ego, that’s where you will find one….

Flag this comment

15.

Netochka Nezvanova
Jun 12, 2009 11:17 AM CST

Wow - we’re really exercising our vocabulary skills today.  First “contumacious”, and now “defenestrated”—two words I must admit I’ve never had the opportunity to use in a sentence, although I have run into the second one a time or two before.

Flag this comment

16.

B. McLeod
Jun 12, 2009 11:17 AM CST

Crap, if we start pointing fingers at posters with big egos here, we’ll all run out of fingers!  Pot something, kettle something, eh?

Flag this comment

17.

Adamius
Jun 12, 2009 11:32 AM CST

Economy Turns Corner, Falls Down Stairs

Flag this comment

18.

D.Scholts
Jun 12, 2009 1:09 PM CST

“I IKnew this Would Happen”, points well made, but PLEASE don’t send the “Low emotional IQ” lawyers to medical practice! There’s enough of that kind there already! (Laughing, sort of.)

Flag this comment

19.

Grammaticus
Jun 12, 2009 2:05 PM CST

To: “I Knew This Would Happen” - Perhaps if you had learned when to use “me” in the place of “I”, then you too would be at W&C !!

See - “Make room for those like I who actually enjoy the practice of law” and “Hey Josh, you are right!  I played football, basketball and tennis, and my wife is a hottie—blonde/blue and ten years younger than I too!”

Flag this comment

20.

I Knew This Would Happen
Jun 12, 2009 2:45 PM CST

Dear Grammaticus,

I am right:  The word “I” is a pronoun that is the subject, never the object, of a verb. Likewise, the word “me” is a pronoun that must be the object, never the subject.  The same is true for we vs. us, he vs. him, and she vs. her.

For example, complete the sentence as follows:
“make room for those like I (am)...” not “make room for those like me (am)”; and “ten years younger than I (am),” not “ten years younger that me (am).”

See what I mean????

Flag this comment

21.

Eats, Shoots & Leaves
Jun 12, 2009 2:46 PM CST

Thank you, Grammaticus!  I can stop tearing my hair out now.

Flag this comment

22.

Smirch
Jun 12, 2009 4:21 PM CST

Comment removed by moderator.

Flag this comment

23.

Anti-Smirch
Jun 12, 2009 4:33 PM CST

Hey Smirch—“I Knew” is wrong, but he is actually a really nice guy, so please don’t call names.

He is confused because of his J.D., and because he thinks his sentences fall under the following rule.  But, as you can see, there is no comparison taking place, so he is wrong as sin!

Their is one other area when people miss use “me”. That is in comparisons. People will often say something like, “He is [add descriptive term here] than me.” This is incorrect. It should be, “...than I.” The way to better remember this is to remember that you can complete the sentence by adding “am” to the end. So, it would become, “...than I am.” “...than me am.” doesn’t sound right and is incorrect. You don’t need “am” at the end of such a sentence, but putting it in, at least mentally, helps to keep straight which pronoun to use.

Examples:
“He is hungrier than me.” (incorrect)
“He is hungrier than I.” (correct)
“He is hungrier than I am.” (correct)

Flag this comment

24.

anon
Jun 12, 2009 4:44 PM CST

I do not mourn the death of BigLaw. However, as a Dec ‘08 grad, I do worry that without those new associates at BigLaw making $160K/year, the medium and smaller firms feel they can get by paying new associates $45K (employer’s market and all). But our law school debts are greater than ever. I’m not whining, I’m just pointing to the correlation. Perhaps it’s based on a false premise?

Flag this comment

25.

BMF
Jun 12, 2009 5:52 PM CST

Most of the time, “I” acts; “me” is acted upon.

“He is ten years older than I am. “
But “He is ten years older than me,” is acceptable usage.

#15: Let’s make it a trifecta with “contumelious.”    It is contumelious to continue pleading the issue during oral arguments once the judge has ruled on the motion.

There’s actually an attorney malpractice case that used both contumacious and contumelious, but I can’t think of it right now.

Flag this comment

26.

KDL
Jun 13, 2009 10:50 AM CST

Poor “Big-Law”.....not!!!!

Here is my rant - What I would so love to see, as a goverment prosecutor,  is stimulus money given to our state prosecutors and public defender offices nationwide.  Folks we are in a fiscal sea of death and it is only getting worse.

Prosecutors and Public Defenders are the unsung hereos that work the hardest in the legal profession.

We work longer hours in and out of court than you can imagine. 70-100 hours a week, wits and cops calling us round the clock.

No - we don’t have billable hours - we live at work!
No -we don’t have law clerks - no budget for them.
No - we don’t have file clerks - no budget for them.
No - we don’t get overtime - no budget for it.

Our caseloads????  Ask around - in Florida ASA’s handle in excess of 700 cases - each -and the same for a PD.

It gets better…..

We earn 40-43k per year. That’s right, after taxes and so forth, we clear 30 K. Managers at McDonalds make more than we do.

No overtime pay.
We come to work sick as there is no way to cover the incoming work when you are out such.

Yet,  we love what we do. We are social workers with law licenses.

However, It is becoming increasingly more difficult to keep excellent attorneys as the pay, after taxes, is 30k a year. 

Marginal pay for excellent work….

How do we get by?  THREE JOBS!!!!!!
I am a landlord with rental property. I have a second job as a realtor and a third as a mediator just to make ends meet.

I am not alone, many of us do this.

So when will state gov. get the funds needed so we can effectively manage an increasing caseload due to the economic plight of the poor out there committing more crime.

I feel no pity for the “Big-Law” as they have always made more money than the Vatican and still they want more.  It is the small firms and solo practioners that provide the best service and I respect them the most.  And they are lucky if 60% of the clients pay them…..

Flag this comment

27.

my56thchoice
Jun 14, 2009 10:58 AM CST

Posters #5 is quite right.  The legal press does only cover 10-15 percent of this business (“Big Law”).  Poster #6 may be right too.  These law firms maywill only come back more efficient and exploitative than ever.  That’s only if the economy ever totally recovers but this is a separate discussion for another day.

But I have a question for posters # 5 and 6. Why should the legal employers and the legal news media that serves them be any different than the world at large?  We all know the answer to that query!

Conservatives only admit that private enterprise is “imperfect” and when you make them admit what an outrageous understatement the “imperfection” is they will respond “So what!  You owe everything you have to the jobs that private interests provide to you” (as well as the goods and services they create). 

The left on the other hand calls the bulk of these private interests “implacably exploitative and evil”.  The left blames these interests and past US governments for all the world’s problems as if big government (when the left is in power) could or would provide for people’s needs any better. 

But you know what?  Without the bastards running Big Law and all the smaller and even small firms, most of us would have little or no work legal work to do and without them I shudder to think what most of us would be trying to do for a living.

This year I did over $10,000 worth of extra moonlighting work drafting and opposing motions for one small firm before I was replaced by a free intern about a month ago.  You can bet I wasn’t happy with that decision especially since without question I can do far better and faster work than any free intern who has only a year or three of law school experience. 

But the fact remains that without that cheap bastard I would be about $15,000 poorer.  Also, he may still give me work to do in the future.  He will find that “cheap and cheaper” is not always the solution to his business needs after he spends more time re-writing the intern’s work than the intern spent writing it. 

That’s not the intern’s fault because Law Schools are primarily in the business of screening employment applicants in the guise of educating their students.  This is because the established fims to whom these schools are accountable want to be very careful about training people who may become their competitors later. 

And these same Law Schools then come to us several times a year asking us for money when in fact we taught ourselves almost everything we know about practicing law and in most cases got little or no practical advice or direction from our professors or employers.

Flag this comment

28.

Carolus
Jun 16, 2009 9:28 AM CST

“Make room for those like me” is perfectly correct.  And, in any event, “make room for those like I (am)” is wrong, since it would really be “make room for those as I (am)”—the “like” is incorrectly used there.  Do as I say, not like I say.  Lawyers cannot write.

Flag this comment

29.

Stan
Jun 17, 2009 8:04 AM CST

One of the worst things about this was the apparent unwillingness of the partners to tighten their belts to keep everyone employed.  Shameful.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.