http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/ A self-deprecating look at life in and after BigLaw Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:16:15 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/#comment-66 lawshucks Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:24:28 +0000 http://lawshucks.com/?p=427#comment-66 Fair points. If I can find the information, I'll write it up (or feel free to help me out and send it in!) Fair points. If I can find the information, I'll write it up (or feel free to help me out and send it in!)

]]> http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/#comment-65 lawshucks Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:24:00 +0000 http://lawshucks.com/?p=427#comment-65 Yes, there's a difference, but not so much, in my opinion. We track both in the aggregate because the tracker is supposed to be a commentary more on the firms' practices than the effects on the attorneys (or staff). That being said, some of the spreadsheets do have that data in hidden columns, so this weekend I'll see if there's a decent way to present the data. Some of the layoffs don't distinguish, either, so that's another reason we report totals. Yes, there's a difference, but not so much, in my opinion. We track both in the aggregate because the tracker is supposed to be a commentary more on the firms' practices than the effects on the attorneys (or staff). That being said, some of the spreadsheets do have that data in hidden columns, so this weekend I'll see if there's a decent way to present the data. Some of the layoffs don't distinguish, either, so that's another reason we report totals.

]]> http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/#comment-59 anon Wed, 14 Jan 2009 03:19:28 +0000 http://lawshucks.com/?p=427#comment-59 would it just be too complicated to separate the staff v. attorney layoffs? there's a difference - and for most of your audience, i'd wager that's a pretty important difference. would it just be too complicated to separate the staff v. attorney layoffs? there's a difference – and for most of your audience, i'd wager that's a pretty important difference.

]]> http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/#comment-58 Guest Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:27:21 +0000 http://lawshucks.com/?p=427#comment-58 Agreed, but it may be possible to find out the numbers of people actually terminated, rather than trying to sift out who left for another firm after the WARN notice versus those who were left behind. At least at Heller, numerous people were laid off on October 10th and October 17th, and I would think someone on the dissolution committee has those numbers. Not sure if the same situation existed for Thelen/Thatcher/Dreier or other firms that may have folded in this climate. Agreed, but it may be possible to find out the numbers of people actually terminated, rather than trying to sift out who left for another firm after the WARN notice versus those who were left behind. At least at Heller, numerous people were laid off on October 10th and October 17th, and I would think someone on the dissolution committee has those numbers. Not sure if the same situation existed for Thelen/Thatcher/Dreier or other firms that may have folded in this climate.

]]> http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/#comment-49 Guest Tue, 13 Jan 2009 02:44:30 +0000 http://lawshucks.com/?p=427#comment-49 The layoff tracker is great, but I wonder if dissolutions should be included anyway, despite being firm failures rather than just layoffs. It seems like it would give a truer picture of the market to include them. The layoff tracker is great, but I wonder if dissolutions should be included anyway, despite being firm failures rather than just layoffs. It seems like it would give a truer picture of the market to include them.

]]> http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/#comment-51 lawshucks Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:00:20 +0000 http://lawshucks.com/?p=427#comment-51 thanks for the suggestion. the problem we're having is getting reasonably reliable numbers to put in the tracker. if you can think of a solution to that problem, we'd agree with you. but we can't figure out how to count a firm like heller that goes under, but groups of 50+ lawyers at a time join other firms. thanks for the suggestion. the problem we're having is getting reasonably reliable numbers to put in the tracker. if you can think of a solution to that problem, we'd agree with you. but we can't figure out how to count a firm like heller that goes under, but groups of 50+ lawyers at a time join other firms.

]]> http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/#comment-47 anon Mon, 12 Jan 2009 07:25:55 +0000 http://lawshucks.com/?p=427#comment-47 you're doing great. maybe it's because i'm a corporate attorney, but I find your posts and insights a lot more interesting than ATL's. keep it up! you're doing great. maybe it's because i'm a corporate attorney, but I find your posts and insights a lot more interesting than ATL's. keep it up!

]]> http://lawshucks.com/2009/01/updates-for-11209/#comment-48 lawshucks Mon, 12 Jan 2009 03:32:19 +0000 http://lawshucks.com/?p=427#comment-48 Thanks - that's kind of what we're going for. We're corporate, too. Let us know if there's something in particular you'd like to see. Thanks – that's kind of what we're going for. We're corporate, too. Let us know if there's something in particular you'd like to see.

]]>