Around 100 employees are believed to be at risk of redundancy at DWF.
An insider has told RollOnFriday that 99 support staff have been put into a consultation process. And given the recent acquisitive nature of DWF, which has snapped up five firms in under a year, it is not surprising that there may now be some job losses.
But 99 is a very precise number, and by a happy coincidence for the firm, the consultation period only has to last for 30 days when fewer than 100 staff are at risk. However rumours are circulating that other staff have been culled, bringing the number to over 100 and obliging the firm to conduct a 90 day consultation. And if that was the case, then the firm would have to pay all its unfortunate victims for the extra 60 days.
But surely a sizeable law firm would go through the process absolutely by the book? A spokeswoman for the firm originally told RollOnFriday that she thought the numbers were "incorrect" and would check the position with HR. But that was over a week ago, and despite repeated requests for comment none has been forthcoming. So the mystery remains.
Tip Off ROF
An insider has told RollOnFriday that 99 support staff have been put into a consultation process. And given the recent acquisitive nature of DWF, which has snapped up five firms in under a year, it is not surprising that there may now be some job losses.
But 99 is a very precise number, and by a happy coincidence for the firm, the consultation period only has to last for 30 days when fewer than 100 staff are at risk. However rumours are circulating that other staff have been culled, bringing the number to over 100 and obliging the firm to conduct a 90 day consultation. And if that was the case, then the firm would have to pay all its unfortunate victims for the extra 60 days.
DWF yesterday |
But surely a sizeable law firm would go through the process absolutely by the book? A spokeswoman for the firm originally told RollOnFriday that she thought the numbers were "incorrect" and would check the position with HR. But that was over a week ago, and despite repeated requests for comment none has been forthcoming. So the mystery remains.
Comments
178
242
185
255
What a right royal stuffing Cobbetts has had. Makes the old corporate raiders of the 1980s look kind-hearted.
196
227
By the book.... If you know how to work the book....
171
217
178
253
174
248
191
232
178
238
175
230
160
254
166
260
196
245
DWF is a business being run as a business. So many law firms have equity partners with no clients, no fee earning responsibilities but as they form part of a bloated "management structure" they are allowed to continue to earn well whilst bringing little to the business. Combine this with an excess of support staff and you have a recipe for disaster.
Better to cut away the fat to ensure the firm not only survives but also thrives.
The speed at which litigation heavy firms are responding to the challenges created by the Jackson reforms is poor. Many are sleep walking into a disaster because the excess staff, the bloated management structures and the non-performers should be being managed now rather than when the cash flow starts to falter.
Lawyers are pretty clueless when it comes to managing their own businesses. DWF's approach seems the right one to me (assuming of course the non-fee earning equity partners are limited to say, one - the Managing Partner).
179
242
157
241
167
251
Wananbes remember DWF