Staff at the recently merged Bond Dickinson have just been informed of their bonuses, and to demonstrate the "cohesive" nature of the merger the legacy Dickinson Dees staff will get half the amount paid to the legacy Bond Pearcers.
An email was sent around last Friday afternoon announcing the discrepancy, and saying that it was due to two significant conditional fee cases hailing from the legacy Bond Pearce side. So while Bond Pearce and Dickinson Dees may have described their tie-up as a merger of equals, in the Orwellian dystopia of the new firm one is clearly more equal than the other.
The news has gone down predictably badly, particularly as the two firms posted almost identical turnover last year. One disgruntled staff member in particular complained of the irony of a two-tier firm currently accepting nominations for its own "one firm" awards as it made the announcement. Under the awards the firm recognises members of staff who have "gone the extra mile" to promote Bond Dicks as "one firm, fully integrated and cohesively existing". Hmmm. We're guessing HR won't be troubling the leaderboard.
A spokeswoman for the firm said that "An additional bonus was also paid to legacy Bond Pearce staff relating to the last financial year when Bond Pearce received additional revenue relating to two significant conditional fee arrangements which concluded last year".
Tip Off ROF
An email was sent around last Friday afternoon announcing the discrepancy, and saying that it was due to two significant conditional fee cases hailing from the legacy Bond Pearce side. So while Bond Pearce and Dickinson Dees may have described their tie-up as a merger of equals, in the Orwellian dystopia of the new firm one is clearly more equal than the other.
 |
Bond Dickinson yesterday |
The news has gone down predictably badly, particularly as the two firms posted almost identical turnover last year. One disgruntled staff member in particular complained of the irony of a two-tier firm currently accepting nominations for its own "one firm" awards as it made the announcement. Under the awards the firm recognises members of staff who have "gone the extra mile" to promote Bond Dicks as "one firm, fully integrated and cohesively existing". Hmmm. We're guessing HR won't be troubling the leaderboard.
A spokeswoman for the firm said that "An additional bonus was also paid to legacy Bond Pearce staff relating to the last financial year when Bond Pearce received additional revenue relating to two significant conditional fee arrangements which concluded last year".
Comments
94
106
103
81
91
96
102
94
97
78
84
96
100
80
80
101
"those of us who work at the Dickinson legacy firm fully grasps the concept of not receiving money you aren't entitled to!"
100
83
Really? If I recall correctly, this is a firm that has a track record of treating people badly and then playing the victim. When they launched redundancies the week before xmas, it wasn't long before the firm was lamenting that it gets picked on.
Strange firm. Can't even get giving out a staff bonus right.
96
92
85
98
100
92
1. 'The facts aren't right' is the default whine of Bond Dicks staff whatever the story. However when you look into their arguments, it becomes pretty clear that the basic facts are correct, but Bond Dicks want you to ignore the inconvenient parts.
2. You can distinguish the ex-Bond Pearce staff from the ex-Dickinson Dees staff by the way they write. Bond Pearce staff appear to have a stronger grasp of grammar.
3. The Bond Dicks Leeds office is unpopular, even though it is generally understood to be their best performing office.
89
100
Which is more realistic? Was there a major oversight in the planning? Or are one set of partners keeping the old financial systems in place in case they want to back out of the merger in the future?
99
93
"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past."
It is a credit to Roll on Friday that these comments appear. Many local papers just print the press release sent to them by Bond Dickinson without any attempt to check the accuracy. Even Legal Week changed the photo on a story at Bond Dickinson's request earlier in the year.