This is all very interesting, but what's going on at BLM? Are the partners "turning tricks" on Fenchurch Street? The silence on these boards is deafening.

Apart from the well-documented financial measures being implemented by firms can we also have a top 10 of the non-financial crass and insensitive behaviour from firms and their management during this crisis. 

Who on earth are Weightmans and Cripps Pemberton Greenish?

Just to clarify RPC hasn't furloughed any its own staff (or got any plans to) - those who have been furloughed are contractors employed by other companies who have furloughed them. The firm is topping up their salaries if they're below the gov cap.

Anon 09.32 1May great idea. how would you rank planking?

Weightmans...we would consider measures including dismissing people who don't accept, and re-engage on revised terms...

So, the message to staff was clear - accept, or after we tell you in the consultation that these terms are, in fact, non negotiable, we fire and re-hire you on new lesser terms. 

No duress? You decide!

Shoosmiths have furloughed around one third to two fifths of the staff and put the rest on 4-day salary with (in effect) 5-day working and they are trying to negotiate pay cuts on top of that. The firm lost 5 partners at the end of April with no explanation. The result of all this is that I get all kinds of furloughed lawyers' work, assigned apparently at random, some of which I know nothing about and spend hours reading in to discover there's either nothing to do, or the fixed fee has already been exceeded and charged, but the work is not yet complete.  It's a chaotic shit-show which is giving those of my team left a great deal of anxiety. My line manager confided in me that the level of lock-up, the firm's debt position (£7m bank debt with £800k a year in interest alone) and lack of cash reserves to meet ongoing liabilities are worrying him as well. 

what's the latest on the Kirkland stealth dismissals?

Just tell weigtmans you’ll bring an unfair dismissal claim and go public.  They will run a mile.  

Re Irwin Mitchell... “Temporary employment changes” aka junior lawyers have been targeted and asked / forced to accept pay cuts

Respect to Cripps Pemberton Greenish for keeping it properly 19th century and not succumbing to the trend for shortening to three letter acronyms. Spiffing. 

Also, who?

Weightmans, please tell the truth. Is it not correct that you are asking staff to agree to a temporary reduction until 30 April 2021? That's 11 months! 

If that's what you have made your staff sign up to, there's not a chance in hell that you're going to return salaries back to normal any time before this date, notwithstanding the 'we will review it in October 2020' rubbish!

Pinsents does appear to have done a fairly decent job. So you effectively gets paid less but work even fewer hours? 

@ Fan of Anon - planking?!  

These cuts are  as brutal as a wet market in Asia. 

I wondered when the clowns at Shoosmiths would start to make an appearance.

This is a firm which is massively over geared.

Still not bothering with investigating stealth layoffs despite the various claims?  Of course these things don’t happen!! Why don’t we all assume the firms are being honest and upright about what’s going on behind closed doors. Yes, let’s do that!! Great, work.

Most staff at PM can’t complain given they will receive a pro rata pay rise (glass half full perspective?). It is frustrating for the busy ones as it’s been applied across the board and they will likely end up working extra hours. Obviously it’s crap that any of this happening but in the scheme of things, PM employees have done alright compared to others in the industry. 

Anon 01 May 20 09:32

How about those firms who have sanctioned and promoted the peddling of Covid-related articles and thought-leadership pieces (AKA as marketing shite) penned by under-utilised partners and associates with nothing else to do? My firm has gone into overdrive on this bollocks and I think it’s crass and I sensitive opportunism.

@ A NON 01 May 20 15:11

Having drafted quite a few of them myself, I don't really see them as a marketing opportunity, more of a way to keep clients up to speed on issues they might have missed or to point them towards official guidance they might not otherwise find.  It's more about maintaining existing relationships rather than attracting new ones.

Just in: SPB chopped pay 20% across the board with corresponding 4 day week/reduction of hours, both for fee earners and for partner drawings. 

Fair play to Pinsents, unlike other firms where I’ve worked the management are doing a very creditable impression of being human beings who actually give a sh*t about their staff and not just putting partner profits uber alles

The plans to cut hours and billing targets at Weightmans were made prior to Covid 19 and not in response; allegedly. 

@Rark Muehlmann 01 May 20 15:29

Have they got people to sign-up to agree to it?  Hard to see how it's enforceable or fair otherwise and there's an interesting piece in the FT today about how, if the reductions aren't done properly, there could be a tax hit for both employers and employees.

@Anon 16:50:

SPB management mentioned in its letter and accompanying pitiful Q&A email they will send out letters to each individual fee earners separately next week, presumably to be signed.
 

Technically one could refuse to sign them if one so wished, but doubt anyone will do that as it would only leave a huge target marker on your back for when the redundancy rounds come.

Stealth layoff here.

Trying to get another job but many firms have applied recruitment freezes. Shitting bricks about receiving another pay cheque.

Tried a recruitment company and ironically discovered many of them have been furloughed. 

Working at S&G the management have been great! I guess however they the management have no money on the line. We have fancy Friday and loads of other fun events..... #SGWAY

Yes.  One of the many elephants in this rather crowded room is that presumably a number of firms were struggling and exposed eg to Brexit and this is a good way to bury bad news.   It may have been aggravated by the virus.  But not entirely caused   

Nobody in particular 01 May 20 16:02

The plans to cut hours and billing targets at Weightmans were made prior to Covid 19 and not in response; allegedly. 

As a team manager and someone who has been budget planning since January, I can confirm that is not the case - budgets have been revised down in direct response to Covid 19.  The original budgets prior to Covid 19 were significantly higher.

Which firm? Why not name them? Surely no loyalty to them now.

@ Anonymous 01 May 20 18:15

Sorry to read that.  No chance of going back to your last shop asking them to rehire you and then furlough you?  That seems to be allowed and would cost them nothing.

@ Cark

Friend has had a salary cut imposed on her without any attempt to seek positive consent. 

She's going to wait until she eventually changes job before putting in a claim for unpaid salary. 

Her place has absolutely no need to cut salary based on its financials and she's not able to work fewer hours.

Pooshits you clearly are full of s**t, fake news

Anon @19.42. I agree the S&G management have been very straight down the line. That was the case in a call with the PI teams this afternoon. 

Any firm cutting lawyer salaries without cutting their hours is royally, and I means totally, taking the p!ss.  If the work level required is the same, requiring the same hours, the value is the same. End of. 

If the budgets at Weightmans are being revised down, the firm must be expecting or have less work. It not mean the value of an hour worked has gone down, just that there is less work. Ergo: less hours needed to be worked. This means staff salary cuts should be matched by fewer hours being worked. Anything less just ain’t cricket dear boy. There will be a mutiny if targets are unchanged but salaries are cut. Hours worked need to reduce too. 

The S&G PI dept wont last during this pandemic. 

The best thing about these SPB cuts is that our London office managing partner sent us their usual manic, typo-ridden email around noon saying “thank you for the huge effort across the office in our billings and collections push...in the words of Queen and Adam Lambert ‘You Are the Champions’”, only for the whole UK LLP to be whacked with a totally impersonal email about pay cuts across the board at around 3.00pm. Conveniently they timed this right after financial year end, funny that.

We’re already paid below market, and now there’ll be people at the firm earning less than if they were flat-out furloughed.

Shameful behaviour from management and needless to say this will only exacerbate the ongoing fee earners exodus from this sorry firm.

@Pooshits - errrrmm not quite... Utter rubbish.

Accepted the salary reduction. Felt like I had no other choice. Firm needs to make difficult decisions when they’re faced with a significant drop in revenue. I am annoyed that we have taken a pay cut at 100% hours when the firm already knows there isn’t going to be enough work to go round for everyone to get their hours down They are already threatening us with part time hours once the effects of this start to show on the time sheets. Part time salaries will be pro rata based on our already reduced salaries. That is what’s unfair in all thus. Clever move, Weightmans. A pay cut at full time hours, followed by a reduction to part time hours. Totally unfair. They will be making a huge amount of money out of lawyers over the next year with that tactic. 

@Anonym 01 May 20 14:03

quite right to raise the point about firms being honest and upright about what’s going on behind closed doors. From my recent experience what my firm’s management tells staff and what the PR team tells the press is quite different from what’s actually occurring. The firm (at the bottom end of the top 30) has stated that apart from some staff being furloughed and partners distributions being held back it is business as usual but the reality is different with salaries being slashed by material amounts on an individual and inconsistent basis. It feels like the groundwork is being laid for layoffs by stealth/forcing people out. Let’s see where loyalty to the firm sits when we come out the other side of this (if the firm does come through).

I'm one of the stealth layoffs.

While it's horrible I am finding it frustrating that so many firms are advertising roles on their website which are not active. Recruitment freezes are in the industry and many firms are leaving adverts as live to project an image that all is well. One firm, who I will not name is advertising a job that I have been told by the partner and a separate recruiter that they haven't got authority to hire due to recruitment freeze. One of my old bosses has also told me the adverts on their website are not valid as they are also on a recruitment freeze. It's very poor form as it is wasting my time.

BLM will be burning through its overdraft like a first-year undergrad.

Integrity and honesty seem very inconvenient standards wen u have to lie to staff on issues such as pay cuts, work streams or stealth terminations. U cant handle the truth.

Any info on Kennedys?

@Anonymous 8.23 Sorry to hear that. Are you able to tell us what type of firm you were at? Where are you looking for other roles? Do you think you will change practice areas (if you were in a particularly hard hit group)? All the best.

I fucking hate this time and am thinking of leaving law as recently been released while on probation.

Thus continues my string of bad luck...

Self funded my professional qualifications to become a regional insurance solicitor. 

Paid to cross-qualify in 2 different jurisdictions off my own back. Firm asked me to start a team in another country and made that successful while others were brought in on 20k-30k more than me.

8PQE+ and never earned more than 67k in regions. Pathetic when I reflect upon it.

Fuck law. 

Yet more flimsy law firms. What a joke sector full of shoddy pretend “business” people.

SRA @ 10.26

In my experience of private practice I’ve never seen much evidence of integrity or honesty from the management of law firms. A fair few partners genuinely care but the firm management I’ve experienced have been generally selfish, arrogant tossers who couldn’t give a flying fuck about their employees.

Sorry to hear Anonymous.

The partnership model is dysfunctional and leads to some very short sighted and often cruel management decisions. Tossing associates out when excess to requirements stealthy is very unethical. 

Really hope the firms using stealth lay offs get named and shamed. 
 

What gets me are the firms with tax and funds teams which are essentially massive tax avoidance hubs (i.e. using wholly artificial and manipulated structures with no underlying other commercial rationale) which then, despite being profitable, furlough staff on the government scheme.  Absolutely shameless.

If anything deserves to get wipied out in this, it's that shit.

Some firms have made no effort to bolster their finances in the good time, and instead run their firms like some sort of asset stripping exercise.

Lots of nice words about sharing the pain, but don’t ever hear about sharing the gain? Funny that. 

Sadly , often there is no honesty / integrity. 

Absolutely. Rather than keeping excess cash to handle any downturn the greedy partners have strip all the cash out and treat the associates who do all the work as disposable. The stealth redundancies in this profession are a scandal and I really hope this practice gets exposed for what it is - they should be named and shamed and their clients should know about this terrible practice. Greedy partners. 

@Basil 02 May 20 16:42 Wow! Where did that come from? Seems like there's a story behind that outburst, a personal one at that. Do tell. 

SPB trainees get paid a miserable £37k in their first year (well below market btw), but with the pay cuts introduced on Friday, will still fall under the higher 20% cut bracket and so will be left working on £29,750 p.a. from May onwards. Might as well apply for that gig in Tescos.

Hope everyone run for the exits once this passes, SPB management does not care about you one iota.

I wish those senior associates who are utterly incompetent, lazy and suck up to Partners and have managed to linger like the plague are booted out.  

Fingers crossed. 🤞

@Anon 02 May 20 18:43

Damn straight it's personal - my wife's a doctor working in an underfunded NHS now without proper PPE so I, like everyone else should, have an interest in seeing some of the rampant taking-the-piss prevalent in this country, including by law firms in relation to tax, tackled head on.  This is as good an opportunity as ever!

@Uncle Ben 02 May 20 19:52

That's a shame, as they say such nice things about you!

Darn it,

Looks like the Slater and Gordon Summer Loveboat Party will have to be cancelled this year.

Sigh.

Please don’t complain in the same breath about the broken partnership model and your “low” 30k pay (above the UK average, as a kid).  The biggest problem with the model is the focus on money.  

Either complain about pay and understand this means huge uncompensated redundancies right now, or hope for a more constructive model, but that means lower pay for your entire career.

Personally, I’m in the latter camp - SPB as well. They announced a pay cut for everyone with no redundancies. 

My firm has furloughed support staff and trainees and cut pay by 20% and we have no way of knowing whether there has actually been a net downturn in income as a result of COVID. A number of departments have had a spike in new instructions as a result of COVID.
 

There needs to be a way to ensure firms don’t exploit COVID, treating it as an opportunity to sponge off the state and slash salaries illegitimately under the guise of having to do so in order to prevent redundancies. Intimidation was used to force people to vote in favour of the pay cut (“Anybody who votes against the pay cut may find their names at the top of the redundancies list later”).

Uncle Ben, you sound like an insecure associate who is jealous of your colleagues. Also sound like you have no work and no strong allegiances so you’ll most likely be the first to go. I’m sure you be missed.

Dildo Spaffins at SPB needs a reality check. You know sod all yet and aren’t worth 37k. That’s more than most people earn. Ever. If you think you are worth more, get a job that pays you more. Oh, I forgot, you can’t. Because you know sod all, have no clients of your own and are clearly a bit of an idiot. 

@ Uncle Joe, 09:02.

I'd bet my house on you being a massively disgruntled, regions-based paralegal.

Thompson's solicitors have made the decision to get rid of their fix term employees as a way of dealing with the pandemic. And insult to injury they are refusing to furlough the staff. When pointing out that the scheme cost them nothing and will help us financially given the odds of the staff finding work during these times is going to be difficult there response is we have made a firm decision not to furlough. When pointing out it is the morally right thing to do they still say they don't care about our financial circumstances and as there is no requirement to assist us by furlough us so please just work you notice and get on with the fact your contract has been ended early. It is so disheartening to be told from the moment you start don't worry we always offer FTC but then go on to employ a permanent position even as you are packing up for lockdown to be let go. But it's absolutely unforgivable they will not place us on a scheme set up by the government to help us during these times to ensure our bills are met and food can be put on the table. Thompson's really should be ashamed of themselves.

Trying to reply to a stealth layoff question. Will RoF allow me to respond please or will it delete?

@ 7.26. You sound like one those creeps who put themselves 1st then sod everyone else. I bet your insecure about your position.  Probably been over promoted n paid and been lucky to be able to simply talk the talk as opposed to having any real talent. I bet you r a one trick pony doing something like motor claims but pretend to be a major player as it's hrly

We used to have trial by combat in this country.

Couldn't we bring some form of that back to decide about furloughs and redundancies.  It would make things a lot simpler. 

“You know sod all yet and aren’t worth 37k“

Glad someone from SPB management turned up to tell us how it is at their firm.

Interesting that pretty much every single City law firm pays its trainees north of £45k in their first year, considering just how low their worth is eh?
 

Shambolic firm, and one which will sadly not stop at mere pay cuts. There’s going to be redundancies, and a lot of them.

Please tell us about the stealth layoffs?

@9.51 Paragraphs old bean.

@ Anonymous 03 May 20 11:58

You really need to get over not getting a TC, but you can still try to get one in the next round.  Brushing up on your spelling and grammar would probably help, as would filling in that massive chip on your shoulder. 

Re Thompsons, ironic and bitterly so given that they claim to be on the side of trade unions and employees.   Absolutely no reason not to furlough rather than make redundant.  That’s the entire point of the scheme.  The chancellor pleaded for employers not to let people go.  So this is about other reasons.  I assume Thompsons either want to make cuts to get rid of people they don’t like.  Or they anticipate a major slowdown.  

@anon90112020 03 May 20 10:36

You tell us, how can we know?!

If it's true what is set out above about Thompsons then it's pretty shameful given the spin on their website:

"We’re the most experienced trade union and personal injury law firm. We have teams of specialists focused on personal injury and employment law, based in our 17 offices across the UK.  We’re a different kind of law firm because we only work on behalf of injured or mistreated people and never for employers or insurance firms. You will also see the difference in Thompsons Solicitors as an employer."

It would be awful if someone let some of their trade union clients know or if they otherwise became aware of it. 

Anon 10:36 please try again - VERY keen to hear which firms are doing this. Let’s name and shame. Their clients should be aware of poor management.

Boooom town

I remember trial by combat.

You lot don't know you're born.

First female partner at Wolfram & Hart pulled my toupee right off and then half eviscerated me with a fingernail.

I cried uncle and had to toughen up to get my own seat the following hear.

Bit rich of old Thomsons given that they are contributors to a recent peice on Left Foot Forward about "[n]ot all companies are making full use of the furlough scheme - and workers are losing out as a result":

https://leftfootforward.org/2020/04/exclusive-companies-accused-of-using-coronavirus-crisis-as-an-excuse-to-sack-staff/

Time for RoF to feature them on the front page?

@ 13.36 completely wrong - qualified yrs ago and very comfortable with no money worries.  Managed to avoid creeps like you affecting my career but I have come across characters like you day in day out -  AKA oversized ego, able to talk about Man United but fairly average intellect and ability.  BTW Thanks for the tip re: grammar and spelling; only useful advice you have shared. 

“You will also see the difference in Thompsons Solicitors as an employer.“. 
 

Utter crap.   
 

I also understand  their partners or owners make hundreds of thousands whilst staff are paid fairly poor on the basis that their focus is protecting the little guy not making money.  

Have heard about Kirkland too

Anonymous @ 17:34

LOL. That chip on your shoulder is a big one isn’t it.

your jealousy and insecurity are completely evident from your comments. I bet you qualified at a second rate outfit and you’re a frustrated senior associate with zero work and who can’t make partnership whilst your peers progress their careers. That would explain tour sounding off about your fellow associates. 

Frankly, I'm surprised that you're surprised that these firms are behaving like total shits behind closed doors, despite banging on about being 'different' and 'caring' publicly.

Who'd have thought it?! I'd have thought it. Any fool would have thought it. This shouldn't come as some sort of "gotcha" surprise - it's the way of the world. If you (hitherto) believed all the human resources bullshit then good luck in this industry...

Would it be less of a sting if you joined a firm whose tagline was: 'when the shit hits the fan we'll crap on you?' 

K&E

Thompsons paid £800k to top of equity.  
 

Scandalously hypocritical. 
 

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/staff-at-trade-union-law-firm-to-strike-over-pay/5101725.article

I'm at K and E and can confirm that no one has been furloughed/laid off in the London office and bonuses will be going ahead.

@ Yawn 03 May 20 21:21

The point isn’t that this comes as a big surprise - the point is to call it out and highlight that it’s a particularly egregious example in the case of Thompsons of rank hypocrisy that is different in scale and degree from other firms.  Big city law firms never claim to be on the side of employees and never state they don’t work for employers or corporates.  They don’t take the moral high ground.  Yes, they have PR about yoga and mindfulness and D&I, and we all know this is driven by their clients’ expectations, but this is puff.   At heart the big firms remain and don’t deny being motivated by profit and commercial interests.
 

 Thompsons however, as set out above, claim to be on the side of the little guy, never to work for big bad corporates or employers and to treat their people better than anyone else and look down on others.  They take the moral high ground.   Yet if the above claims are true, they are far worse than the large firms, their owners make millions, their people are so badly treated they go on strike over pay, and they are now not allowing desperate people to go on furlough for no good reason at least.   This level of hypocrisy needs to be called out and not just met with your approach which is a shrug of the shoulders and a “oh well such is life” response.  

Erm yes, no one has been “furloughed” or “laid off” because that firm doesn’t do those sort of things, it does however do stealth layoffs which is what was being referred to above

Lmao looks like K&E’s HR have made it to the comments section.

Try working for the gld and having 10-15 years pqe and barely being on more than 50 grand. That's misery. 

@ Anonymous 04 May 20 10:09

How does a "stealth layoff" work if it's not simply an unannounced 'normal' layoff?

It isn’t a stealth layoff if the associate was just a bit crap

A stealth layoff involves a firm deciding they want to lose the cost of an associate by stating the person isn't up to the job, or another artificial reason, purely to avoid making them redundant.

This is because redundancies are linked to problems with a firm's finances. A stealth layoff is better at deflecting the issue towards the employed rather than the firm.

It is a stealth layoff if its done to avoid paying a redundancy pay out or to trim costs irrespective of associate performance. 

Winckworths have today asked staff with salaries over £50k to agree to cut salaries by 15% with NO reduction to hours. There's a notional option of 20% cut to go to a 4 day week, but entirely at the discretion of partners. 

Here's a challenge for you all...

Explain the value of the legal profession to me in no more than ten words.

@ challenge

Do your own homework. 

How are PI firms still going?

Meanwhile, back at the ranch Hill Dicks sent contracts to their staff requiring a 20% reduction for “at least 2 months with the possibility of further extension beyond such period”. This is contrary to their prior reassurances that no further cuts would be made without further consultation. Another classy move by the partners who are still sitting on a heap of cash from the sale of their healthcare business. Clearly the day is not sufficiently rainy for them to dip into that fund. “No, it’s scientific experiments for the lot of you (employees).”