Irwin Mitchell is the Golden Turd 2018.
Staff at the national personal injury firm awarded Irwin Mitchell just 23% overall. That was 1% less than last year's loser, KWM. And KWM had just gone bust.
"Back stabbing. Favoritism. Shit IT. Out of touch management. Weak HR", summed up a trainee. The management "is akin to Lord of the Flies", said a junior lawyer. "Absolutely appalling in every respect", agreed a colleague. Senior management "shun the opinions of departmental managers when submitting tone deaf edicts which seem calculated to create resentment and inefficiency". Exhibit one, "patronising 'values' like 'tenacity' and 'pioneering' daubed in lurid colours on the walls". Exhibit two, "Scoreboards on the walls with stars next to names of solicitors indicating management approval (or not)". The culture "would seem unduly patronising in a creche".
Some staff had good things to say about Irwin Mitchell. It was "definitely improving over what it was", said one, and was "not nearly as bad as the London-centric detractors would have you believe". There was an all male board, but "that's finally changing with women making it to the top". It was, said another, "not as bad as the press makes out".
Hopefully it's not as bad as its own staff make out, either. "If there is any firm that should attract bad publicity", said a senior solicitor, "it is Irwin Mitchell". There was, he said, an "exceptionally greedy cohort of equity partners underpaying staff to undertake the roles of lawyer, business development manager, CSR co-ordinaries and press liaison all merged into one role".
One example of this, said another senior solicitor, was the firm instructing junior staff "to build links with disability charities simply as a way to persuade said charities to refer all their service users to the firm for negligence claims". Ingenious, perhaps, but also, she said, "truly awful". Meanwhile, "People actually shit on the floor!" said a junior lawyer. "On the actual floor".
"Despite efforts to change", said a senior solicitor, "the culture within some divisions and offices is still toxic". There was, said a junior solicitor, "zero correlation between performance and pay and progression". Departments, he said, "base their entire business model on not qualifying staff" to save money, and "are now trying to prevent qualification via Cilex after having relied on the TC model for years to hold people back".
"It really is a case of who brown noses and back-stabs best", said a senior solicitor. As for the coffee, it was "cheap and bitter - like many of the partners".
In a creditable move, the firm addressed its drubbing head-on. “We welcome all feedback to improve our business", said a spokesman, "and will take on board the RollOnFriday results. We seek regular external feedback from clients via services such as Trust Pilot and we are pleased that our customers rate our services very highly. We also received over 2,000 responses in our 2017 internal employee engagement survey with very positive scores on areas including diversity and inclusion and we have robust action plans to continue making improvements to our employee experience”.
Another PI firm, troubled Slater and Gordon, came second bottom. "Awful awful awful", said a trainee. Its business model "revolves around pigeonholing trainees in a bid to retain them" in a "dying area", he said: the PI sector. The abominable news reports, said a senior solicitor, "speak for themselves". There was "no chance of progression or promotion", said a morose junior solicitor. "No chance of a pay rise, no point in trying". Hooray!
Kennedys also hit the low 20s. Staff said the partners "only care about increasing PEP", and pay was "dictated by low hourly rates and a high proportion of fixed (low) fee work". In spite of the glamour, "it's like the Marie Celeste at 5pm". Which indicates a healthy work/life balance, at least, although one solicitor said it was only because "Nobody can take more than 8 hours of that shit a day".
Check out the full results next week.
Tip Off ROF
Staff at the national personal injury firm awarded Irwin Mitchell just 23% overall. That was 1% less than last year's loser, KWM. And KWM had just gone bust.
"Back stabbing. Favoritism. Shit IT. Out of touch management. Weak HR", summed up a trainee. The management "is akin to Lord of the Flies", said a junior lawyer. "Absolutely appalling in every respect", agreed a colleague. Senior management "shun the opinions of departmental managers when submitting tone deaf edicts which seem calculated to create resentment and inefficiency". Exhibit one, "patronising 'values' like 'tenacity' and 'pioneering' daubed in lurid colours on the walls". Exhibit two, "Scoreboards on the walls with stars next to names of solicitors indicating management approval (or not)". The culture "would seem unduly patronising in a creche".
Some staff had good things to say about Irwin Mitchell. It was "definitely improving over what it was", said one, and was "not nearly as bad as the London-centric detractors would have you believe". There was an all male board, but "that's finally changing with women making it to the top". It was, said another, "not as bad as the press makes out".
Hopefully it's not as bad as its own staff make out, either. "If there is any firm that should attract bad publicity", said a senior solicitor, "it is Irwin Mitchell". There was, he said, an "exceptionally greedy cohort of equity partners underpaying staff to undertake the roles of lawyer, business development manager, CSR co-ordinaries and press liaison all merged into one role".
One example of this, said another senior solicitor, was the firm instructing junior staff "to build links with disability charities simply as a way to persuade said charities to refer all their service users to the firm for negligence claims". Ingenious, perhaps, but also, she said, "truly awful". Meanwhile, "People actually shit on the floor!" said a junior lawyer. "On the actual floor".
 |
Bless you, Golden Turd, already getting work in for your new masters. |
"Despite efforts to change", said a senior solicitor, "the culture within some divisions and offices is still toxic". There was, said a junior solicitor, "zero correlation between performance and pay and progression". Departments, he said, "base their entire business model on not qualifying staff" to save money, and "are now trying to prevent qualification via Cilex after having relied on the TC model for years to hold people back".
"It really is a case of who brown noses and back-stabs best", said a senior solicitor. As for the coffee, it was "cheap and bitter - like many of the partners".
In a creditable move, the firm addressed its drubbing head-on. “We welcome all feedback to improve our business", said a spokesman, "and will take on board the RollOnFriday results. We seek regular external feedback from clients via services such as Trust Pilot and we are pleased that our customers rate our services very highly. We also received over 2,000 responses in our 2017 internal employee engagement survey with very positive scores on areas including diversity and inclusion and we have robust action plans to continue making improvements to our employee experience”.
Another PI firm, troubled Slater and Gordon, came second bottom. "Awful awful awful", said a trainee. Its business model "revolves around pigeonholing trainees in a bid to retain them" in a "dying area", he said: the PI sector. The abominable news reports, said a senior solicitor, "speak for themselves". There was "no chance of progression or promotion", said a morose junior solicitor. "No chance of a pay rise, no point in trying". Hooray!
Kennedys also hit the low 20s. Staff said the partners "only care about increasing PEP", and pay was "dictated by low hourly rates and a high proportion of fixed (low) fee work". In spite of the glamour, "it's like the Marie Celeste at 5pm". Which indicates a healthy work/life balance, at least, although one solicitor said it was only because "Nobody can take more than 8 hours of that shit a day".
Check out the full results next week.
Comments
Love the standard response from the Ostriches in charge to the award - typical. They have now intention of changing, they just want to bury the bad news...again!!
Sadly for all us still here, its a worthy winner.
None of which include:
a) paying staff properly;
b) stopping management stripping an obscene amount out of the rest of the business;
c) restructuring the entire firm so half the 'personal' side isn't treated like the poor relation despite bringing in all the money; or
d) preventing senior partners from giving crap, platitudinous presentations that deal with none of the regularly-expressed concerns but are designed to make us think it's OK when we're all bright enough to know it's not.
As you were...
I can see how some folk in the PI and catastrophic injury teams might enjoy working at IM. Those departments are genuinely good at what they do (it's not just ambulance chasing, but properly complex cases with lifelong implications), and they do form strong bonds both with clients and with each other.
The rest of the firm though...
It's not perfect, of course, but people are supportive and warm, displaying a real desire to do right by their colleagues and their clients. There's a real focus on mental health and wellbeing, balancing family life with work, and developing your career. Sure, the biscuits are a bit naff, but I wouldn't swap the welcoming, inclusive nature for all the chocolate Digestives in the world.
Irwin Mitchell has its issues yes but is it really the worst law firm ? Seriously? Compared to the stuffy, old fashioned big London firms that have people chained to their desks to god knows what time? There are things that could be done to improve it but there are also a lot of happy people who like the firm and whose view isn't refelected here. Unhappy people shout louder.
YES - IT dept. is a joke verging on an embarrassment. But that's outsourcing for you.
YES - HR is weak and no one has any idea who they are or what they actually do.
YES - there is favoritism and often she who complains the loudest gets promoted
YES - some of the SMT (below the board) are grossly incompetent and will do anything to save own skin.
But
The board are genuinely trying to implement positive change
The company listens to is employees and ACTS
Majority of people are good decent human beings & management encourages the need for a work/life balance
Having worked in various firms, is IM the worst? Hell, no. If anything one of the better employers, going places, making positive progress in employee relations.
I can only imagine the respondents to this questionnaire want the trappings of a partner when they have the skill set of a mail room clerk!!
We were once a great firm, we are no longer. The senior management have given it a go, but the sooner they accept their incompetence and move aside for more capable people the better. If you are in senior management and are reading this, don't dismiss what is written, take a long hard look at yourselves and do the decent thing - resign and get out of your ivory tower.
Sheffield is not the centre of the universe and we are not a full service commercial firm
Some common themes here that cant be dismissed as a few bad apples being grumpy.
Internal feedback is a joke. Way forward is to spend time in all sites at all levels and listen regularly. People/skills development needs to be the focus.
This can be profitable if you accept low margins a fluctuating revenue stream so long as the rest of the firm is subsidising you during the tougher periods. Because IM lack a full-service offering they haven't got the ability to absorb the tough periods. Instead they increase pressure on people to deliver what cannot be delivered.
Paying just over £30k for NQ's and giving them little increases year-on-year while demanding CSR commitments and social media presence on top of ambitious average daily chargeables and billables makes it a tough place to work. When you have a difficult job, the little things start to matter as you expect a support service. There isn't a visible one in place.
Sadly for IM there are some good people but the objectives and realistic delivery fail to align.
I normally hate consultants but it seems like IM could use a root-and-branch review.
27/01/2018 22:00 is correct, this is exactly my experiencing of working at IM (I would add micro-managing). I think everyone in junior positions in my department left in a period of 6 months.
Comment made on 26/01/2018 at 11:36 - "There's a real focus on mental health and wellbeing" - are you joking? Those who disclose any mental health difficulties are not given any support, but are targeted and pushed out of the organisation.
As others have said - Irwin Mitchell do a great job for their clients, particularly in PI. However, as an employer, it is very much a turd.