And the unhappiest law firm in the UK is...BCLP.
Staff at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner gave it the lowest overall score in the huge RollOnFriday Best Law Firms to Work At 2023 survey, signalling deep dissatisfaction with their firm.
And that means BCLP is this year's Golden Turd, relieving Knights, the 2022 loser, of its embarrassing brown crown.
BCLP's status as UK law's shiny shite represents a spectacular fall from grace for BLP, the legacy firm which was once crowned a RollOnFriday Firm of the Year.
Those glory days feel far away now: four years after merging with Bryan Cave, the firm seems to be losing, not gaining, cohesion.
"Since the merger, management of the firm has been DREADFUL" said a senior solicitor.
"Who knew trying to run a London firm from Missouri would be so difficult", observed another.
The high level of churn within the London partnership, revealed by ROF, was a major focus for concern reflected in comments following that story.
"So many high quality partners have left, that is the really crazy thing about it, just haemorrhaging top people who made the firm what it used to be", rued one person, who remarked that associate ranks had also thinned out: "So much great homegrown talent, destined to be the future of the firm, has just disappeared…!"
"The merger was a stressful enough experience to put anyone off working there, but the Americanisation of the firm has only got more stark as time has gone on", said a former member of BCLP’s business services team.
"Time and again, C-Suite BS roles were moved from London to Chicago or St Louis, and Partners increasingly grumbled about their practices being pulled from under them by Project Advance, a multi-million pound slideshow presentation by McKinsey that made the US the focus of the firm and concentrated on sectors that mattered in the Mid West. London has become a RE cash cow with a handful of other practices hanging onto its coat tails."
More's the pity, they said, because "BLP had a fantastic vibe about it when I joined; it was competitive and scrappy with the firms around it, but friendly and welcoming to those within. That spark and warmth sadly looks to be extinguishing fast and I don't know what it could do to try and recover".
BLP "was a good outfit", agreed another. "Not perfect but a decent brand and did some great deals for its size. The founding partners were titans of their day in that property world, the likes of Stanley Berwin, Laurie Heller, Neil Sinclair, Jon Bennet, Hugh Homan. They’d be turning in their graves if they could see what it’s become now".
A former BLCP solicitor said the current direction of the firm "has done so much damage to the careers of many associates (me included) and partners (lifers and laterals) who made serious commitments to the firm only to have their future careers (and in some cases established practices) irreparably damaged by the firm turning its back on certain sectors".
One positive: "The advantage of legacy BLP partners streaming out the door is it does create more space at the top", admitted a lawyer with their eye on the prize.
Describing the exodus in terms that would make a PR proud, one satisfied solicitor said BCLP "has shown that it is focussed on promoting from within and moving on more senior (less profitable) partners for junior partners with more hunger".
BLP was well-known for its real estate prowess, and the sentiment that career development at BCLP is "hopeless unless you are a real estate lawyer" was shared by a number of respondents.
Complaints hit on other matters, too, though most if not all could be traced back to post-merger management.
"The maternity leave pay is appalling", said one lawyer, who described how management rebuffed proposals by a group of female associates to improve BCLP's package of 13 weeks at 100% and 13 weeks at 50%, even "when competitors are at 6 months (or more) full pay".
"The worst thing is [that] they save on money with their current policy", said the solicitor, citing a practice group in which "I personally know 5 people on mat leave right now and none of them have been replaced with any short term contracts...no wonder most females leave before reaching Partner!"
Others complained that there had been "not a single pay rise in 5 years for senior lawyers", and even a solicitor who conceded that pay was "objectively fine" added the caveat, "but I hate my job so you could pay me seven figures and I'd still be dissatisfied".
The negativity was by no means universal. "I can't say what it's like across the board but Real Estate has a lovely vibe and is filled with great, friendly people", said one lawyer.
In fact, if there was one thing BCLPers liked, it was each other. "There aren't many backstabbers and you can usually find common ground with someone by moaning about the management", said a colleague.
However, "low morale" was a problem, said a junior solicitor. "Everyone is trying to leave. It’s bleak", agreed a colleague. Despite a "good ratio of good people to d**kheads", it "still won’t be enough to keep people if the firm as a whole doesn’t improve", said respondents.
BCLP declined to comment on its latest trophy, which it almost dodged: its people handed it a 29% overall score, and just two more points would have landed another firm with the Golden Turd. But that’s the way the dookie crumbles.
Tune in next week for the overall scores of all the qualifying firms.
Also horribly dissatisfied, or just mildly curious who wants you? Add your LawyerUp profile in 20 seconds and attract approaches from leading firms and in-house employers when they're seeking someone just like you. Accept/reject at your leisure. Available on the App Store and Google Play.
Ffs. Up your game Knights.
SPB: “hold my beer..”
I appreciate that nobody cares about offshore law firms - we are just postboxes for onshore lawyers and as such a professional irrelevance - but I can honestly say that, having worked as an associate at Harneys for a number of years, we deserve an award for the most awful environment in the legal world.
Not at all - we do care about offshore firms as they make their shilling facilitating the corruption and money laundering which makes the world a less fair, more difficult and nasty place to live.
Cannot believe that Knights did not get the golden turd crown this year. Disappointing, considering evidence on RoF was overwhelming. Management team should not see this as a reflection that employees are happy. We are not.
You really need to take that Photoshop course, Jamie - it's come on a really long way since 2005.
Mustn’t have been enough people left at Knights to muster up the votes for the turd, offices like ghost towns
Champagne at the Cheshire Golf Club today
There will be celebrations in the offices of Wombles, Knights and Slater & Gordon today, they’ve avoided the golden 💩 this year!
Geordie 27 January 23 09:28
There will be celebrations in the offices of Wombles, Knights and Slater & Gordon today, they’ve avoided the golden 💩 this year!
Conspiracy 27 January 23 09:14
Champagne at the Cheshire Golf Club today
Nothing to celebrate Knights. You'll be at the bottom.
The TURD should be MINE.
Our friend Happy Knight is still furiously submitting positive reviews - can someone please tell them they can stop now and get back to their four dials of fun
And at WFW
Knights toadies must have been busy with the up-votes!
Jon Bennet ‘turning in his grave’? Have they buried him alive?
Interestingly the maternity pay at BCLP, described here as appalling, and no doubt driving some low scores, is identical (13 weeks full pay, 13 weeks half pay), to firm of the year Burges Salmon, where they all think they are well rewarded.
All the people wanted was to hear more about the window blind feng shui and being in the office five days a week
So many comments about so many dire firms. BCLP must really be a sh1t show to have achieved such a stellar award against fierce competition.
I was part of the halcyon BLP days. It’s sad to see a once great firm, crashing and burning. Run for the hills if you’re there…oh you already are!
Turd or no turd, if you’re in the bottom 3 you are never going to attract laterals.
Harneys 27 January 23 09:03 - unsurprising: offshore firms are the preserve of failed lawyers, so they are packed with, and run by, dysfunctional, chippy people.
The Dark Knight 27 January 23 10:02
All the people wanted was to hear more about the window blind feng shui and being in the office five days a week
And selling shares and recent promotion. Those feng shui blinds don't hide them from the truth.
Ogier takes some beating in the “most awful place to work” league. A combination of the usual washed-up people you find in the offshore world, run by the typical high street types in Jersey.
Harneys 27 January 23 09:03: leaving Harneys was the best thing I ever did. The Cayman and Hong Kong offices are the very worst of an admittedly very mediocre outfit.
How can it be that the shambolic Knights management team failed to do enough to retain the turd?
I demand a recount.
Wombles will be letting out a huge sigh of relief, but it won’t last long. Abhorrent firm with sociopathic management. Just wait til the sra have a peek
I don’t know why we didn’t win. Stewarts is a very depressing place. Run by a load of personal injury lawyers who earn money out of all proportion to their abilities and professional standing.
Was obvious this year there would be no golden turd for Knights. Partners getting lavish days out to The Shard whilst the underlings man the fort, what’s not to love? Little to no perks for everyone else other than being ridiculed on figures (4 dials) and watching the revolving door keep on spinning
Freeths won’t feature in the bottom 3.
Racist jokes at partner conferences and calling new female starters “talent” might seem shocking to us, but not to them. So don’t expect them to fare badly in this poll.
Oh and Roll on Friday refused to allow votes by fax.
John (not Jon) Bennett is alive and well - I saw him doing press ups this morning in a well known dance studio
@bryan’s cave, wouldn’t be too quick to compare BCLP with Burges on May leave policy. Burges are a Bristol based UK law firm, whereas BCLP are a “global law firm” with a London base in the UK
Bryan Cave sounds like my sort of place!
Not sure what angle the other comment about maternity pay is going for but for the avoidance of doubt I think 13 weeks full pay, 13 weeks half pay is poor from both firms. Market standard is 6 months full pay.
@Bryan’s Cave - comparing a Bristol based UK law firm to a global outfit such as BCLP with UK HQ in London…are Burgess your new competition
Scary reading this stuff - let's see what the rest of my career holds
I've worked in a few law firms and BCLP is a great place to work! Great colleagues, lovely modern office and facilities, friendly partners, interesting work. A great culture. Good luck to those leaving - it is not always better elsewhere.......
@Relieved 27 January 23 10:34 - don’t forget the London office, which is grim as well.
@ Bryan's Cave - Burges Salmon is not a competitor of BCLP
Why the hatred for offshore here? From someone who worked offshore for 7+ years and has been back onshore on the last 5, you’re fools if you think onshore is any better. Everywhere has a crap firm/office in their town, let’s not base the discrimination on whether or not there’s sunshine and a beach too
Excuse me Flo - we get free fruit 😂 and the odd sandwich here and there. Don’t be so ungrateful 😂
I work at BCLP and do query why the maternity leave pay is so poor. Quite cruel to save money in this way. If there were more females at the top, the policy would have changed by now. Clearly Lisa is not doing enough for rest of us females.
To add to the erudite commentary above:
Can confirm that life at Knights is worse, and only fractionally less demeaning in moral terms, than even the subsistence level existence that constitutes working off shore.
Even Abu Dhabi is better than this.
Relative though all of these things are.
Little Ross 27 January 23 11:10 - like you, I did a stint offshore and then returned onshore. What depressed me was the standard of people offshore, both in professional and personal terms. They were second rate and, frankly, dysfunctional. Like the odds and sods which you find washed up on a beach. They didn’t stand a chance onshore, which is why they left. Onshore is a far better environment: tough, yes, but the big players are at the top of their game and far more adjusted in social terms.
Little Ross 27 January 23 11:10 - eh? It’s not about sunshine or beaches. Offshore firms are just rubbish, as everyone knows.
I am a happy BCLP employee - and this is my 3rd law firm. Yes, there are issues and leadership has clearly under estimated the impact of the merger but some of the sectors who disappeared under people's feet were unprofitable corner shop operations. A lot of unhappy former partners using RoF to vent, as always. Not really a true measure of what is going on.
Why oh why is my dearest and nearest, the beacon of Bolton not here? Where do we stand RoF?
@Bryan's Cave your comment has angered female Associates further. Whether you are HR or a male Partner, you should have thought twice. Comparing the two Firms is ridiculous - they are not our competitor.
Hey Del Monte, don’t get carried away. It’s been restricted to Mondays now, so you’ve got to be quick to the (one) bowl, especially now that you’re back in the office five days a week. Hope you don’t have to work late, because it’s difficult on water alone (although that seems low risk, given that most decent clients and employees have long since departed)!
I love offshore firms and the way their friendly dedicated, but slightly dim, staff facilitate tax avoidance on a massive scale. I was sad to read that they're not good employers to their little minions
Working offshore is terrible though.
I did it for a while and came to realise that it's the legal equivalent of playing the submissive in a pornographic video (be that a physically submissive role, or a more psychological one such as being a cuckolded husband or sometsimilar).
To unpack that, everyone in the production is being demeaned by participating in it, nobody wants to do it for any actual enjoyment, but your role is one that even your fellow performers - and ultimately the audience - look down on.
Your job is just a lot of kneeling, whimpering and tritely repeating the clichéd catchphrases that the audience needs to hear as part of the broader fantasy (yes sir, no sir, I'll bundle that immediately sir) with none of the 'glamour' of actually playing the starring role, engaging in the real action, and being the subject of anyone's actual desire.
It's what a life the sandpit makes you.
On the maternity pay point, we get 12 weeks at 90%, then back down to statutory. So that’s 3 months of mat leave until you have to come back in order to afford your energy bill. Absolutely shameful.
If you give toadies’ promotions, lavish days out and pay rise they’ll do anything to please the boss. Spend most of the day up-licking, sorry, up-ticking, on ROF no doubt. Hefty salary must be worth every penny. Be proud. Not too sure which boss he’ll be trying to please the most. We can all guess. Should be a recount.
Suppose we all have different experiences then. Although some of you make me laugh about the whole tax avoidance stuff like you guys aren’t participating from your ivory towers in the City. You can’t be the super important big bosses running the transactions and leading the offshore minions one minute and then claim not to participate in any of the “tax planning” schemes the next. Pick a side.
@Hangry Knight - not to worry - there’s always a few Granny Smiths and over ripe conference pears rolling around for the rest of the week
Kellogg’s - they’ve rebranded to Harvest Morn
@10.47 - I would hope all of the female (and male) staff at Freeths have talent!
DB isn’t worried about Roll on Friday - he attributes the negative comments to jealously from others on how well we are doing
I actually like the fact that my role is inherently demeaning.
There's a real thrill to it when I catch a glimmer of contempt in the eye of a well-polished senior associate half my age, as their thinly disguised disgust for me radiates out from the Zoom call in an unguarded moment.
"Can you turn those tonight?" They say, in a tone that makes clear it isn't a question.
Below the desk I am rigid like a granite candlestick. The mute function masks my delighted whimper of affirmation. My face flushes, but everyone just assumes it is the desert heat.
It's a good thing really. I'm inherently useless and a very poor lawyer, like all of my colleagues here, so I could never really move back to a real jurisdiction.
One must get ones jollies where one can.
”It's a good thing really. I'm inherently useless and a very poor lawyer, like all of my colleagues here, so I could never really move back to a real jurisdiction.”
At last, some honesty from an offshore lawyer.
Surprised to hear the Wombles’ toxicity and widespread misogyny didn’t land them the turd.
The rank and file partners and associates at BCLP must be worried about a death spiral. This doesn't mean the firm dies, it just becomes a different, less upmarket beast to what it once was.
Denton Wilde Sapte was a very similar firm to pre-2017 BLP in its day. It made some unenforced key strategy errors, then merged with another US Midwest firm (who took over all the key management roles) and "Dentons" is now focussed on geographic spread rather than higher end UK work. On a more national level (for Hammonds was never a big player in London), see also Hammonds and Squire Patton Boogs.
Almost better for the UK arm of BCLP to demerge while there's still talent remaining but that's not going to happen.
Little Ross 27 January 23 12:23: most onshore lawyers do not object to offshore lawyers because of their participation in tax avoidance. The objection is because offshore lawyers are incompetent.
The merger has been an absolute car crash for BLP.
In my old team the partners in charge who championed the merger and dismissed the general misgivings among the rank-and-file were among the first out of the door in the years that followed and are now plying their trade at other City firms.
Unfortunately management are not truly accountable for their poor decisions and instead it is the firm as a whole that suffers the consequences.
It's sad as when I joined it was a quality outfit with a great working culture. There must be some pockets where that's still true but it has undeniably been a pretty spectacular fall from grace.
@Red Knight Green Knight - as is reflected in the share price…
@13.06 - what turd?
False allegations of coprolites, which turn out to be entirely fictional on brief interrogation, are very common.
I don't know if Harneys HK lawyers are any good or not but they are a lot of good fun - especially in their HK Sevens box - very generous hospitality.
It's FriYAY and I am humbled and delighted to announce that even though associates are fleeing my team in droves my firm avoided the Golden Turd! I am going to celebrate by stopping work for the day early. I will then send a psychotic email to a trainee at 3 a.m.
Problem is, all the ambitious partners and associates have left and the ones that are left are those who are happy to either stay in denial or “settle” with mediocrity or who have tried to leave but can’t as they haven’t made the cut elsewhere (ie, why wouldn’t you leave and get paid more elsewhere with a better culture etc?). In no other company would Management get to keep their jobs after such a debacle.
I don't think BLP London's management team fully appreciated what they were signing up for and the negative impact it would have on BLP after the merger.
There was an excellent post in the previous BCLP article (innocents to the slaughter) which highlights the US law firm operational approach.
It's easy to forget that BLP was a quality outfit for what it did in the UK and overseas and was respected by its peers within the City. It knew its strengths and its weaknesses and operated accordingly with solidity and a civilised approach within the firm to everyone working for it.
There are always teething issues with any new merger however the consistent, ongoing and very significant number of excellent BLP people (at all levels and in all UK offices) exiting since the merger is alarming and conveys the impression of a post-merger offering in the UK which is holed below the waterline and is sinking fast.
A lot of hate for offshore from the tax cattle on here. But if asked they'll claim they really love giving ~50% of their compo to HMRC, I mean it's such good value!
I recently left BCLP and one of my reasons was the maternity leave policy. I’m surprised it has taken this long to put the policy in the spot light. Expect more female associates to leave now they know what the policy is.
Not all of us offshore are post boxes. Some of us are advising on some of the most high profile cross-border cases of the modern age. We are enjoying our work as well as sipping our rum cocktails on a white sand beach at the weekends. So I'll pay my 8% tax and smile at the rest of you. Because if you think it's all crap and the work we do is abhorrent and all we have between ours ears is jelly - good! My position is safe. I won't be losing my dollars, or my weekends in the sunshine, to you oh-so-better-than-me onshore folk :)
It was good, Old Guard, I repost here:
if they just wanted a US presence the they should have gone for a franchise model like a DLA or The Shed. Traditional English law firms have always been innocents to the slaughter when it comes to full financial integration into a US partnership model.
The top US firms are a bit different because they structure themselves like corporations, but mid-tier US firms like Bryan cave are run like a barristers chambers - you contribute a small % to overhead and then you are paid on what you personally bring in.
US partners typically do all the work themselves and it’s not unusual to find a US partner who does a bit of M+A, some IP, some litigation and some private client work, and keeps that all within his/her/their siloed team of associates. They only resource outside that pool when they really, really have to. Because that’s how they get paid. Also, because most of the work is hourly billing, they want the most expensive person doing the work. So the partners chargeable hours will be higher than their associates.
another telling factor is that Americans don’t call it income, salary, earnings, profit share or whatever- they all refer to their “compensation” . And that’s telling, because they expect at the end of the year to be “compensated” for what they and their separate group has delivered, irrespective of the performance of the rest of the firm. If Paris has made a loss, then sack them, I’m not earning less because of it. They don’t get things like employment right and due process, they live in a world of fire at will. There is no concept of investment or market cycles.
English law firms on the other hand have come from a completely different place. Although the lock step model was broken a long time ago, the DNA is still very much that we are in this together and it’s a profit share. When disputes and insolvency is quiet, transactions will be busy, but then it will flip around because the market is cyclical. There is a still a pay gap amongst partners but they take a 3 year view when deciding on pay and firing. And their is a general expectation that in good years, everyone gets a bit of upside because you are all “owners of the business”.
also because the market outside the US has a lot more caps and fixed fees, you are encouraged to push work down and get the cheapest people to do the work. The classic pyramid resourcing structure, which is the total opposite of the US model. Departments are rigidly divided into different legal work and anyone stepping out of their lane to dabble in a bit of litigation or a bit of tax or whatever is quickly brought into line because it damages the brand and because there are other people who are more qualified to do that work.
when you drop a load of English law firm partners into a US “compensation” system, it’s always blood on the carpet. Most get screwed, because they don’t have the high hours or siloed billings, for the reasons outlined above. A small few big biller and hoarders will see their earnings catapult through the roof and will be delighted.
It then becomes a feral hunger games in subsequent years, where all that “collegiate team working” goes out the window and partners either adapt to the new reality or they get pushed aside and squeezed out. Or they decide that, if that’s the new reality, then they might as well move their practice to a better and more profitable version of it at another firm. I suspect this what happened at BCLP.
the classic trick Americans always pull is to weight the compensation committee in their favour. They will happily give up equal votes at board level because they know the real power lies with those who count out the money in the “comp committee”. English law firms assume that governance and management comes from the top and that the board is the most important structure and so fall into this trap every time.
none of this is a secret btw, it happened to my old shop which “merged” with jones day, it happened at squire Saunders, Mayer brown, reed smith and now to BLP. The point is however that the trade off for the English partners in taking all that pain and risk is that, in theory, you then have access to a wonderful roster of US clients paying top dollar fees. In practice the American partners won’t let you anywhere near their clients and will still try to do all the work themselves and then ask a junior London associate to print out the docs day before signing.
BLP either had to stay independent, or bite the bullet and get taken over by a much more profitable US firm with genuine international client base and lots of US corporation clients hungry to do deals in Europe. By going for a “marriage of equals” they fell through a trap door that you then can’t get out of. It’s all very well for them to bang on about performance but their results relative to the market are poor and have been that way for many years now.
shonkie honkie 27 January 23 13:40 - I know the HK Harneys lot and it’s all about marketing. No substance and toxic leadership.
@Offshore Gimpess 27 January 23 14:55. But you are a postbox, as you well know. The onshore firms hold the client relationship, put the legal team together, do all the drafting, devise the strategy and give the advice. And if you are a litigator, the onshore solicitors instruct counsel, and you just sit at the very back of the court, taking notes. There is no dignity to your job whatsoever. Little wonder nobody takes offshore lawyers seriously.
Blue Iguana 27 January 23 14:27 - tax is the price you pay for professional success. Nobody wakes up one day and says, “I have a shot at partnership/silk in the short term. I will give that all up and become a post box for onshore lawyers”. Offshore is for people whose careers haven’t worked out.
I've been to many law firms and BCLP is hands down been one of the best to work! The allegations are all false, everyone has different experiences in a job, but personally my departments and many others I've worked closely with thoroughly enjoy it and couldn't ask for a more inclusive and healthy environment to work in!
No article is going to make me consider to leave and especially a law firm which is constantly looking to improve themselves and including those from different backgrounds to better themselves.
Anon 27 January 23 15:13: Mind yourself on that pedestal there, would hate for you to fall off and realise this is just a job and there are better things in life to get worked up about
Anonymous 27 January 23 15:46
Have you had an early start on the drinks trolley?
The maternity leave comments are very interesting. We lost a lot of really good working mum up-and-coming partners in the real estate team who moved to places like DLA, Dentons, Fladgate. I wondered at the time why, so maybe that was part of it?
ironic that a firm that projects itself as a bastion of diversity and inclusivity can be so short-sighted when it comes to equal opportunities.
oh and to the toadies in HR posting boot-licking comments pretending to be associates and about it being the best place ever to work, your pay is still frozen like the rest of us. Just in case you hadn’t noticed yet.
Will Knights staff be storming RoF’s offices demanding a recount and alleging the Golden Turd was stolen? Or will they continue to listen to the four dial name and shame “I’m trying to help you” crap whilst plotting their exits?
Pleased to see many of my comments from another scathing article about BCLP have made the cut as part of this summation, along with many other former colleagues. I'm somewhat torn between being quite sad that this once great firm has been reduced to this, but also pleased that surely, the only way is up (?) Hopefully the firm's management can see the error of its ways and enact the following changes (as a starting point):
1. Re-balance the practices away from being reliant on RE in London. There are so many amazing lawyers working at BCLP in London and Manchester outside RE, give them a chance;
2. Pay people what the market demands, lawyers and BS staff alike;
3. Don't let the US Partners manage what goes on in the UK (or the rest of the firm). Culturally they are too different and aren't focussed on what goes on outside the US;
4. Put your D&I money where your mouth is and bring in 6 months 100% paid Parental leave;
5. To paraphrase one of your own stated values: "Treat your colleagues you do your best clients"
Hopefully this time next year, BCLP will be in a much better place than the one it currently finds itself in.
Quite surprised to see BCLP get this. A lot of the comments in this article do not reflect the firm I work for
Anonymous 27 January 23 15:46
Give it up management. You’ve tried that before. And all you did was rile the troops further. No sane lawyer sees the firm this way. Cut your losses and start to come up with a plan that actually addresses the problems rather than argues whether they exist or not.
Actions speak louder than words. Your past actions have got you here. Your future actions will determine if there’s any hope of survival.
@Anon 16:02 - bit naive to think they can still afford a drinks trolley.
@Former BCLP BS Staff 1700 - interesting viewpoints and I also read your previous post with interest. Are clients seeing the serious trouble in BCLP and getting concerned?
I got rejected for a job at BCLP in the RE team back end of 2021 - I was gutted at the time but everything happens for a reason and all!
@Harneys - couldn't agree more. Worst firm and partners ever.
What is this all about 27 January 23 15:49: what you do as a job matters. You know or ought to know that.
@13.06 - what misogyny?
I pity any headhunter trying to sell BCLP to any associate thinking of moving right now. Avoid at all costs by the sound of things.
So 2105 psychotic Wombles are accepted just not sure about misogynists?! Nice work by the way business development putting in lots of positive reviews
@21.05 how about we had 2 women both board experience as head of diversity and head of BAME and we chose a white male with no board experience as new MP. Both women now stepped down because overlooked and talent lost. New MP a disaster. Wombles are the Pitts
Head Of BAME and Head Of Diversity are both comedy non-jobs though, so a bit unfair to expect them to rise any higher...
How the hell did Ince avoid this?
28th @ 17.03 - what misogyny though?
28th @ 18.24 - there would need to be more than the mere fact of a white male getting appointed to indicate misogyny. What were the reasons given for his appointment and the females' non-appointment? But if a leap to assume it was misogyny, especially when you have 71% of Associates, 63% of Managing Associates and 57% of new Salaried partners being female at your firm. By you logic that would be misandry.
You can kind of understand it when grubby ambulance chasing PI outfits or grotty little regional wannabes win the Golden Turd but this year’s winner is an international player.
Something is going badly wrong in the Cave.
Told you all. My work is done. I cannot wait for the full list to be published and for it to reflect our great culture and premium (Waitrose) offering with a champions league place
The Knights board will probably see this result as evidence that they are turning the business around. That is way off the mark.
Aggressive pricing and one man’s out of control ego has destroyed this business.
We will never recover. Buying small regional players in saturated legal markets are no longer masking the scale of the problems. 4 dial roadshows only increase the levels of contempt.
It’s time for a change at the top.
SPB would have won, but had the foresight to murder c.18% of its staff before they could post. They are presently being burnt for fuel to combat increased heating costs for the northern offices. Those ex-employees were leaving anyway and would have spread further negativity in the market generally.