The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Serious Q about Latham and peer firms
| Vibrant dog poop | 06/30/09 |
| thriller bisexual sanctuary | 06/30/09 |
| emerald ungodly abode deer antler | 06/30/09 |
| turquoise dysfunction | 06/30/09 |
| up-to-no-good olive church building | 07/01/09 |
| Swashbuckling black karate | 07/01/09 |
| pontificating jap brethren | 07/01/09 |
| Nudist anal kitty | 07/01/09 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 30th, 2009 11:46 PM Author: Vibrant dog poop Have any of the 7-8 firms ahead of them in the Vault rankings and Munger, Irell, Quinn, Gibson or OMM done all of the following:
Salary freezes Layoffs 1st Year Layoffs |
 |
Date: June 30th, 2009 11:48 PM Author: thriller bisexual sanctuary I don't know about all of latham's peer firms, but I understand that chadborne reduced salaries and laid off a substantial number of people. I would have a difficult time choosing between the two firms, to be honest. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1031152&forum_id=2#12129331) |
|
Date: June 30th, 2009 11:49 PM Author: emerald ungodly abode deer antler OMM's did a lot too (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1031152&forum_id=2#12129334) |
|
Date: June 30th, 2009 11:49 PM Author: turquoise dysfunction OMM may have laid off some first years. the rest haven't.
if you compare the NY office to its peers, none of them have.
LaTTTham = pwned in the long term. since you have the incident in the 90s and now this, people are connecting the dots and saying this is latham's mo. in the long term this will hurt recruiting, hurt the work product, and hurt the bottom line. not to mention the 400 angry attorneys they've injected into the market, + the sympathizers. this was a very dumb move on latham's part if you look at the long term because their peers didn't follow. they should've just bitten the bullet and ridden it out like the other top firms. then again, if they were well managed, they wouldn't have been in such bad shape in the first place. arguably, the ny office was poorly diversified compared to other ny firms. |
|
Date: July 1st, 2009 12:26 AM Author: up-to-no-good olive church building Hate to break it to ya, but Latham will probably be fine in the long run. So long as the big name partners remain at the firm and clients continue to hire them, the firm can continue to boast about their practice areas, offer high salaries, and slowly buy back into the ambitious law student's naive quest for prestige. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1031152&forum_id=2#12129618) |
|
Date: July 1st, 2009 12:49 AM Author: Swashbuckling black karate in NY the other elite firms will pwn them. they're out of the running. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1031152&forum_id=2#12129811) |
|
Date: July 1st, 2009 1:05 AM Author: pontificating jap brethren In NY, yeah. But in Cali it will always be a powerhouse. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1031152&forum_id=2#12129967) |
|
Date: July 1st, 2009 1:03 AM Author: Nudist anal kitty All firms are not equal. Three of these firms are all or virtually all litigation, which wasn't hit nearly as hard as corporate. You'd be a fool to assume these firms won't screw associates when they encounter bad times. Hell, Quinn Emanuel laid people off and slashed bonuses when they hit record profits. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1031152&forum_id=2#12129946) |