'There are real challenges at the firm': Shearman equity partners face demotion in profits push
US firm considers demoting equity partners in global profit drive
September 20, 2016 at 12:05 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Shearman & Sterling is considering demoting some of its equity partners in a bid to boost profitability and focus the business around priority practice areas, Legal Week understands.
Partners inside the firm told Legal Week the issue is expected to be discussed tomorrow (21 September) at a meeting between the firm's global and regional managers in New York. It is understood that partners in less profitable practice areas and regions will be most affected, though the details of the plans are not yet clear.
If approved by the larger management group, a cull of the equity ranks could be implemented during the annual compensation period next January. Other more immediate changes could include a reduction in the number of practice group heads.
"There is a desire within the partnership to make sure that every equity partner is in fact putting in the time and effort and driving the business," said a current Shearman partner, who requested anonymity in order to speak freely about firm matters.
Another partner said: "It wouldn't surprise me if Asia or the US were affected by any changes. I don't think it's any secret that most firms struggle to make money in Asia, unless their partners are on some sort of salaried structure. It's no secret the firm has struggled with underperforming partners and areas. There are real challenges at the firm."
Shearman partners with knowledge of the plan said the firm's leaders have been searching for a few years to trim the ranks of unproductive partners. But they have been hamstrung by the firm's partnership agreement, which requires that a supermajority of 75% of equity partners approve a partner's removal from the equity partnership.
"It never happens," said one current partner. "This has been a major problem for the firm." It is possible, however, to de-equitise a Shearman partner with his or her consent. And management does have potential sticks at its disposal to encourage that consent: leaders are authorised to trim equity partner compensation annually by as much as 25%.
In a statement, a Shearman spokesperson said: "As with all firms, we regularly review how and where we invest equity and manage headcount."
The move has taken on increasing urgency in the past few months, with news of the potential departure of a top antitrust group in Brussels for Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, as well as the June departure of three top M&A partners in San Francisco for Paul Hastings.
Partners have grown frustrated at the firm's stalled growth. After two strong years in 2013 and 2014, average profits per equity partner fell nearly 4% in 2015, to $1.8m, while gross revenues grew just under 2% last year, to $860.5m. Two inside sources at Shearman said this year that demand has been flat.
The 839-lawyer firm had 162 equity partners and 26 fixed-share partners last year. Under Am Law 100 guidelines, the fixed-share partners are counted as non-equity partners, though they have full voting rights and Shearman considers them equity partners.
Meanwhile, the firm has continued to grow its younger tier of partners. It has promoted 25 partners within the past two years, many to fixed-share status.
If Shearman does move toward de-equitisation, it would not be the first time the firm has used powerful measures to cull its equity partnership. In 2005, the firm made waves by encouraging underproductive partners to leave in what were then labelled 'Shearminations'.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllChicago Law Requiring Women, Minority Ownership Stake in Casinos Is Unconstitutional, New Suit Claims
5 minute readFree Microsoft Browser Extension Is Costing Content Creators, Class Action Claims
3 minute readFired by Trump, EEOC's First Blind GC Lands at Nonprofit Targeting Abuses of Power
3 minute readIndian Law Firm Cyril Amarchand Rolls Out AI Strategy, Adopts Suite of AI Tools
Trending Stories
- 1Public Notices/Calendars
- 2Wednesday Newspaper
- 3Decision of the Day: Qui Tam Relators Do Not Plausibly Claim Firm Avoided Tax Obligations Through Visa Applications, Circuit Finds
- 4Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-116
- 5Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250