The war for talent may be on a break, but reputation still matters
Since its launch five years ago, the Employee Satisfaction Survey - Legal Week's annual report on the attitudes, priorities and morale of lawyers at major law firms - has always been interesting reading. But for several reasons this year, it promises to be even more so. Firstly and most obviously, major law firms have engaged in an unprecedented round of job cuts since the last report was conducted. The long-term impact of that is as yet largely theoretical, as the legal industry has so little experience of widespread job losses. Law firms are quite logically calculating that tending to the whims of assistants is less pressing in a recession, when staff become less full of their own importance and rather happier to just have a job.
May 20, 2009 at 08:03 PM
3 minute read
Since its launch five years ago, the Employee Satisfaction Survey - Legal Week's annual report on the attitudes, priorities and morale of lawyers at major law firms - has always been interesting reading. But for several reasons this year, it promises to be even more so. Firstly and most obviously, major law firms have engaged in an unprecedented round of job cuts since the last report was conducted. The long-term impact of that is as yet largely theoretical, as the legal industry has so little experience of widespread job losses. Law firms are quite logically calculating that tending to the whims of assistants is less pressing in a recession, when staff become less full of their own importance and rather happier to just have a job.
But you still have to strike a balance, and damaging your staff relations tends to have a shelf life that can last well into the upturn when it comes to matter much more. It will be interesting to see which firms have acquitted themselves well and, to put it bluntly, which haven't.
It will also been interesting to gauge the impact that the rapid change in economic circumstances has had on the mindset of assistants, who had become used to being assiduously courted. For a well-educated generation that until recently gave little thought to the idea that work might be scarce or that there would be a shortage of employers hoping to secure their services, it will have come as a shock.
There are also several other reasons the report promises to be particularly relevant this year. For one, the sheer number of responses, with more than 4,000 qualified solicitors below partner level taking part in the study, which means the 58 ranked law firms will have on average attracted more than 65 independent responses (firms have no role in the research process and cannot influence the outcome).
Going on the experience of previous years, many of the larger firms will attract well over 100 responses (last year DLA Piper had no less than 262). General readers will also get some scope to separate the stars from the less-than-stellar, since for the first time Legal Week will print a number of headline rankings for individual law firms. The report, which is produced by our independent research arm Legal Week Intelligence, will also this year place a stronger focus on assessing and comparing individual firms. Those firms that do well will have the distinction of being lauded by those that know them the best – their own staff.
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
© 2024 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 AllLatham's magic circle strikes, pay rises and EY's legal takeover: the best of Legal Week over the last few weeks
3 minute readJob losses, soaring partner profits and Freshfields exits - the best of Legal Week over the past two weeks
3 minute readMagic circle PEP hikes, the associate pay conundrum and more #MeToo - the best of Legal Week last week
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 2The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 3Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 4For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 5As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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