Bank in-house teams wary of secondment culture
In-house lawyers working in banks have joined their private practice counterparts in voicing concerns about the growing numbers of secondees in financial institutions. Lawyers at a number of banks told Legal Week that the large number of secondees from panel law firms was structurally weakening in-house legal teams. There are particular concerns about procurement departments' understanding of in-house legal roles, with some suggesting that there is an assumption that all lawyers are the same whether they are in-house or private practice.
July 23, 2009 at 04:46 AM
2 minute read
Senior lawyers at some banks concerned over pressure to rely on secondments as in-house budgets slashed
In-house lawyers working in banks have joined their private practice counterparts in voicing concerns about the growing numbers of secondees in financial institutions.
Lawyers at a number of banks told Legal Week that the large number of secondees from panel law firms was structurally weakening in-house legal teams. There are particular concerns about procurement departments' understanding of in-house legal roles, with some suggesting that there is an assumption that all lawyers are the same whether they are in-house or private practice.
Banks have been forced to rely increasingly heavily on secondments to get around recruitment freezes and to cover positions affected by redundancy. Secondees make up more than 25% of some banking legal teams, with one mid-ranking lawyer at a large bank stating that, of the 82 lawyers reporting to him, 70 were secondees.
Commenting on the issue, one head of legal at a leading investment bank said: "One of the key functions of a legal department, if not its raison d'etre, is to manage risk. So is it really a good idea to fill them with people who do not really understand the business?"
Other criticisms include claims that secondees are not always appropriately skilled for the role required and often need to be put through fairly lengthy training – the burden of which is falling on already overworked permanent staff.
The other major gripe voiced by in-house lawyers was that the overuse of secondees damages organisational morale – with the constant turnover of lawyers on three to six-month stints undermining team spirit and putting a strain on relationships with the rest of the business.
The situation is not helped by the fact that secondees – remunerated at law firm rates – are in many cases being paid more than in-house lawyers.
The criticism from in-house lawyers comes after Legal Week reported on growing resentment in law firms where partners are concerned that banks are putting firms under too much pressure to supply secondees.
Sign up to receive In-house News Briefing, Legal Week's new digital newsletter
Click here to join Legal Week's LinkedIn In-house lawyers group
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 All
Workload and Getting It All Done Top Challenges for In-house Counsel: Survey
4 minute read
Amazon Corporate Counsel in Brussels Returns to US Firm in ‘Boomerang Hire’
2 minute read
Former Miral GC Brings Commercial Insight to BCLP’s Middle East Real Estate Practice
4 minute read
‘A Slave Drivers' Contract’: Evri Legal Director Grilled by MPs
Trending Stories
- 1New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 2No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 3Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 4Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 5Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
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
