White & Case partner billings under scrutiny in performance crackdown
White & Case is to crack down on partner performance, with the firm planning to enforce average billable hours targets globally. Partners were alerted about the move at a meeting in Washington DC last month, at which they were notified of a drop in average billable hours across the firm and told that some partners would be asked to leave as a result.
March 01, 2012 at 07:03 PM
2 minute read
White & Case is to crack down on partner performance, with the firm planning to enforce average billable hours targets globally.
Partners were alerted about the move at a meeting in Washington DC last month, at which they were notified of a drop in average billable hours across the firm and told that some partners would be asked to leave as a result.
Research carried out by management before the retreat found partners' average hours chargeable to clients had fallen significantly behind their peers both in the US and elsewhere, with some in London expected to be affected by the new performance management measures.
It is understood the firm is contemplating an upper-end target of around 1,700 billable hours a year, although this has been described by some within the firm as an "aspirational" target rather than a minimum requirement.
London managing partner Oliver Brettle (pictured) commented: "As a leading global law firm we must manage our firm proactively. Given the new economic realities, we have undertaken a renewed focus on partner performance, aimed at reinforcing our commitment to clients and innovating how we deliver service to them. To do this, we are asking our partners to step up towards the same level of contribution as partners at our peer firms."
One partner added: "There will be partners who will be asked to leave because their performance is just not up to scratch, and there are those that will be asked to get their act together in order to stay on."
The move comes after White & Case carried out a restructuring of its London partnership three years ago, affecting more than 10% of partners.
This content has been archived.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 AllBig Four Japanese Firm Mori Hamada Launches Foreign Joint Law Enterprise, Joins Rebrand Drive
Cox & Palmer to Merge with Benson Buffett in St. John’s, Canada’s Easternmost City
2 minute readAsia's Top Stories 2024: Departures, Layoffs and Breakups at the Likes of Kirkland, Skadden and Mayer Brown
Trending Stories
- 1Advising 'Capital-Intensive Spaces' Fuels Corporate Practice Growth For Haynes and Boone
- 2Big Law’s Year—as Told in Commentaries
- 3Pa. Hospital Agrees to $16M Settlement Following High Schooler's Improper Discharge
- 4Connecticut Movers: Year-End Promotions, Hires and an Office Opening
- 5Luigi Mangione Defense Attorney Says NYC Mayor’s Comments on Case Raise Fair Trial Concerns
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