Bond Dickinson cuts 5% of support staff roles following merger
Bond Dickinson has concluded its post-merger redundancy consultation, with fewer than 25 employees now expected to lose their jobs. In August, the firm said around 7% of the support staff positions - equivalent to 35 posts - could be made redundant. Managing partner Jonathan Blair (pictured, right) said at the time that the job losses were caused by the merger of legacy firms Bond Pearce and Dickinson Dees, which had "inevitably" created "some areas of duplication".
December 10, 2013 at 08:04 AM
2 minute read
Bond Dickinson has concluded its post-merger redundancy consultation, with fewer than 25 employees now expected to lose their jobs.
In August, the firm said around 7% of the support staff positions – equivalent to 35 posts – could be made redundant.
Managing partner Jonathan Blair (pictured, right) said at the time that the job losses were caused by the merger of legacy firms Bond Pearce and Dickinson Dees, which had "inevitably" created "some areas of duplication".
In a statement today (10 December), a firm spokesperson said: "The group consultation process of the support staff review has been completed. As a result of this process the percentage of support staff roles that will be made redundant has fallen to 5%.
"Every effort is being made to redeploy these staff; therefore the number of people actually leaving the firm through redundancy will be lower than originally anticipated."
Legal Week understands the final number of redundancies will not be confirmed until summer 2014, when Bond Dickinson's staff structure is finalised.
All staff who affected by the redundancy have been offered voluntary redundancy enhancements.
Bond Dickinson began to restructure its support teams soon after the financial integration of the legacy outfits on 1 May. The merger created a business comprising 1,200 staff, including 700 lawyers, and offices in eight locations across the UK.
Last week, accounts filed for legacy Bond Pearce showed the firm grew its revenues by 11% to £51.8m in 2012-13, giving a combined turnover figure of £99.8m.
This content has been archived.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
Israel's Rushed Corporate Tax May Spark Law Firm Mergers, Boost Large Firms Including Gornitzky
4 minute read
Norton Rose Sues South Africa Government Over 'Unreasonable' Ethnicity Score System
3 minute read
MoFo Launches in Amsterdam: Exclusive Interview with Global Chair Eric McCrath
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
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
