Recruiters Are Playing Dirty in the Push for Private Equity Talent
U.K. partners say recruiters are using deceptive tactics in the heated hiring market.
July 30, 2019 at 03:29 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
Agents often get a bad reputation. During property booms, there have been cases of real estate agents telling buyers a house is on the market when it isn't so they can make an approach to the owner with a potential offer. Sports agents are sometimes accused of suggesting a club might be interested in signing a player, just to see if the player is keen.
But few would have thought that similar tactics would ever enter the legal recruitment market in a major way.
And yet it seems they have. The hiring market for private equity partners in London is so hot at the moment that lawyers are complaining of similar behavior.
Some private equity partners complain about being marketed by recruiters without their permission. One says he received a call from a friend at a rival firm asking if it was true that he was on the market. The partner in question had just been marketed by a recruitment agent with whom he had not even spoken.
Partners add that they are also being approached about joining firms that recruiters haven't been mandated by.
One law firm head says he sometimes gets approached about specific partners with whom a recruiter may or may not have spoken. He has to explain to the recruiter that he is happy for them to signal that the firm may be interested in the partner, but that they must make it very clear they are not being mandated by the firm and they must not approach other partners. "It's like talking to children," he says, adding that they typically still do approach others.
The incentive for agents to operate in this way is clear. Recruiters typically stand to receive a fee that is 25% of the annual remuneration of a person they place. For highly sought-after individuals, this can be quite profitable for the agents involved, so it is perhaps understandable that they would do whatever they can to get in ahead of their rivals.
The tactics are not all that new and by no means confined to just private equity, but the surge in private equity work and subsequent hiring war has magnified the effect in that sector and attracted attention.
Partners are understandably frustrated, as are those responsible for hiring. No one wants to appear like they're making multiple approaches, lest they appear slightly desperate.
Some recruiters also feel resentful of their counterparts' actions because they risk being tarred with the same brush.
"We are aware that this happens, and it is very bad for the industry because when we call them up there is always something to overcome," says Scott Gibson, a recruiter at Edwards Gibson.
And yet, while one recruiter called the behavior "disgraceful," there also seems to be a grudging acceptance that this is simply a function of a manic hiring market. In the last few months alone, private equity hires have been made in Europe by the likes of Kirkland & Ellis; Clifford Chance; Simmons & Simmons; Weil, Gotshal & Manges; Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld; Vedder Price; and Willkie Farr & Gallagher.
This is not a practice area in which firms want to be only a little bit larger. Private equity has come to dominate corporate transactions in a way no one expected a decade ago. Not only do buyout firms offer a steady stream of M&A mandates, they also provide opportunities for restructuring, finance, tax and property departments. Any partner with links to such influential clients will be highly sought after.
One private equity partner says demand is so strong you would have to be "comatose" for a firm not to be interested in hiring you at the moment.
Good news for the agents maybe, but such dirty tricks are certainly not a welcome market development.
Email: [email protected]
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 AllAs American Firms Retreat, Will Loyal UK Firms Regain Asia Market Share?
DeepSeek’s AI Power Move: Will Lawyers Be the Next to Adapt or Perish?
6 minute readNow That the Trump Era Has Begun, Change Is Coming. For Big Law, Change Is Already Here
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
- 2Lack of Jurisdiction Dooms Child Sex Abuse Claim Against Archdiocese of Philadelphia, says NJ Supreme Court
- 3DC Lawsuits Seek to Prevent Mass Firings and Public Naming of FBI Agents
- 4Growth of California Firms Exceeded Expectations, Survey of Managing Partners Says
- 5Blank Rome Adds Life Sciences Trio From Reed Smith
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