In an interview in today’s Australian Financial Review, mid-tier middleweight Corrs Chambers Westgarth announced an affirmative action policy to help women in the workplace designed ‘[to help] women position themselves for promotion.’

The pipeline may be contrasted with Minter Ellison’s approach to women in the workplace, which seems skin deep by comparison: employing female and male models and, in the most outrageous circumstances, seeing the glamorous pair hook up.  The Firm Spy queries which of these ‘policies’ will be more successful in the long term.

In an almost criminal act of self-confidence, Queensland’s Crown Prosecutor, Kris Ashen, has nominated himself for the CLEO Bachelor of the Year competition. Appearing shirtless in his profile shot, Kris evokes in readers a curiosity as to whether his surname is legitimate, or merely an alias drawing from his complexion.

Some investigative journalism from the Firm Spy confirmed that the surname is legitimate. Of course, Ashen’s prosecutorial ability is nevertheless open to question, given that his most notable Crown prosecution was the recent indictment of a man who got involved in a Zoolander-esque nightclub dance-off which turned ugly. In that case, Ashen helpfully informed the court:

‘A dance battle is where people take turns to show off their moves.’

In his CLEO Bachelor of the Year application, Ashen answered the following:

Q - Biggest Turn-On?

A - A sensual, slow, passionate kiss

Interestingly, CLEO invites readers to make comments at the bottom of each profile, presumably to enable the voting public to offer encouragement to the applicant.

No such luck for Kris Ashen.

In comments appearing at the bottom of Ashen’s profile, ‘Jennifer” made the following pejorative offering:

‘under [the question] ‘how I’m feeling’, shouldn’t you have said ‘myself’?

Do you think this ‘bachelor’ should be prosecuted for being a wanker? Send us your thoughts and comments!

After months of redundancies and cutbacks in mid-tier firms and below, it seems that the global financial chill is spreading upwards.  After many requests for updates on the ‘big three’ — Mallesons, Allens and Freehills — finally, Firm Spy can reveal that a top-tier Australian law firm has cracked!

Freehills has apparently frozen pay for its legal staff, who are naturally irate.

Whereas Allens took the comparatively modest steps of sacking the tea-ladies and cancelling the Christmas party, today Freehills Chief Managing Partner Gavin Bell took revolutionary steps, saying:

we’ve introduced a salary freeze and, secondly, we’ve extended a number of flexible work options that we already had in place that were extended to address the global financial crisis… the GFC hasn’t hit us hard [but we took this measure] to be in a position to deal with it proactively as it happened.

The Firm Spy has received a number of insider reports which throw doubt on the reasons behind the pay freeze:

If it has not hit the firm yet — something which accords with perceptions held by almost all lawyers here — then why the pressing need to freeze our wages? If it never ‘hits’ will the partners pay us extra?

Adding to the self-righteous futy of  Freehills’ lawyers, Bell and the Freehills partnership recently commented that the firm was in excellent shape.  This latest revelation suggests that the firm either ‘misunderestimated’ the impact of the GFC or that something funny is going on.

Was freeze was premature? Will other firms follow suit in this July’s salary review season?  Send us your thoughts!

It started with a leaked email to the Australian Financial Review in which Mallesons partners were revealed to be

readily pondering whether it was time to ‘chop spare lawyers’. Now, it seems, a pattern is developing at Mallesons with new sensitive documents leaked to media.

But this time the document has landed on the desk of the Firm Spy!

A communique was sent to all Mallesons partners earlier this week entitled:

Partners Conference 2009: Embracing a Changing World

The document is the programme for the Mallesons partnership conference this weekend and contains in the fine print some evidence that Mallesons, the Australian top-tier heavyweight, is struggling financially. Under an item entitled ‘Charges’, the following is stipulated in something akin to a contractual arrangement:

The firm will cover the following charges: standard single room for Friday; standard single room rate for Saturday [subject to an election] to join the optional Saturday dinner; reasonable telephone charges; all organised meals and beverages (excluding alcoholic spirits).

All other charges incurred by you must be settled with the hotel before departure.

Amusingly, it is evident that event organisers anticipated that Mallesons partners reading the communique and its associated efforts to strictly limit costs might look for a loophole through which they could avoid paying additional costs (by placing them on the corporate credit card).

Please note a personal credit card will be required for all hotel expenses not covered by the conference.

Do you believe Mallesons partners will sit through the optional Saturday night dinner to score an extra night’s accomodation? Do you think the firm should pay for spirits, or just beer, wine and champagne? Do you think these cutbacks are a sign this iconic Australian law firm is struggling?

Send us your news and views!

In the wake of the largest Australian law firm layoff, in which Blake Dawson sacked a total of 89 employees, the firm’s Wikipedia page has been defaced. A senior Blake Dawson Firm Spy has reported that:

‘ a vindictive ex-employee hoping to exact a measure of revenge on the firm has altered our page on Wikipedia; something we volunteered to author in order to supplement our firm advertising.’

The following comments appeared on the Wikipedia page:

‘The partnership of Blake Dawson, the sixth-biggest law firm by revenue in 2008, is considering cutting up to 100 staff in a bid to slash costs and preserve profit. Blake Dawson is the first top tier law firm in Australia to announce anticipated redundancies during the 2009 economic downturn. While other major law firms Allens Arthur Robinson and Freehills have assured staff that there will be no redundancies, partners of Blake Dawson announced on 24 February 2008 that they would sack up to 100 staff instead of reducing their individual profit share. The firm’s partners receive an average of $850,000 each per annum.’

A spokesperson has remarked hours after the alerteration to the Wikipedia Blake Dawson page, a firm-wide partnership communique was circulated. As a result of this communique, it was resolved not to re-edit the page out of fear that it would provoke an editing war.  Nevertheless, mere hours later, the page was re-edited to its former state.

Send us your opinion of who changed the page? Did a partner contravene the firm resolution? Leave your comments!

In a display that beggars belief, Deacons partner Daniel Cross has commented on how to ‘strike the right balance’ in a redundancy and how to create ‘successful redundancy programs’ mere weeks after Deacons sacked many of its own workers.  The comments, appearing in today’s Australian Financial Review, have generated a deluge of embittered responses.  This from the firm that:

• sacked 9 of its 17 Melbourne office Articled Clerks in January this year, informing them that the firm would not be offering them permanent positions at the conclusion of their articles year
• ignored pleas to retain its ACs until their admission date
• informed the redundant ACs that they would also have to pay for the costs of their own admission
• has also taken the curious step of locking the stationary closet, allegedly ‘to cut costs’ as part of its response to the GFC.

Among the more measured responses we received from Deacons staff and elsewhere was this comment:

‘it is understandable that Deacons would seek to capitalise on increases in employment law work like advising on redundancies, but to spruik its wares now, as many sacked junior lawyers starve and worry about their future as a consequence of this mishandled redundancy, is objectionable on any view.’

Lunacy, outrage or just good management?  Share your views with fellow Firm Spies below.

Following on from the cruel news sent by the Blakes partnership

that sackings were imminent, and pursuant to the even crueler revelation that several dozen graduates commenced work with the firm a couple of weeks ago, it has emerged today that Blake Dawson has sacked an incredible 89 staff.

The employee sackings consisted of 23 lawyers and 66 support staff. The firm said in a statement:

‘All our staff were provided with career transition support and severance payments, and in some cases support is ongoing… While this has been a challenging process for everyone, we believe that the measures we have taken will ensure the business remains competitive with the right mix of skills and experience for the current environment.’

What the Blake Dawson partnership declined to comment on, and which the Firm Spy can now reveal, is the ‘advice’ it gave to the newly redundant workers to tell colleagues that they were going home ‘sick’ rather than reveal their job losses. A Blakes Firm Spy contributed the following comments about the sackings:

‘for several hours throughout the day, workers from around the office were leaving early to go home ‘sick’. I emailed a colleague in corporate to ask him if anything was happening up there and he said several lawyers had already gone home ‘sick’. It later came to light across the firm that none of the people who had gone home were actually sick - they had simply used that as a cover for the fact that they had been sacked. Apparently HR told them to do it.’

Do you believe that this HR advice was appropriate? Are you ‘sick’ of incompetent HR staff and heartless partners? Send us your news and views!

Two Maquarie Group advisers have been the subject of a successful injunction application by their former employer to interdict the flow of confidential corporate information to their new employer UBS, according to the Australian Financial Review. In yet another blow to UBS Australia, the company has employed two people whose potential revenue streams and workflows appear considerably lower than first thought.

As reported in the Review, the Supreme Court of New South Wales has granted an injunction in favour of Macquarie ordering Mark Minchin and Peter Simpson to provide to Macquaries lawyers within 7 days:

‘a memores ultra travel drive, any Sony storage media device and any Kingston USB device … [as well as] any personal computer belonging to either defendant.’

In addition, both defendants have been ordered not to work at UBS on client accounts which are the subject of the dispute. This begs the question; in the midst of the same financial crisis which caused UBS to sack graduates and cancel bonuses, what will Minchin and Simpson do?  Comments, theories and gossip welcome!

The Allens partnership confirmed rumours last week to the Financial Review that it would be baulking on its 12-year commitment to lease several floors for its Melbourne office in the 567 Collins St project. Instead, AAR will take

residence in the office space vacated by Blake Dawson at 101 Collins St.

Broken promises. Staff feel ‘ripped off’.

In comments received from an AAR Firm Spy, it is appears that the prevailing sentiment amongst staff is that the move is viewed as a step down, even from the very modest digs at the ASX.

‘For years we  have suffered through our joke of an office building, bereft of a tea room or any space to eat lunch, in the hope that we would move to an office space befitting our top-tier status. The Partners have instead taken the cheap option, moving to an office still warm from mid-tier Blake Dawson … Im not alone in feeling a bit ripped off by the whole situation.’

For the record, Allens has now:

• sacked the office tea-ladies;
• decided a Christmas party ‘wouldn’t be appropriate while so many of our clients are suffering’; and
• relegated its staff to an office space considered unfit for a considerably smaller law firm.

What measures will be next? Email us with your news!

After months of anecdotal reports of redundancies, confirmation today direct from Cutlers that several lawyers had been made redundant in the last few months. According to Lawyers Weekly, the partnership found that the layoffs were ‘unavoidable’. Although declining to elaborate on numbers, Cutlers revealed:

‘This was … an unavoidable decision given the economic conditions and the flow-on impact on the demand for legal services… it’s important to manage the size and shape of the workforce to reflect the current workflow and economic conditions.’

However, some Cutlers employees have questioned the motivation behind the layoffs.  One employee (who did not wish to be named) speculated to the Firm Spy that the redundancies, which occurred since the announcement of the merger with Dibbs Abbot Stillman on 30 January, are ‘the result of Dibbs heavyhandedness’.

Are these redundancies another example of opportunistic GFC sackings?  Does anyone care?  Give us your opinions! Give us your news!