Last week we reported the news that Middletons lawyers has decided against renewing the contracts of a handful of grads. We thought this was reprehensible when, in our view, its recruitment literature made an implication that the relevant grads would be kept at the firm after their first year.
Well, a similar event occurred at national mid-tier law firm Herbert Geer a couple of weeks ago.
—–Original Message—–
From: news@firmspy.com [mailto:news@firmspy.com]
Sent: Friday, 4 March 2011 7:23 AM
To: wfazio@herbergeer.com.au
Cc: Anthea Hancocks
Subject: Grad SackingsMorning Bill,
We’ve been sent a tip-off that Herbert Geer has decided against renewing
the contracts of several grads. How many did this decision affect? Why
was the decision made?You’ll note that we came down pretty hard on Middletons for similar
behaviour earlier this week. We think it is a good idea for Herbert Geer
to come back to us with some sort of rationale.We will be writing on this issue some time early next week.
Regards,
Firm Spy
Bill palmed this one off to HR, who responded as follows:
——- Original Message ——–
Subject: RE: Grad Sackings
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:20:11 +1100
From: “Anthea Hancocks” <AHancocks@herbertgeer.com.au>
To: <news@firmspy.com>Herbert Geer has a good record in the recruitment and retention of its
graduates. When we recruit graduates they undertake rotations through a number of
practice areas.At the completion of their year, a decision is made based on feedback
from the graduates themselves and from the business with regard to
performance, positions available in their preferred practice unit and
cultural fit.Therefore in any one year there is the possibility that not all
graduates will continue with the firm. This year two graduates were not
offered positions.
Not enough room for two people? We found that hard to stomach when in FY 2009/2010 the Herbert Geer partnership grew by 6% and, according to the AFR (25/6/10):
[the firm] has doubled both its revenue and number of partners in two years.
On this issue of whether graduates are a “cultural fit” at the firm (we think this is a cop-out phrase, by the way), at least Mr Fazio had the fortitude to address the inherent inexactitude of assessing this quality when referencing it in the context of partnership distributions (yes, extraordinarily a partner’s draw is related to their Herbert Geer “cultural fit”):
the individual contributions of partners are examined every year and points are adjusted to reflect both financial performance and cultural fit. Fazio admits the latter is a subjective quality and the accurate measurement remains a work in progress.
So let us get this straight – not even partners have the benefit of knowing the precise cultural quality that is sought by the firm? Seems queer indeed that a partner could lose tens of thousands of dollars in equity distributions because they are grumpy on a Monday…
Has your firm sacked grads? Tell Firm Spy first!
Send the Firm Spy your news and views!
Loading...
Perhaps the graduates were exceptionally poor performers and Herbert Greer hasn’t wanted to embarrass them by saying so in a response to the Firm Spy request re not continuing their employment past their first 12 months. I think its a bit much to read a sinister motive into every action that firms undertake.
Except that the very first thing the firm mentioned in its response is that the decision was made having regard to performance.
I don’t think firm spy is trying to expose any motive here, but is simply showing that Herbert Geer grads are under serious performance and cultural pressure from the moment they traverse the marble archway. I know if i were tossing up a grad job there or somewhere else, this would be a consideration
Queer? Isn’t that homophobic?
This concept of “poor performers” is something which always makes me laugh. In my experience, it usually applies to those people who are normal and see the firm’s bullshit for what it really is.
Unfortunately our firm is in a different boat – it hired our 2 grads, one of whom can’t manage to do anything without his hand being held (even the most basis tasks!), never turns up before 9:30 and is always gone by 5, yet thinks he is Mr Big Shot. The fact he has been retained has put a lot of noses out of joint and has really affected our view of the partners who hired him!
“Herbert Queer”? What are you, a high school student?
To those referring to the “Queer” part of the title, perhaps you should look up the definition of that word. It’s only recently that the term has been used to describe people who are homosexual. In this case it would appear to refer to the “odd” explanation of why these graduates were fired.
On to the graduates in question. The reason these two will no longer be at Herbert Geer:
One spent most, if not all, of her time contributing to the “Social Committee” instead of actually doing a decent days work. If you are relatively new to a firm, putting in the hard yards instead of ponsing around doing sweet f*ck all might be a good idea. You’re not being paid to make pointless films about daily life in the firm or organising the next p*ss up for your drunken social committee friends.
As for the other, that I can’t comment on as I have little to do with the practice groups he was in.
You may want to ask yourself the question “Why would a firm can someone who was good at their job?”.
Ohh queer meaning “odd”, I get it. That must be why the blogger used the image of Boy George to accompany the posting… because he’s odd. Your logic is impeccable.
Anyone who has gone through a clerkship would know that its as much a “try before you buy” process for the law student as it is for the firm.
The same goes for a graduate year.
I agree with Insider, why should a private partnership have any moral obligation to keep underperformers employed?
Smithy, if that were the case then why do grads get ongoing employment contracts rather than One year ones, subject to extension upon agreement of both parties? The same definitely does not go for grad years as for three week fixed contract internships…
And as much of a moral imperative, firms have a commercial imperative not to make grads redundant – the bad press from this and the morale effects will cost more than 2 first year salaries.