DLA set to cut up to 140 in new redundancy round

This number of redundancies won't be enough. DLA really does have to bite the bullet and fire some of its equity partners - many have never been significant fee earners and their value to the organisation has always been suspect. Boot them out now!

Anonymous -10 Feb 2009 | 15:40

DLA has to run a tight ship; this is the small visible tip of their redundancy iceberg - they have an exceptionally high rate of both voluntary and involuntary departures - moreso since teaming up with the Yanks to keep their finances sweet. Opening new offices and hiring in new partners as often as they like to has not come cheap! Despite this from a multiplity of acquisitions, especially in the London office, there are numerous partners who might find it hard to justify their positions under scrutiny.

Ex-DLA GC -10 Feb 2009 | 16:12

@Ex-DLA GC - what do you mean 'teaming up with the Yanks to keep finances sweet'? Both partnerships are completely independent of each other with no sharing of financials or comp.

banker -10 Feb 2009 | 16:44

The partner renumeration committee at DLA has always had deep flaws. The run-of-the-mill fee earning partner's renumeration is tied strictly to billing - no other contribution is recognised, despite the relevant partner being tasked with things outside of fee earning by management. But the old boys consistently earn more, and for what? Sitting in meetings, pontificating about things they know little about, or, in the case of some, so carefully CYAing that they are never responsible for anything. I agree with the first commentator - DLA should boot them out. They are worth nothing and should have been booted out a long time ago. Lawyers should fee earn. Hire a business school graduate to do what these equity partners have been doing - they will be more efficient at it than they ever were and at a fraction of the cost.

Anonymous -10 Feb 2009 | 16:44

There is a pool of cash available to fund investments in new offices etc, contributed to by both the US and the UK partnership, so yes, they are separate partnerships as was said, but they 'joint venture' on some things. Question is how do the yanks feel about the non fee earning UK equity partners - they all, bar a couple, contribute to their firm's bottom line - from which cash for these joint ventures ultimately comes.

Anonymous -10 Feb 2009 | 16:57

That's simply not true anymore. DLA US is purely US, the rest of the world is UK and international (which is run by and funded by the UK firm). US no longer does anything outside of the US.

Anonymous -10 Feb 2009 | 20:45

All of us are worried, things really 'ain't what they used to be' albeit ... only two years ago when everything was going so well.

Anon -10 Feb 2009 | 23:00

So, was the US "merger" such a wonderful idea in the first place? The answer is probably yes and DLA has Knowles to thank for this. It DID catapult DLA into a different league and it did result in the firm having a greater appeal to global clients. There are good lawyers at DLA and the not so good - pretty much the same everywhere else in varying degrees. But let's not lose sight of what they have achieved - labelled a crap regional law firm 10 years ago, they are now a name the international markets recognise at worst as a mid-market firm worth at least taking taking an estimate from and at best a go-to firm. What is happening there now reflects a global business downturn, not bad management. And that is not to say that it is very sad that people are losing their jobs. DLA are lucky that they have Knowles steering them - he is, despite rumours to the contrary, a man of great ability and compassion and DLA is his life. It won't have been an easy decision for him to make the redundancies. And again, it is with the people who have lost their jobs that our thoughts should be.

Anonymous -12 Feb 2009 | 16:45

Agreed, DLA is simply responding to market conditions. It has to. But it is a firm with good, if not excellent, management in Knowles and Darwin. Everyone is realigning their business needs to the current environment but, speaking as someone who worked there for a long time, they are a good organisation on pretty much all fronts. As the previous commentator said, it is sad that people are losing their jobs, infact it is awful that we are experiencing this globally. But, I worked there in banking and I enjoyed it and had, and still have, respect for the partners and lawyers there. It is crucially important in the current environment though that partners say that they believe that the people who have or are being made redundant are efficient, good and professional. Their redundancies are not connected to their abilities and this can never be over stated: they were and are good lawyers and support staff. Full disclosure of this would be a good thing!

ex dla partner, now GC -12 Feb 2009 | 18:06

DLA is a firm that has grown exponentially in the last 6 years. Lawyers and partners at different locations clearly have different experience of their working colleagues and mangement. My experience in Asia was that the management was far from competent and compassionate, and I, along with many many others, was pleased when I was able to walk out the door.

Anonymous -14 Apr 2009 | 01:38