Categories:UK

Bevan Brittan to vote on shake-up as PEP drops

  • Print
  • Comments (5)

Readers' comments (5)

  • So what?

    Whitfield is potentially being ousted because the firm isn't making much money, but only in the law is that unusual. The only real difference here is that in other big businesses, failed bosses don't normally get to take another position in the company after they are de-throned.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • yep

    I'd go with the previous statement ('so what?'). Whitfield's post isn't even that of a managing partner, he is a 'chief exec' - if he wants a corporate-type role, he should take a corporate-type demotion.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Who should be in charge?

    I have some sympathy with Mr Whitfield. As a non-management partner, personally I'd hate to give up my role on the deal coal face for what Slaughter and May's Nigel Boardman described years ago as 'counting paper clips'. Yet law firms need management, and it is perhaps a bit tough that Mr Whitfield is taking the heat for the partnership's collective failure when other members have avoided blame simply by simply not stepping forward to help manage the firm.

    If Whitfield's role was a contested one then this consideration does not apply, but only if.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • No surprises...

    Unfortunately all partners need to take a degree of responsibility but all exist in a fear culture that they too will be ousted from BB if they say anything against the firm.

    A very high number of partners are caught in lockstep and are desperate to get out of a failing firm. Anyone out there looking to merge would at least get a lovely state of the art office in Bristol! Please send in your offers now... starting bid £1...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • About time

    It's only right that the buck stops with Whitfield. As CEO for 5 years he had complete control of all appointments and an enormous say in all business decisions, including the remuneration of partners.

    The interesting thing is that the Bevan Brittan partners are intending to retain what has now to be seen as a lame duck; initially as Senior Partner and then as a fee earner - I would have thought that they would be keen to get him out of the business, given: the reputation that flows from his forcible removal, his lack of following and his out of date legal skills.

    If Whitfield himself was still in charge then I wouldn't bet on him being with Bevan Brittan for long.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (5)