Cadwalader threatens to sue London partners

  • Print
  • Comments (3)

Readers' comments (3)

  • Most sincere quote of the year goes to...

    "Our goal ...is to protect the rights of those employees". Yeah sure. Even by Cadwalader standards the cynicism is breathtaking. Pity the CWT associates (once again) who are caught between a dysfunctional imploding office and a group of self serving partners scurrying for the nearest exit after happily cherrypicking their most useful assets and dumping the rest in true CWT fashion.

    As for those left at CWT, they find themselves being foisted on a firm that does not want them by a firm who does not want them. I can't imagine the people at Paul Hastings are too impressed or excited by the new arrivals.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • makes sense

    Breathtaking cynicism aside (sadly it's only to be expected from these people at this point), based on the numbers being batted around, the departing partners are taking at the very most maybe 75% of their current associates with them. So effectively those seven are making 25-30% of their associates redundant without bearing any of the assorted costs (financial and reputational, although it's probably too late for them to be concerned about the latter) associated with redundancies. Not to mention redundancies among support staff, who doubtlessly will be impacted to a much greater extent than the associates. Obviously the departing partners were trained well during their time at CWT...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • no billables

    paul hastings will chuck them all out when it realises they have no work!

    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Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down.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 (3)