Eversheds to offshore more support work, 100 jobs at risk
Eversheds is to offshore HR, administration and finance roles, with 100 jobs at risk of redundancy as a result.
Lee Ranson
The firm has signed a seven-year agreement with Accenture, which will also see Accenture develop a common IT platform for all the international
offices. Eversheds will also outsource HR support services and administration, general accounting functions, billing and collections and the business processes involved from procurement to payment to Accenture over the next 12 months.
The work will be offshored to Bangalore in India. As a result 100 roles in finance and human resources, mainly located in Birmingham, Cardiff and Leeds, will be at risk of redundancy.
Managing partner Lee Ranson explained that the job losses were likely to centre on those regional offices because the firm has already concentrated most of its back office functions there. The job losses are likely to affect those in junior roles.
Ranson said: “It’s important that any major law firm continues to adapt in line with changes in both our sector and the wider marketplace.
“We’ve worked over the last eight months to look at how best to deliver some of our HR and finance functions. This proposal would enable us to put in place a cost efficient, innovative and robust solution, which safeguards quality and enhances client service.
“It’s always regrettable when potential redundancies are a part of such a process and we will of course be consulting with all those members of staff who may be affected by this announcement. The proposals are to retain impacted staff for a minimum of six months to assist with the transition. Those affected will be offered enhanced redundancy terms and comprehensive outplacement support.”
The firm has begun a 28-day consultation and is proposing paying twice the statutory redundancy to those affected.
Ranson estimated that the cost savings would be “several million pounds per year”.
Last year Eversheds outsourced document production work to business process outsourcing (BPO) company Exigent in South Africa, saving an estimated £2m and resulting in 95 secretarial redundancies (14 September 2009).
The firm also sends legal work abroad on behalf of clients. Bulk repossession work for GE and volume conveyancing work for Aviva are carried out by Williams Lea in India.
Through redundancies, outsourcing and other cost-cutting measures such as trimming the equity, the firm pushed up its profits over the 2009-10 financial year, with average profit per equity partner (PEP) increasing 28 per cent from £404,000 to £517,000 (28 May 2010).
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Readers' comments (44)
Scep Tick | 12-Aug-2010 12:24 pm
Assuming £20k p.a. earnings for support staff, the wages of those facing the sack amount to less than the increase in PEP for 18 partners.
The partners must be so proud of their astute, profit-busting business acumen.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 12:31 pm
Correct, Scep Tick. That's what happens when you knock yourself out for years to make partner and then get to run your own business. Its not some charitable foundation.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 12:41 pm
Oh dear. This is, in my view, dire. I struggle to see how a law firm can function to the high standards it should (in all respects) without all support functions fully integrated. I am truly sorry for the staff who are affected.
I am also quite tired of seeing this continual focus on PEP in the press. I don't view it as a measure of well rounded success, and I don't think clients do either. Its all greed and perpetuates peoples' hatred of lawyers. Earnings do not equate to quality of advice and service.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
IHateBPP | 12-Aug-2010 12:49 pm
Sending repossession work to India, well that's one way of avoiding the earache from an irate homeowner on the phone after finding out they're losing their home.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 1:17 pm
Love the 2nd comment - good to see that Parnters only worry about themselves. Once again - support staff dont exist in a partnership. This is not the 80's and greed is no longer good.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 1:43 pm
"Eversheds prides itself on being a great place to work" as per its own website.
Class.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 2:40 pm
Globalisation inevitably means that, where possible, work will be transferred to wherever in the world it can be done most efficiently. It also means the convergence of wages for all such jobs between the transferring nations and the recipients.
The process might be great for the world economy as a whole but is not so good for the people whose jobs are transferred or whose wages are held back or reduced as a result.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rural bliss | 12-Aug-2010 3:38 pm
@ Anonymous 12:31 pm
What a sad indictment you are of the greed culture that has infected the legal profession.
A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 3:50 pm
The second comment shows the usual arrogance from Partners to Support staff.
Correct it is not a charity, but what you are too foolish to see is that support staff will lose any loyalty (if there was any in the first place) and will only "do their jobs" and not go above and beyond.
Financially offshoring does make sense, but you do lose the hidden benefits. I only hope you experience the moment you require that "urgent report" only to find that it has been offshored and therefore will not be immediate.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Antonio Gramsci | 12-Aug-2010 3:59 pm
That's right anonymous -- no one works hard at law firms except the partners... Ever asked the cleaners how many other jobs they have?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 4:03 pm
This is very sad and, in my opinion, very short-sighted by Eversheds. Yes, it is efficient, but how much does a chair-warming, happy-clappy [insert name of outsource provider] drone in some Bangalore sweat-shop know about client service and the culture of the Firm?
BTW, the firms that loudly crow about their improved PEP are the ones targeted most by the Buyers of Services as the ones to tackle first.
Sometimes, a little discretion is best.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 4:15 pm
The firm has begun a 28-day consultation and is proposing paying twice the statutory redundancy to those affected.
Oh how generous! Most market-leading businesses have redundancy terms which are significantly more generous than that.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dayglo Dave | 12-Aug-2010 4:15 pm
I agree with Anonymous@12.41pm. If the support function is not fully integrated fee earners will feel, even more than ever, that they are just cogs in a faceless machine. I personally think it's pretty unsporting to off-shore back-office support. Were I a client I'd be prepared to pay a small premium for a firm that was a bit more patriotic and not obsessed with profit.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Aug-2010 4:29 pm
Would you seriously pay 20p more per litre to fill your big car up on the motorway when you can call in at a petrol station when you pull off the motorway and get the same product from happier staff? From one Global company to another... its a no brainer!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Worldview | 12-Aug-2010 4:38 pm
A UK Foreign Office briefing note reports that by 2020/25 India has to generate 900 million jobs if it is to prosper and remain stable. Given their current energy and drive it seems likely they will succeed. The only question is, where will those jobs come from? The debt laden, narcisistic and self entitled West remains a very good place to look. This will no doubt continue until we wake up, hopefully before it is too late.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
OutsourceHere | 12-Aug-2010 4:46 pm
Gobalisation my *rse!
The country is going into recession so let's send our business off shore - great idea.
What's wrong with outsourcing on shore, working on a different cost base and giving our people here a chance to have a better life?
The bigger picture has not been considered at all.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mr Jingles | 12-Aug-2010 4:54 pm
If they outsource all their administration to India, who is going to leave a post-it on the Partners' desks reminding them that they have missed their son's birthday. Again. Presumably, they will get a call from a nice Indian chap. Perhaps that's the answer for all the struggling law students trying to get training contracts. Let's all head out to Delhi and start applying there.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Bloomin' Heck | 12-Aug-2010 5:10 pm
Maybe I am missing something, but how can you offshore HR to Bangalore? How can you, for example, conduct disciplinary and grievance procedures if the team is on the other side of the globe?
Perhaps though the service proposed has the same relation to HR as Bangalore call centres have to Customer Service - i.e not a lot.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Economics Logic | 12-Aug-2010 5:23 pm
Interesting reading and very similar comments (unsurprisingly) coming up here to the Cameron's deal.
While there is clearly huge sympathy for those whose jobs are displaced, it is perhaps worth putting some context from other professional services firms here.
Firstly, the fundamentals of economics will tell you that by specialising in what you have a comparative competitive advantage in is the way that countries and nations will grow. That is why we import much of our agricultural produce and why many toys get made in China. It is called progress. Moving more commoditised elements of services to providers or countries who are comparatively advantaged is not new and facilitates continued growth to higher value-add services.
Secondly, there have been some suggestions on this and earlier posts that outsourcing will be brand-damaging. Well, if you look at the precedent of blue chip firms from other sectors who offshore outsource - Goldman Sachs, McKinsey, 3i, PwC - it is difficult to say that it has destroyed their brands. Some might question why law firms have taken so long to focus on the delivery of their core service (i.e. law) and retain more commoditised service support.
Thirdly, there are perceptions of poor quality and service from outsource providers. This simply is not true. Again, do you think that banks would allow their equity research or merger modelling be prepared offshore if it was not of appropriate quality. As for closeness of relationship - most work is done by phone/email anyway nowadays - you lose some personal contact perhaps (though this can be managed) but not the service.
Again, one's heart goes out to those who have lost their jobs but as most are able and talented, they will find work elsewhere - the cream always rises. Meanwhile our firms become more competitive and deliver higher value-add work allowing them to distinguish themselves on the world stage.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Hugey | 12-Aug-2010 5:48 pm
Confused thread, as usual. Bosses are sacking workers. What gives?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment