DWF axes 38 roles in second redundancy round this year

  • Print
  • Comments (4)

Readers' comments (4)

  • A real shame.

    However credit to DWF for declaring it as a redundancy situation. Lesser firms would cite bogus performance issues.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Net profit at this firm is 11%. The PEP figure is misleading. It just shows there is an incredibly tight equity partnership. These cost cuttings are not a surprise - they are necessary if the firm is to avoid drastic consequences from over extending itself with multiple mergers and integration issues. Someone should point out that big isn't always best!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I recall on another post elsewhere about this firm "with top 20" ambitions, that this was a churn and burn firm. Churn and burn Insurance work, which is in the main woefully paid, when contrasted to other commercial/corporate clients. Secondly, they churn and burn staff, and this will continue, caused by , a) the decent Lawyers and Partners will realize this firm does nothing particularly well, apart from the Fishburns better quality Insurance work,b) with all the acquisitions they have made there is multiple duplication across number of roles, both in fee-earning and support. Margins at this "full service " firm are extremely tight, to be made only tighter when the MOJ reforms crystallize , and I would imagine their PI function, will in the next year be reduced by at least 40% in terms of headcount and revenues. Ambitions to be a top 20 firm........never in my opinion. And whatever of the ever increasing levels of debt they are carrying!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It's a firm built on it's large insurance teams with 2-3 big clients. If one of them goes it folds like a pack of cards. Unfortunately , should this happen, it won't be any of the (smallest ratio ever) equity partners who suffer (as with Halliwells), it will be the ones who can least afford to be out of a job. In the current climate where costs are key, the ongoing expansion route is a very brave move particularly when the talented lawyers seem to be moving to boutique firms where the client knows they are not getting palmed off with a junior and can deal with an expert at preferential rates. Risky strategy from dwf but let's have no excuses if the Halliwells moment comes.

    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 (4)