Shoosmiths' partner profits halved

  • Print
  • Comments (22)

Readers' comments (22)

  • “Our profit was hit hard because we chose to put people before profit.”

    Making 25 fee earners redundant being a fine example of this!

    And of course not offering trainees any money to defer was another master stroke of putting people first I suppose!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Andrew Tubb's comments are pure comedy genius and another example of how out of touch with reality Shoosmiths really are.
    On the issue of trainees, Dickinson Dees awarded their trainees £7.5k to defer for a year, whilst posting the same PEP figures and an almost identical YoY decline. Shoosmiths offered theirs £0 and told them to 'find another job in the interim' - have they actually thought how difficult this is in the current climate?
    And then there's the small matter of opening a Manchester office and recruiting for this whilst laying staff off.
    Shoosmiths = Profit before people.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Truly awful firm, sounds like they are getting their just rewards.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Profits halved and T/O down 4% is serious and potentially catastrophic. The short term solution is to retire partners and establish a more corporate structure. The present leverage ratio is insupportable and has an overall impact on pricing with too much emphasis on the top end. It is highly likley many partners fail to personally generate sufficient fees to cover thier fixed and variable costs (including personal drawings). This kind of business model, in an environment where clients have effectively gained control of the pricing model, is high risk and unsustainable. Partners hahve to generate more or go.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I would imagine that most partners have probably built up fixed costs in excess of GBP150K [mortgage costs, housing costs, public school fees, alimony etc].

    Those without savings are probably suffering considerable financial stress even at these lofty payouts. At some point it may be preferable to downsize everything, - house, expenses, debt, job and hence stress.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Slap it into them.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I would have been very happy had my previous firm waited until May to invoke a redundancy programme. Most national firms got rid of staff long ago to preserve profit - doesn't appear as though that happened here. My mate is an assistant at shoosmiths and has nothing but good things to say about it. I suspect the posters here are ill equipped to offer any kind of insightful comment...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • As a current trainee at Shoosmiths, I have to agree with the above poster.

    To the deferred trainees STILL going on about deferrals and no compensation ....

    GET OVER IT!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • To the Shoosmiths Trainee - do you not think, if the firm was so easily willing to screw over the trainees coming after you, it has no reason not to treat you and your intake in exactly the same way?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anon @ 3:13pm

    Surely even you can see the irony in a firm purporting to "put people first" having recently become the only national firm to shaft its future trainees so outrageously?

    You're at a firm which has become a laughing stock amongst the profession...

    GET OVER IT!!! (and stop trying to defend the indefensible).

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Shoosmiths have grown far too big for their boots - pun intended.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Good God, Shoosmiths has a live one here!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • At no point in my post do I defend Shoosmiths' decision to defer or not compensate future trainees. I was merely make the point that your continous and belligerent posts about the matter are somewhat dull and monotonous.

    For your own good.... move on!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • To the current shoosmiths trainee posting dribble on here, just one question, how many trainees are being kept on this year at your firm? Maybe you are one of the very few, but it’s disturbing why you feel the need to post on here. Get a grip.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Maybe the trainees not kept on can alter their CV and pursue a new career as shoesmiths.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I don't think the industry will forget the name of Tom Goff for some time to come. For all the wrong reasons of course.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Opening in Manchester must be really draining their cash.

    Doesn't look such a good decision now.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The Manchester market will not be cracked on a shoestring! Fortune favours the brave but it is difficult to see a profit coming from their Manchester office in the next 3 years. As somebody capable of carrying work to a new firm, would I wish to join them? The answer is a resounding "no". It is high time that Managing Partners recognised that many decisions made internally have an impact externally. Should we blame their inept handling of the PR issues? Again, a resounding "no". Trying to spin positives out of negatives is folly and as at least one Managing Partner in Manchester has found out to his cost, the "truth will out". Treating people fairly and reasonably must be the starting point. Once you achieve that, much of the business looks after itself and people with genuine client followings will find you a much more attractive proposition.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • RE: Anonymous | 7-Jul-2009 3:13 pm.

    Is your post endorsed by Shoomith's HR department!? Otherwise one would expect that after the initial debacle Shoomiths would have had the sense to instruct their IT techies to put a firewall on any trainee's access to TheLawyer for fear of another 'Tom Goff MkII'. Obviously not the case...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What a wise move. I am a legal secretary (I was). When hard times hit the economy, staff is always first to be laid off. while the partners hardly ever feel the squinch. My suggestion is: keep the staff and strip the partners of their profits or give them the pink slip. Every firm should follow Shoosmiths' example.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • To my comment above: People asked me what squinch means (even it's clear from the context). "Squinch" is a new combination word consisting of "squeeze" and "pinch" that has entered our vocabulary since the economic meltdown began. It might not have made the OXFORD Dictionary yet.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I was one of the staff laid off in March, as a PA. Thank you Shoosmiths, I have found a much better job and wouldn't have found this great job without being made redundant.

    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 (22)