The
top
Biglaw
recession
indicator,
stealth
layoffs,
may
have
arrived!
Paul,
Weiss
has
parted
ways
with
an
unknown
number
of
associates
and
multiple
insiders
describe
the
move
as
an
instance
of
stealth
layoffs
in
the
firm’s
litigation
department.
The
accounts
from
those
reportedly
let
go
should
sound
awfully
familiar
to
anyone
who’s
been
following
this
beat.
For
the
uninitiated:
stealth
layoffs
are
a
Biglaw
specialty.
Rather
than
announce
economically
motivated
headcount
reductions,
firms
quietly
push
associates
out
the
door
using
performance
reviews
as
cover
—
reviews
that,
coincidentally,
turn
suddenly
negative
right
when
business
slows
down.
The
associates
let
go
frequently
have
no
prior
history
of
negative
feedback.
It’s
a
toxic
business
practice
placing
the
blame
on
the
attorneys
themselves,
rather
than
acknowledging
the
economic
reality
driving
the
decision.
On
Reddit,
the
Paul,
Weiss
tipsters
are
unambiguous
about
what’s
happening:
“To
those
saying
it’s
unsubstantiated:
it
happened
to
me.
Since
the
firm
doesn’t
exactly
announce
you’ve
been
let
go,
it’s
hard
to
know
how
many
people
this
has
affected.
But
the
other
comment
here
saying
that
they
do
it
by
giving
you
bogus
negative
performance
reviews
that
are
uncorroborated
by
the
actual
teams
you
work
with
is
exactly
what
happened
to
me.
When
I
asked
what
the
actual
problem
with
my
performance
was,
all
I
got
was
the
vaguest
‘feedback’
ever
about
attention
to
detail
or
something
like
that
(mind
you,
I
had
only
ever
gotten
positive
feedback,
and
never
had
any
complaints
before
about
my
attention
to
detail).
I
immediately
clocked
that
the
firm
was
making
up
a
performance
reason
for
what
is
essentially
a
layoff
due
to
persistent
slowness
in
the
litigation
dept.
This
suggested
to
me
that
this
was
probably
happening
across
the
department
rather
than
anything
to
do
with
me.”
A
second
source
echoes
this
assessment:
“Laid
off
PW
assoc
here
—
can
confirm.
They’re
doing
it
as
bogus
performance-based
sendoffs
—
bogus
because
most
affected
folks
are
getting
negative
feedback
in
the
annual
review
that
none
of
the
individual
teams
are
corroborating.
And
it’s
happened
to
many
of
us.
The
party
line
at
P,W
has
consistently
been
‘oh
we
would
never
do
layoffs.
Didn’t
do
it
during
the
2008
recession,
didn’t
do
it
during
the
2022
Biglaw
layoffs,
and
certainly
not
now.’
But
I’ve
learned
the
hard
way
that
they
do
plenty
of
stealth
layoffs.”
That
boast
—
that
Paul,
Weiss
doesn’t
do
layoffs,
not
even
during
downturns
—
is
a
particularly
bitter
pill,
because
it’s
been
used
to
burnish
the
firm’s
reputation
as
a
good
place
to
work.
And
now,
multiple
associates
say
they’ve
been
handed
suddenly
invented
performance
problems
by
a
firm
that
is
manifestly
dealing
with
something
much
bigger
than
their
attention
to
detail.
We
reached
out
to
Paul,
Weiss
for
comment,
and
a
spokesperson
provided
the
following
statement:
“There
were
no
layoffs.
These
were
performance-based
decisions
based
on
the
review
process
we
conduct
every
year.”
That
response
is,
word
for
word,
the
stealth
layoff
script.
Repackaging
economic
cuts
as
performance
decisions,
all
while
insisting
no
layoffs
occurred,
is
how
a
stealth
layoff
works.
It’s
of
course
possible
for
a
firm
to
part
ways
with
an
associate
for
“performance-based”
reasons.
But
the
language
of
the
firm
statement
—
speaking
in
plurals
—
suggests
a
broader
swath
than
terminating
a
perpetual
underperformer.
Add
in
insider
accounts
describing
associates
with
clean
records,
whose
teams
never
flagged
a
problem,
and
suddenly
negative
annual
reviews,
and
everything
sure
sounds
like
a
stealth
layoff.
While
most
stealth
layoffs
are
nakedly
cynical,
some
firms
might
genuinely
delude
themselves
into
thinking
they’re
just
making
performance
cuts.
Except,
if
the
firm
is
honest
with
itself,
the
associates
involved
never
did
anything
that
would
merit
termination
until
the
business
environment
changed.
Tiny
shortcomings,
the
natural
byproduct
of
a
lawyer-in-training,
get
magnified
into
unforgivable
sins
—
for
the
first
time
in
their
whole
career
—
just
as
the
firm
needs
to
cut
headcount.
To
understand
why
the
litigation
department
would
be
slow
right
now,
you
have
to
understand
what
has
happened
to
Paul,
Weiss
over
the
past
year.
In
March
2025,
the
firm
became
the
first
—
and
most
infamous
—
Biglaw
shop
to
cut
a
deal
with
the
Trump
administration,
surrendering
$40
million
in
pro
bono
services
and
its
DEI
programs
to
get
out
from
under
an
executive
order
targeting
the
firm.
The
fallout,
which
we’ve
documented
extensively,
has
been
severe
—
and
nowhere
more
than
in
litigation.
Litigation
co-chair
Karen
Dunn,
along
with
partners
Bill
Isaacson,
Jeannie
Rhee,
and
Jessica
Phillips,
bolted
to
start
their
own
boutique
free
from
the
constraints
of
the
Trump
deal.
Former
U.S.
Attorney
for
the
Southern
District
of
New
York
Damian
Williams
departed
for
Jenner
&
Block
—
a
firm
actually
fighting
the
executive
orders
in
court.
Former
Homeland
Security
Secretary
Jeh
Johnson
retired
after
40
years
at
the
firm.
And
most
recently,
Kannon
Shanmugam
—
one
of
the
most
accomplished
Supreme
Court
advocates
in
private
practice
—
left
for
Davis
Polk.
That’s
a
bunch
of
litigation
talent
walking
out
the
door.
And
when
the
partners
leave,
the
work
tends
to
follow.
Which
means
fewer
matters
to
staff,
fewer
hours
to
bill,
and
a
department
carrying
more
associates
than
it
now
has
work
to
sustain.
The
associates
absorbing
that
slowdown
aren’t
the
ones
who
made
the
decisions
that
caused
it,
but
they
will
be
the
ones
paying
the
price.
Which
brings
us
back
to
those
suddenly
vague
performance
reviews.
The
structural
reality
at
Paul,
Weiss
makes
all
of
this
entirely
predictable.
New
chair
Scott
Barshay
—
an
M&A
heavyweight
who
was
reportedly
a
major
internal
champion
of
the
Trump
deal
—
has
been
steadily
remaking
the
firm
in
a
transactional
image.
Associate
staffing
is
now
more
tightly
controlled.
The
firm’s
identity
has
shifted
from
“litigation
powerhouse
with
a
conscience”
to
“M&A
juggernaut
with
a
carefully
managed
personality.”
As
a
former
Paul,
Weiss
attorney
told
the
American
Lawyer
when
Barshay
took
the
reins:
“The
litigators
have
never
been
led
by
a
corporate
partner.
Will
the
litigation
team
have
an
issue
with
the
firm
becoming
really
a
corporate
shop
with
a
litigation
arm,
rather
than
the
other
way?”
A
litigation
department
hemorrhaging
partner
talent,
led
by
a
firm
chair
whose
future
seems
transactional,
is
exactly
the
environment
where
you’d
expect
stealth
layoffs
to
emerge.
Work
slows.
Headcount
that
made
sense
when
Karen
Dunn
was
running
a
booming
litigation
practice
doesn’t
make
sense
anymore.
That’s
the
recipe
for
a
stealth
layoff.
If
this
has
happened
to
you
at
Paul,
Weiss
—
or
anywhere
else
—
please
reach
out.
You
can
email
us
([email protected])
or
text
us
(646-820-8477).
Even
if
we
are
unable
to
verify
the
move,
we
are
listening.
If
you’d
like
to
sign
up
for
ATL’s
Layoff
Alerts,
please
scroll
down
and
enter
your
email
address
in
the
box
below
this
post.
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email her with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter @Kathryn1 or
Bluesky @Kathryn1