Scoop: Rumours suggest other firms are also considering similar steps
Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas has deferred joining dates for fresh associate recruits from campus to 5 October 2020 from August, according to multiple sources.
The firm confirmed that it had committed to hire a total of 78 freshers to start in August 2020, but declined to comment further.
There are several reasons for the move. For one, onboarding and induction would likely be a nightmare, with everyone still working from home right now, potentially indefinitely and quite realistically also still in-part by July.
We understand from sources that CAM is planning for remote induction and training from September for the incoming batch.
Second, virtual working notwithstanding, there might not be very much for them to do by July.
Third, at a base remuneration of Rs 12 lakh per year, the two-month deferral of start dates would save the firm approximately Rs 1.5 crores, by way of quick-back-of-envelope calculation.
At this time, with the CAM’s partners having elected to not draw any monies and part of fee-earners’ fixed components having been parked into optional bonuses, the step seems like a no-brainer, and in line with the what many international firms have already been doing to pre-emptively cut costs and manage headcounts.
In light of the above, it’s not unrealistic that other Indian firms will follow suit.
“No other firm has provided an official update yet regarding their joining dates, however, we have been hearing through grapevine that even they will push their dates,” said one student with knowledge of recruitments.
Update 23:35: Khaitan & Co is also deferring start dates of freshers until October, according to Bar & Bench. Executive director Amar Sinhji told us in a statement: “Our Campus Batch usually joins in July every year. Our Batch of 2020 consists of 48 freshers from 18 law colleges across the country. This year, given the exceptional circumstances around the lockdown and the uncertainties with regard to offices being able to return to normal operations, we have decided to push back the freshers joining date to October 2020. We are at this stage in talks with various campuses to finalise the exact schedule. We hope that by October we should be ready with a welcome befitting our young future leaders! And of course, we will honour every campus offer that has been made. The campus hires are a key entry level addition to our talent pipeline.”
In the last recession in the UK, around a decade ago, it was de rigeur for many London law firms to offer hard wads of cash for joiners who would volunteer to delay their entry into the firm by a year. The money would obviously be less (around a sixth to a third of) full year’s salaries, with payments typically between £5,000 and £10,000; but as an added benefit, future trainees could travel or pursue other interests in that time, while, for the firm, it will also save (considerable) costs on induction, training and maintaining of new trainees.
UK firms have hinted that they may do so again in Covid-times, with Irwin Mitchell having been first to postpone the start of training contracts by six months to February 2021.
Photo by Michael Duxbury
Comments
2. Most firms do not give you the retainer agreement before you join, just an offer to join. Some don't even give you one after you join.
3. It's not an amendment. The letters usually have a starting date along the lines of X, or such date determined by the firm.
4. The UK firms are deferring for a much longer time. They have also engaged in more drastic action with existing fee-earners.
That being said, it's obviously not great for the students to not get a pay check for two months. Maybe they can still release the relocation advance (if applicable) early.
Also for other firms which do give out appointment letters, I'm presuming they're smart enough to include language that allows them to unilaterally set/change the joining date.
This makes A0s the only other people that the eq partners to take a full hit on the money they make (albeit for 2-3 months rather than an year).
A very bad look for the firm indeed.
If you defer by 3 months you get 3/4th of your salary. Be glad no one is cancelling jobs yet.
And just curious how will these fresher's graduate if the colleges are shut and exams won't happen before July. They do need to graduate to become lawyers and join the firms.
Wouldn't be a bad thing to spend some time at home before hitting the grind.
Disclosure, I'm a paying subscriber at both LI and b&b, and I quite like both services for different reasons though I am a far bigger fan of LI. So yes, I've seen how both sites operate, and i can see a few advantages that make this look like a win-win for LI in every way.
1. in the hours before b&b copies LI stories, LI gets more subscribers.
2. those subscribers (like me) get future stories immediately, providing value to those subscribers.
3. LI very visibly dictates the corporate law news agenda, everyone in law firms and schools knows and reads LI first. When b&b nearly word-for-word copy-pastes LI stories and slaps EXCLUSIVE on it in big letters without (as far as i know) ever giving credit to LI, it makes it looks like they are insecure, dishonest or cheap, or maybe all three, which is fooling no-one except maybe their own audience who probably don't care and don't read b&b for their ethics or journalism anyway but go there for court reporting services (at which, to be honest, LiveLaw often does a better and more trustworthy job).
4. whenever b&b lifts LI stories, the b&b version is generally much more anemic and sycophantic they often shy away from pointing out anything negative. Let's look at today, when b&b lifted two stories in the space of a few hours. In the Trilegal bonus story, it was nearly the same, word for word, but they censored the fact that bonuses were lower. In this CAM/Khaitan story they literally copied every LI detail they reasonably could yet their context is far shallower than even this LI story. Again, that makes LI look better with those readers who read both: it's like reading a story in TOI and then reading the same but better story in Indian Express - which will you be more likely to read and trust in future? Plus the LI comments are more entertaining and enlightening any day, often more so than the actual articles (sorry Kian, but you know it's true!).
5. Judging by the comments, readers who don't (and may never) subscribe to LI are obviously not going to stop coming to LI because B&B copies the stories. And since LI apparently lifts the paywall within minutes of B&B copying the stories, there's no real harm done to LI readers by this.
6. Whenever B&B gets a law firm exclusive, LI seems to quickly copy the story if it's relevant to LI's audience. That's also quite sneaky but at least they give credit to b&b and don't pretend that they broke the news, which makes it a completely fair and transparent game in my opinion, and as a regular reader it also provides value to LI's core audience who come here for law firm and law school gossip.
In other words, I don't see any reason for why LI to change this policy, which seems to be working for them.
On the other hand, Kian, the site does need a redesign please, and you need to change your subscriber sign in to password and username, it would be easier than the current email system.
I'd be interested in knowing how many subscribers does LI really have. How do such subscribers feel when a story is published with a promised exclusivity of X hours but is reduced to X-Z hours later. Do they get a refund on their subscription amount?
@Kian - My question was genuine. Does it really make sense for such a revenue model? Or is B&B or LiveLaw a better model? If it's actually working for you, good for you!
On another (hypothetical?) note, if I told you about a bug on the website which allows non-subscribers to also get access to exclusive stories in advance, would I get rewarded?
That said, we're happy to consider feedback and evolve if required, so let's do a simple poll. Please:
- OBJECT to this comment if you would prefer LI to lock archive stories older than a few days/weeks behind a paywall, like B&B/LiveLaw, or
- LIKE this comment if you prefer our current system, where some stories are locked away for a few hours and then free for all time.
Finally, regarding your (hypothetical :) note, I am aware of one or two loopholes but would always be interested to learn more and to receive bug reports. You can anonymously submit it via Send Tip, and I will be grateful. And if you include an anonymous / redirector email address, we can create a free gift subscription for you if it's a legit bug.
America being the so called best country in the world can’t save its citizens and you speak of market leading firm here. India should have followed America and had no lockdown by your logic, to see then millions infected & god knows how many dead ! And why should anyone follow anyone’s example here, huh even if it be UK firms !
People have lost it seriously, and these are to so called privileged class of the society, atleast most of them. But still, sigh !
On separate note, has CAM or KCO explained how the rotation system and promotions will work for these freshers?
Why do they need to have a KIRA team (paid about 1 crore a month), support staff of 50 people who have no use and utility (paid another 1 crore a month) and god knows how many extra people on the pay roll??
Remove them and employ the fresh graduates - they have to repay student loan.
And since they are joining in October, they won’t even get bonus as the firm policy is to work for a minimum of 6 months to be eligible for bonus. What a great idea Sirji of not giving bonus to new joineees!
Student loans- whoever has loans can seek a moratorium from banks. Banks are amenable. No firm has taken the obligation to ensure that a student pays their loans. Deferment is better than cancellation coz the kids don't atleast have any fixed costs like rent etc. Better to have a deferment than joining and if found unsustainable, then letting them go. That's would be unfair. To to chose the path of least harm, deferment seems the best bet.
And on a lighter note, the millenials can use this time to find themselves, which a lot of them chose to do after a year or so. Finding out that this job is not what they want and that they want to be start their own web series. If you are attributing a parena patriae on firms to ensure their well being, I don't see too many supporters for lock-ins in contracts after the firms literally pay new joinees salaries for learning. It's sunken cost of they leave after a year. That's not restricted as it's the associates professional call. Similarly, an equal right should be extended to the employers specially in situations like this. Sounds heartless but it's utilitarian. Give unsustainable jobs to 100 which disbalances the ship and jeopardised the ones already on board is probably not the best policy in my view.
Do note thay I am not from CAM and only an associate in one of these named firms so not treading any 'management type' lines. Just reality. As apopulist as it may be. Most will agree. Few will publically accept. Like me- behind this anonymity.
India is still better, please see the bloodbath at foreign law firms!
Does anyone know if there is a possibility of job offers being cancelled at these tier 1 law firms?,