Gilson Daub Reviews

Since starting here, everything has gone downhill. Upper management and above do not listen to anyone and don't have any idea what's going on with employees at a staff level. They are out of touch. There is no room for growth unless you are close with upper management. Staff was told they should not worry about financial growth, only personal growth despite being paid less than the living wage. Remote workers have been told they are not eligible for any sort of promotions because they are not in office--none of the work that is done needs to be in office as all of it is done on a computer. They do not have enough staff in any given department, making each person do the work of about three other people. Although, not all of the people in the departments actually work. Despite the overwhelming growth this firm has had, they are not looking to increase support staff's pay. Trying to speak with anyone in management about concerns is impossible. They will actively avoid you or dismiss your concerns entirely. The attorneys treat the support staff as "less than", often talking down to them and being non-responsive and then blaming them for the consequences of doing that. The office culture is toxic. Upper management will let just about anything slide. It feels like behavior that would not be tolerated in a law firm or office setting in general is rewarded. They say that they have an open door policy, but staff are told not to speak out or bring up their concerns to higher management for fear of termination. Overall, it has become hard to continue to work here. I am actively looking for other employment opportunities because I'm not sure how much more I can take. Many good people have left this job because the company as a whole is not willing to promote, give raises, or make the staff feel like they matter and feel heard.

As several other reviewers have said, the firm strongly asserts itself during interview process as a "work-life balance" firm; however, this is far from the truth. The founding partner is extremely ambitious and grew the firm from just a few offices to having locations in several states and having their own proprietary case management software. Rapid growth and expansion is expensive and hurts short-term profitability (with satellite offices in Kansas, Nevada, and Hawaii contributing little to revenue while employing attorneys who do not have enough work to generate billing). The management then approaches attorneys at profitable office locations and asks them to empathize with the firm for low profitability, suggesting that their minimum billable quotas be increased, that raises be foregone year after year, and that cuts be allowed to various lifestyle expenses. Management regularly advises attorneys at profitable offices that the firm operates at little to no profit overall, to explain why billable requirements inevitably will rise in order to accommodate requests for regular raises. Responsibility for every negative decision by management is shirked off by local managers onto unseen, invisible partners from other locations, while credit is taken for any policy improvements (which were few and far-between). Policy changes for the firm are not well thought-out and announced in writing, but instead are alluded to and commented upon in various verbal meetings, are ambiguous, and never seem finalized. Policies themselves, as a result of not being reduced to writing, come across as amorphous and are applied post-facto as it pleases management, to discourage any behaviors that hurt the bottom line of the firm, no matter how petty. Management repeatedly drafts the highest-billing attorneys for promotions, without regard for other considerations, whether it be quality of education, quality of character, or quality of work. Although the founding partner seems to be cool, magnetic, and attractive, he is disengaged. He does not do legal work to get a sense of what it is like to use company software and meet company expectations. He also is doing post-graduate schooling and traveling and cannot respond to company concerns, instead delegating all power to a non-attorney "comptroller" who is the de facto leader of the firm.