Monday, December 08, 2008

Law in Motion

My firm is moving to a new building in February. Currently we're in two buildings, and we're moving to a Google-esq complex with gym, cafeteria, outdoor pool. Amenities aside, the goal is for all of us to be in one building. It's amazing how proximity affects relationships, even on this scale: it's a lovely 5 minute walk to the other building, yet I'm significantly closer to the folks in my building than the other.

Because the lease on the building I'm in runs out before the other building, we're moving over to the other building for a spell. It's a tight fit: I, for example, am sharing a corner conference room with a fellow 1st year. My firm is pretty unique in that everyone - from summer associate to partner - has about the same size office.

Until now. As my bunkmate noted, "At least we can say we're the first ones in [Firm]'s history to have a corner office."


Peter said...

After reading your post about being laid off, then going back and reading this one about your company moving to a new building (presumably as part of a broader "company overhaul"), I see patterns emerging ... The big-time Internet company I worked for did the same thing about a year ago, relocating to a swanky, campus-style business park with all the amenities. Then, about 4 months later, they laid off a bunch of employees, including this guy. I guess that sort of upgrade should be seen as a red flag to newer, low-level employees. Lame!

Keep up the good posting.

Sansserif said...

Interesting thought. Reading some news articles about my firm's move before I was laid off, I saw that some reporters suggested my firm was in trouble because the new location, while advertised to us employees as swanky, was actually cheaper than our then-current location.

Perhaps a firm's move can be an indication of economic trouble as often as it's an indication of financial success...