Tag: PwC

Debunked Rumor of the Morning: PwC Is Rescinding Offers

Adrienne, who is hidden away in an undisclosed location (read: Boston) was tipped off last night with the following and forwarded it on to me:

Rumor has it that PWC rescinded offers for September 2011 hires. I went to GC to read the inside scoop but didn’t see anything. Maybe this is a totally false rumor or a lead….

Answer: Totally false rumor.


Yes, believe it or not, we happily debunk rumors around here when possible. Of course this can only occur when people with the means to help us discredit the rumors are cooperative. We spoke to someone in the know at PwC who informed us that not only is this rumor false, P. Dubs is asking some of their new advisory hires to start in July because there is so much work. Now, it’s possible that there are a few isolated incidents where someone’s name shows up in the police blotter and an offer may get pulled but our source says there haven’t been any reports of those and definitely nothing “systemic.”

Of course if you’ve got evidence to the contrary, we’d welcome you to get in touch with us and good luck to those who choose to end their summers/lives two months early.

Plaintiff in PwC Overtime Lawsuit Made a ‘Serious Error’ on One Engagement, Was Eventually Fired for Poor Performance

Yesterday we learned that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of PwC in the matter of Campbell v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, the wage and hour class-action lawsuit filed in California. It’s a pretty major win for P. Dubs and the decision remands the case back to district court for trial. I was skimming over the 9th Circuit’s Decision in case over at Leagle and found some interesting things that I thought were worth sharing including some details about the named-plaintiff’s performance. The following anecdote seems to support the firm’s argument that unlicensed associates must “exercise discretion and independent judgment” and if they don’t, they will be held responsible:

PwC […] argues Plaintiffs perform analytical work “integral” to PwC’s Attest services. To the extent Plaintiffs do not regularly exercise discretion and independent judgment during an audit engagement, PwC says they are failing to meet the firm’s expectations. PwC emphasizes the variety of duties performed by Plaintiffs during an engagement and claims the failure to perform those tasks adequately can have “significant consequences” for PwC’s clients. During one engagement, for example, named-plaintiff Campbell overlooked approximately $500,000 in the client’s unrecorded liabilities. This oversight, which Campbell himself described as a “serious error,” was ultimately discovered by another team member. The error required a late financial adjustment and made the client unhappy.

While working for PwC, Campbell and Sobek each received some criticism over their job performance. In addition to the mistake described above, Campbell earned a “Less Than Expected” rating during his 2006 annual performance review. Sobek received the same rating during her 2005 review. More generally, PwC alleges both named-plaintiffs consistently fell below the firm’s expectations for Attest associates.

Campbell was terminated by PwC in 2006 for poor performance. Sobek resigned from the firm that same year.

Obviously just because Jason Campbell and Sarah Sobek both had performance ratings of “Less Than Expected” and that Mr. Campbell was fired does not mean that all 2,000 members of the class-action were of similar ratings. Regardless, it’s an interesting little nugget of information that we were not previously aware.

The rest of the opinion is pretty analytical, labor law stuff, so if you’re into that, the whole thing is worth a read, otherwise you can discuss as you wish below.

Ninth Circuit Rules for PwC in California Overtime Lawsuit

Reuters reports:

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed [a lower court decision] on Wednesday, ruling that PwC is entitled to litigate whether the unlicensed accountants can be exempted from overtime laws. The 9th Circuit remanded the case back to a district court in Sacramento, Calif. for more proceedings.

So, no this isn’t over. The actual trial still hasn’t gone down but this is definitely a big win for PwC.

A firm spokesperson provided us with the following statement: “PwC is pleased that the Ninth Circuit supported its arguments in this important case. The firm greatly values these employees and considers their work an integral part of PwC’s success.” An attempt to reach counsel for the plaintiffs was not immediately returned. Will keep you updated with any new details as we learn them.

Previous Coverage:
Campbell v. PricewaterhouseCoopers

PwC Falls Victim in the Competitive Poaching Game to…WTP Advisors

As you know, the Big 4 are pretty competitive when it comes to landing the best talent. The brightest brains. The biggest, swingingest…well you know. Anyhoo, PwC has been on tear this year, luring an accounting firm equivalent of a platoon from KPMG. They’ve also managed to pick off people from Duff and Phelps and the SEC.

But now the tables have turned unexpectedly on P. Dubs. They certainly had to be wary of the likes of Deloitte, E&Y and yes, even KPMG trying to woo their partners seeking greener pastures but it’s highly unlikely they saw this coming:

WTP Advisors, an award-winning, global tax and advisory firm, announced today that it has opened a new office location in Long Beach, CA. The new site will be headed by tax expert, Jon Worden, who most recently managed PwC’s West Region International Tax Services Quantitative Solutions Team. “Jon is a terrific choice to lead WTP Advisors’ West Coast tax practice. Like all WTP directors, he has Big Four experience, combined with a drive to forge deep and lasting client relationships. His personality, talent, and ambition will represent us well with large multinational companies in this region,” says Mike Minihan, Partner and co-founder of WTP Advisors. In his new role, Worden will be responsible for serving the L.A., Orange County and Northern California markets, as well as cultivating relationships with organizations up and down the West Coast.

Or maybe they did. WTP Advisors was founded by “four PwC veterans” back in 2005 according to this Fortune blurb on the firm’s website. It also boasts that it “has retained 100% of its clients” since the founding of the firm. The clip above is also from said blurb which depicts some sort of Rumble in the Professional Services Jungle between WTP and PwC. Perhaps WTP is gunning for P. Dubs because there is some bad blood there, we don’t know (but would love to hear about it). And with only 75 employees and $12 million in revenues, they barely register on Bob Moritz’s radar but it’s clear that they can poach P. Dubs talent and they are already better at using PR to make it known than some other firms.

PwC’s Assurance Practice in the Middle East Now Opining on Whether Construction Workers Are Being Treated Like Human Beings

It’s a slow day out there*, this first day back from Memorial Weekend so perhaps I’m making a mountain out of a molehill here but it seems that PwC might be stretching the definition of assurance services. Based on various obscure reports, the firm fka PricewaterhouseCoopers has been engaged by Tourism Development ‘&’ Investment Company (“TDIC”) “to monitor its contractors’ and subcontractors’ performance in the area of worker welfare on Saadiyat.”

“Saadiyat” is Saadiyat Island, a “mixed commercial, residential, and leisure project […] expected to be completed in 2020,” according to Wikipedia. This sort of project of course needs manpower, so presumably there will be plethora of construction workers coming from various parts of the world to earn some scratch. Anyhoo, it’s no secret that labor comes cheap in the Middle East and the treatment of workers isn’t the best. In an effort to get those pesky human rights types off their backs, TDIC has called on the most prestigious professional services firm in the world to assure everyone that worker welfare is just fine and dandy and there’s no cause for concern that these workers are living in squalor and being treated like stray dogs:

In stringently monitoring compliance, PwC will report to TDIC on key aspects of worker welfare, including holding of personal documents, illegal recruitment fees, payment of wages, health and safety, and working and living conditions. The results of the audit reports will be released in a comprehensive report to the public on an annual basis. During the reporting cycles, PwC will conduct formal and informal interviews with construction workers in their own language, as well as with the Contractors’ and Sub-Contractors. In gathering facts and reporting their findings, PwC will conduct scheduled and surprise site visits to check contractors’ compliance. They will also be conducting site visits to assess the living and working conditions of the workers.

Considering the fact that Abu Dhabi has an average temperature of 88 degrees Fahrenheit, it’s safe to assume that those “site visits” will be an interesting experience.

PwC to monitor Saadiyat Island contractors’ performance in area of worker welfare [WAM]

*Unless you’re glued to the train wreck in Columbus.

PwC’s Calgary Office Takes a Don’t Hate, Congratulate Stance on Furlough Fridays

More Big 4 news from the True North, as the Calgary office of PwC has been forced – due to ‘unique market conditions’ – to close the office five times over the summer to compete with the oil and gas companies that shut down every Friday.

Calgary Summer Office Closures

As we all know, recruiting and retaining our people is critical if we are to achieve our marketplace and firm goals. Calgary is one of the toughest markets in which to retain our people. The Calgary leadership believes that one of the key reasons is the extent of time off provided by companies in Calgary. Driven by the oil and gas companies, shutting down on Fridays in the summer is a practice followed by many companies in Calgary, including our clients.


For whatever reason, the email reads strangely apologetic, as if the leadership knows how much everyone loves working on Fridays and that they HAD NO CHOICE but to take these measures are absolutely necessary:

We believe that to be an employer of choice in Calgary we must respond to these unique market conditions with the result that, on Monday, May 30, Calgary will announce that the office will be closed on five Fridays over the course of the summer. Given the strategic importance of our Setting the Pace market segment priority, we think we must move in this direction, otherwise we will continue to be at a competitive disadvantage as we seek to grow the practice and attract and retain the people we need to do so. Going forward, we will assess the continuation of this policy in Calgary based on market conditions.

And finally, it was pointed out that everyone is aware that this is grossly unfair but A) it had to be done and B) everyone will be made right one way or another:

We also think it’s important to be transparent with you around this policy so that you understand the rationale. We appreciate that adopting these office shutdown days solely in the Calgary office gives them more benefits than the rest of the firm. Our view however is that we must adopt practices that are competitive and appropriate in each of our local markets and the Calgary market presents a unique situation.

We recognize that everyone is working hard and contributes to the firm’s success. That’s why we encourage everyone to take advantage of the various forms of flexibility available, particularly during our less busy times. These include Flexible Fridays, which will be announced next week for offices outside of Calgary, Flexible Time Away, our new Flexibility code and, of course, your vacation.

Yes, don’t forget that you could use five days of vacation as opposed to being given the non-option to stay home from work. That gets everyone back to Even Steven.

Chinese Company Wraps Themselves in the Security Blanket That Is an Unqualified Audit Opinion From PwC

You may have noticed that a number of Chinese companies have had some issues with their accounting. This typically leads to the company’s auditor quitting, the CFO resigning, an SEC filing explaining all of it and then the revelation of some embarrassing details to accompany it all. Like a video of company’s employees sleeping. Or taking audit workpapers hostage. The best part about these stories is that the companies typically go on the defensive, and some make claims about their prestigious auditors just moments before the shit hits the fan.

Today we bring you Li & Fung, Ltd., a supply chain manager out of Hong Kong. L&F has reacted to a recent report from UBS that has…wait…yes, called attention to an accounting change and that “the company’s future GAAP earnings might not fully reflect the profitability of operations and that the new revenue recognition policy may distort a declining margin trend.”

Li & Fung has reacted right on cue:

“These statements are misleading,” Company Secretary Terry Wan said in the statement.

“The company has disclosed the relevant accounting policies in note 1.1 of its 2010 accounts, which have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers and are in full compliance with the HKFRS (Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards),” Wan said.

Li & Fung: UBS Report On Firm’s Accounting Policies Not Factually Accurate [Dow Jones]

PwC’s New Compensation Structure Gets the Spreadsheet It Deserves

As you know, PwC marched out a new compensation structure earlier this month and it’s been the subject of much interpretation, gnashing of teeth and even a fair amount of rejoicing. Of course, a complete analysis of this new structure would not be complete without the magic of Excel and lucky for you, a reader has taken the time to put some spreadsheet wizardy on it.

Here’s our tipster:

[Here] is an analysis of the new PwC compensation structure. It shows that the firm expects an approximate average raise of 8% per year and 16% per promotion year. The analysis also includes an approximate total compensation for each year of career progression.

I had to break up the image into two pieces so they could be readable. They appear on the next two pages.

Don’t forget that in Year 7, the bonus for promotion to manager is being phased in over three years, so that younger managers do not jump their more experienced colleagues in overall comp.

Obviously results will vary but this gives a pretty good picture of what your compensation will look like over the years at P. Dubs. If you’re busting, still not satisfied or have your own variables to add to the analysis provided, do share.

BREAKING: Big 4 Firms Compete for Talent

For those not previously aware:

A talent war is among the top concerns for both the accounting profession and their corporate clients, says Jim Henry, managing partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers in San Francisco. Even as the nation struggles with persistently high unemployment, those with the right skills and credentials are in demand. “We’re seeing a hot market for those with the relevant skills,” said Henry. “It’s a sign of the economy improving over the last 18 months.”

Since this is a BizJournal publication we hit the paywall but can presume that Diego discussed PwC’s successful competitive poaching campaign (which included picking up James Draper in San Fran).

Accounting firms battle to attract the best talent [SFBJ]

Will One Bad Performance Review Doom a PwC Intern’s Chances at a Fulltime Offer?

Editor’s Note: Got a question for the career advice brain trust? Email us at advice@goingconcern.com.

I need some advice. I am doing an internship and all my performance evaluations have been good except one. I got one that said did not meet expectations. All the others were met or exceeded expectations. will the on bad pff prevent me from getting a job offer?

PwC Intern

Dear PwC intern,

Forget about your work ethic; your grammar and spelling should be enough for HR to deny you an offer.

Quick side note: I’m sure Caleb has touched on this before (if he hasn’t, he should), but emails are a representation of your professional image. Spelling/grammar mistakes are excusable when it’s an email to a fellow intern about the evening’s happy hour, but not when you are trying to represent yourself to the client, a partner, a manager, or in this case the GC community. My first piece of advice – proofread your $#!%.

Now, back to your original question. Considering the job market and how strapped for staff the firms will be in the next few years, you should be fine. Modern day internship programs at the Big 4 are a testing ground for both the firms and you, the student. Were you able to fumble through workpapers, create some binders, and generally not piss anyone off? Seems like you did, for the most part. For whatever reason (and considering that you didn’t provide one, I’ll assume the poor ranking was justified) you received a less than satisfactory review on one engagement. The positive reviews will counter this. Also, if you have a positive relationship with your recruiter, he/she will fight for you to receive an offer (after all, HR has their own goals to fulfill).

However, if you rubbed an important partner, manager, or recruiter the wrong way at any time, consider your goose cooked. All it takes is a short “I don’t want this person receiving an offer” email from a person of authority to erase your chances of receiving an offer.
Good luck. Cross your fingers and dot your i’s that you can rise above the poor review.

PwC Snags Another KPMG Partner

Is PwC offering these partners a lifetime supply of Girl Scout Cookies or something?

Ellen Rotenberg will join PwC to head up the Banking, Capital Markets and Insurance group as a tax partner in New York. She was most recently the National Tax Leader for Banking and Finance at KPMG. Prior to that position she did a stint in KPMG’s Washington National Tax Practice.

If you’re keeping score at home, this is the fourth KPMG partner/principal to join PwC since February (that we know about). Kinda makes you wonder if Tim Flynn is really retiring. [PwC]

Here’s PwC’s New Comp Structure in Its Entirety (And Thoughts on Salary Multiple)

Last Friday we broke the news of the “exciting changes” to PwC’s new compensation structure. We now have obtained the document in its entirety (on Page 2 of this post) for those interested in perusing and any P. Dubbers who are unable to navigate their own email or internal websites.

The news has generated a healthy discussion with mixed reviews so far but one reader wanted to focus on the salary multiple specifically

Caleb – I think something that has been glossed over by everyone is the expectations PwC has set around salaries throughout your career.  While the attached excerpt [after the jump] shows that the firm wants you to think you will make 2X your starting salary as an average manager and 1.5X your salary as an average senior, it just doesn’t add up. 

No one is making that multiple, and most don’t think they will get there when we get raises on July 1.  Even the partners in our office said 1.5X for seniors and 2X for managers is an unreasonable salary expectation; they are also a little pissed that BoMo set such absurd expectations.  From what I heard about the associate and senior webcast yesterday, a lot of the questions were some form of “why are you a lying piece of shit about compensation?”  I haven’t had a chance to listen to the webcast yet, but I assume the answers to the questions were some sort of non-answer.

The firm has had a hard time keeping seniors around, so my best guess is they were trying to get senior expectations up to get them to stick around.  I guess they didn’t count on accountants to check those figures and do the math to make sure everything was accurate.

Well, P. Dubs new managers and SAs – do the numbers add up? Tell us in the comments.

PwCTotalRewards2011