Add RSS RSS

Featured Job Survey Results: Billable Hours By City
(Or: Do New Yorkers really work harder?)

clock time billable hour Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.gifSo far, we've received exactly 1,400 responses to last week's survey on hours and bonuses. You can see how bonuses broke down for the Classes of 2005 and 2006, based on hours, in the results to yesterday's Lawyer of the Year survey.

But how did billable hours break down by city?

There's been a lot of discussion in responses to our previous surveys about whether New Yorkers really work as hard as other cities, especially given the Christmas and New Year's efforts of their California brethren.

Find out how New Yorkers really stack up, after the jump.

As it turns out, New Yorkers really are working harder than associates in Atlanta and Texas, but so are associates just about everywhere else. When it comes to associates billing 2400 hours or more, there's not a huge amount of difference between New York and D.C., and Boston, L.A. and San Francisco aren't exactly slouches either.

Breakdowns for the number of hours spent on billable, pro bono, or administrative work were relatively constant across classes and locations. About 60% of associates had fewer than 50 pro bono hours, with another 18% in the 50 to 99 range, and the rest at 100 or more. About 40% of associates had fewer than 100 administrative hours, with another third in the 100 to 199 range. But there were a couple of exceptions: Texas and Chicago lagged the rest of the country in pro bono hours, New Yorkers were much less likely to spend time on non-billable work, and a surprisingly high percentage of associates in Atlanta lost at least 300 hours to non-billable time.

Hours By Location

Less Than 18001800 to 19992000 to 20992100 to 21992200 to 22992300 to 23992400+
Atlanta24%28%14%18%6%4%6%
Bay Area7%27%24%12%10%11%9%
Boston20%22%24%11%4%7%11%
Chicago9%9%32%17%13%9%11%
Los Angeles7%15%25%17%16%10%10%
New York14%16%23%13%11%7%15%
Texas19%26%14%15%8%8%8%
Washington, D.C.9%23%23%13%8%10%14%
Other15%25%26%14%8%4%9%
Comments
avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:07 PM

i did not read the post, but i know in my gut new york lawyers do work harder than anyone anywhere else

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:12 PM

Lat needs to check his math. By these numbers, significantly more LA associates are working 2100+ hours than NY associates.

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:14 PM

I know in my ass that we here in L.A. work harder than anyone else.

I feel in my nipples that N.Y. does work hard too though.

avatar
4 Posted by Anon | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:16 PM

Looks like Boston is the place to be! Good hours, good chowder.

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:18 PM

I have not been a fan of these surveys so far, and the results usually seem flawed - but the results for this one are really interesting, and are varied enough that they do not seem skewed.

That said, where are all the NYC'ers on this site who say that 2400 is the norm? Who are these 50%+ who responded who say they bill below 2099 in NYC??? Is this possible?

Another thought - perhaps this should have been restricted to lawyers in firms of 100+ attys?

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:18 PM

"New Yorkers were much less likely to spend time on non-billable work, and a surprisingly high percentage of associates in Atlanta lost at least 300 hours to non-billable time."

That's because NYers are more "generous" when it comes to what they consider billable time.

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:24 PM

I know from the hair standing up on my testicles that we work harder here in LA.

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:24 PM

How does Boston get put up in the big leagues? Significantly more lawyers working less than 2,000 hours than any other hard working cities mentioned, plus Chicago, in fact, it's almost as bad as Texas. And it is the only one of the hard working cities that doesn't have at least 20% of respondents working at least 2,300 hours. I'd actually tier it more like this:

New York, DC, Chicago
LA, Bay Area

Boston, Texas


Atlanta

avatar
9 Posted by Lat/(LA+Math) | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:31 PM

2:24, if the hair on your testicles has enough energy to stand up, then you're not working 2400+ hours. You're just very well air-conditioned.

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:31 PM

And once the COL index of 97 for the ATL is factored in against NYC's 198, Atlanta lawyers more than NYC with half the work

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:32 PM

2:24, I assume you mean NY, DC, Chicago, LA, and Bay Area all on the same line.

avatar
12 Posted by (T5->V10) | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:33 PM

I'd like a survey detailing who works more hours: attorneys doing sophisticated cross-border transactional work or complex bet-the-company litigation.

avatar
13 Posted by Cheesesteak | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:34 PM

I'm in Philly and I work harder than anyone in NYC or Beantown. Why? Because the women in Philly are FUGLY.

Option #1

Bill my arse off and earn a major bonus?

Option #2

Waste time and money at bars on the trolls and skanks in this God forsaken city?

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:35 PM

The people billing 2400+ don't have time for this site

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:36 PM

I'm in NY, billing about 2000. Why in the name of all that is holy would anyone want to bill 2400+? I don't see enough of my wife, dog, friends and gym as it is.

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:40 PM

Boston-"good hours, good chowder" and an amazingly high tax bracket to take a huge chunk of your earnings. I'll need more than a good bowl of soup to ever work in that s-hole.


Did I mention the people suck and the girls are ugly?

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:42 PM

Lat -

How about a fluff piece on the most attractive city for attorneys.

My vote is for NYC

avatar
18 Posted by anon | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:44 PM

This is a poor time to make a comparison by city. NYC's corporate work has dried up compared to previous years because of the subprime crisis causing billables to be lower than normal. I'd like to see a breakdown by practice group.

avatar
19 Posted by A&B Non-Billables | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:48 PM

I used to work at A&B (in a satellite office) and I'm not surprised to hear the 300+ non-billable statistic at all. A&B is terrible about expecting people to devote several hundred hours of time to non-billable endeavors, on top of billable ones. Some of those hours are boosted by the firm's general rule of recording time that would be considered irrelevant and unnecessary at any other firm (e.g., firm social events, group associate lunches, etc.). It's like they want to know what you are doing every minute of the day.

avatar
20 Posted by anon | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:49 PM

I like the clock graphic

avatar
21 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:49 PM

Why group 1800-1999? Many firms have hours cutoffs between 1900 and 1950, which would therefore seem to make separate columns for 1800-1899 and 1900-1999 analytically useful. Also, it helps to more fairly represent what's really going on, given that everything else is divided into 100-hour blocks.

avatar
22 Posted by sms257 | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:53 PM

This is a self-selected sample, people. The lawyers billing large amounts of hours are not diddling around on a blog answering a survey.

avatar
23 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:54 PM

Why group 1800-1999? Many firms have hours cutoffs between 1900 and 1950, which would therefore seem to make separate columns for 1800-1899 and 1900-1999 analytically useful. Also, it helps to more fairly represent what's really going on, given that everything else is divided into 100-hour blocks.

avatar
24 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:55 PM

For any of you outside of TX--your life must suck

avatar
25 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:00 PM

What constitutes the "other" category?

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:00 PM

2:55:

It does. I live in Atlanta, work NYC hours, and get paid on a Kansas City payscale. Thanks for asking.

avatar
27 Posted by 36thChamber | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:02 PM

I wonder what impact the credit crunch had on this. I work in structured finance in NY at a firm that isn't firing people (or gently letting them go) and I was on track to bill 2900 hours in August. I ended up with around 2200.

avatar
28 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:04 PM

I work in TX, have great hours, get paid NY $, and have a life

avatar
29 Posted by Anonymous | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:04 PM

This may be a stupid question, but what does it mean to "bill 2400"? Is that pure billable hours only (excluding all non-billable events, such as recruiting)? Does it include or exclude pro bono? I would imagine that the answers probably vary among firms (and even how people have interpreted the questions within a firm), making this survey inaccurate...

avatar
30 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:05 PM

3:00 - Miami, Philly, Minneapolis, Denver, San Diego, Seattle

avatar
31 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:10 PM

3:04(2) - of course this survey is flawed--everything on ATL is (except (generally) the only info we care about--salary/bonus info)

Lat has to think of something so we click on surveys--for each person that clicks and participates in a survey, Lat gets paid $$

avatar
32 Posted by LA Law | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:15 PM

Dude.

So Angelenos are more likely than New Yorkers to bill 2000-2399 hours, and New Yorkers are more likely than Angelenos to bill less than 2000?

I do not want to see any more complaining from the NY bitches on this site. LA beats you out for complaining rights. We win.

avatar
33 Posted by anon | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:21 PM

I wonder if Latty Boy ever feels crappy-as-hell that he left Wachtell with its incredible salaries and concomitant prestige to publish useless surveys and generally run ATL??

p.s. Yeah I said "concomitant;" morons, go look it up...

avatar
34 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:38 PM

3:04: Good question. Many of my friends at non-hours-based-comp firms use "bill" and "work" interchangeably.

avatar
35 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 5:10 PM

Don't feel sorry for people not living in Texas. Remember, you live in Texas. We therefore feel sorry for you. No amount of money could force me to live in that gun-toting s-hole.

avatar
36 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 5:11 PM

Don't feel sorry for people not living in Texas. Remember, you live in Texas. We therefore feel sorry for you. No amount of money could force me to live in that gun-toting s-hole.

avatar
37 Posted by NY v5 | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 5:20 PM

I think the results, at least for NY, are fairly accurate. Among my peers at NY Biglaw, these numbers seem about right.

avatar
38 Posted by Atlanta | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 5:47 PM

Lawyers are lazy. When I was in law school I worked 2200 hours a year and went to school full time (12 hours a semester). Now that I am done with school and just have a single job as a BigLaw attorney, billing 2200 hours is a walk in the park.

avatar
39 Posted by shakespeer | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 6:00 PM

5:47: glad to know you're a sour workaholic AND full of yourself!

avatar
40 Posted by WLRK hours, market pay | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 6:28 PM

You need two additional line on that thing: WLRK Hours

2400 I hit in September.

avatar
41 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 6:52 PM

This chart needs an additional segment that discloses how many people from each market actually took the survey.

avatar
42 Posted by anony | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 6:54 PM

5:47, aside from the other d-bag aspects of your post, I don't know what kind of job you had in law school, but there's a big difference between billing hours and working the same number of hours, in my opinion. I worked while I was in law school too and wasn't surfing the internet all day, but it was still very different from working as a full-time associate in BigLaw.

avatar
43 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, January 17, 2008 9:39 PM

DC still remains the hardest legal market in which to secure a biglaw job (of the so-called elite legal markets) because of its small size relative to NYC, its relatively low attrition, its east coast location, and the fact that SCOTUS, DC Cir, DDC and many other federal clerks (Bristow fellows, DOJ Honors, etc.) stay in or migrate to DC.

What does this have to do with the survey? Nothing. I just wanted DC to get some props too.

avatar
44 Posted by Justin Timberlake | Permalink Friday, January 18, 2008 8:53 AM

JT billed 4800 hours...in a day.

avatar
45 Posted by General Olgethorpe | Permalink Friday, January 18, 2008 10:46 AM

Atlanta to $35K because thats how much lazy rednecks deserve...

avatar
46 Posted by Glad 2 B Gone | Permalink Friday, January 18, 2008 11:57 AM

I make almost as much money as you guys make, and I billed ZERO hours last year.

Man, I sure am glad I went in house.

avatar
47 Posted by Statistics 101 | Permalink Friday, January 18, 2008 12:51 PM

The differences are statistically insignificant given the size of the sample.

avatar
48 Posted by Statistics 101 | Permalink Friday, January 18, 2008 1:03 PM

The differences are statistically insignificant given the size of the sample.

avatar
49 Posted by F_THE_EASR | Permalink Sunday, January 20, 2008 1:27 PM

All this talk about this place is an S-hole and that place is an S-Hole.

The whole east coast is an S-Hole. I would rather live in Texas where the women are hotter and the weather more agreeable than the entire east coast.

East Coast =expensive, cold, ugliest women in the country.

California = expensive, better weather, hotter women.

Post Your Comment