John Quinn Cracks a New Year’s Whip
Most people know that partners often write off associate hours and paralegal hours when it comes time to bill clients. Quinn Emanuel is no different.
But managing partner John Quinn has had enough. Just before Christmas, Quinn sent around an email to his fellow partners (no associates were included on the distribution list) urging them to keep a closer eye on billing:
Month in and month out, partners request write‑offs from bills, giving the same reasons. All of them are preventable. The most common reasons are as follows:
Among the reasons Quinn listed was associates taking their own initiative by assigning work to paralegals:
Associates or others delegating work. One sure way to lose control of staffing on a case is to tolerate associates assigning out work to other associates or paralegals. Associates are told they shouldn’t do this, but it happens from time to time. Associates need to be reminded that they do not have authority to assign work to others.
Bang! Well, tell us what you really think:
Associates being inefficient, spending too much time on assignments. For any significant assignment, an associate should always be given a time budget ‑‑ how much time they should spend on the project or how much time they should spend before reporting to the partner on their progress. It should never come as a surprise to a partner that an associate has spent twice as much time as the partner expected.
Read the full Quinn memo after the jump to learn more about how partners really think.
JOHN QUINN — MEM0 — SAME OLD REASONS FOR WRITE-OFFS
Month in and month out, partners request write‑offs from bills, giving the same reasons. All of them are preventable. The most common reasons are as follows:
1. An attorney was not approved to be working on the matter. Increasingly, clients are requesting pre-approval for all timekeepers. A team of lawyers will be approved by a client and then, a few months later, an unapproved attorney or paralegal will log some time which the client refuses to pay for. This is simple: always get approval for additional timekeepers, and make sure that everyone on the team knows that no one else is approved to work on the matter.
2. Budgets are exceeded. Often budgets are exceeded because of unanticipated events. Other times, the budget did not represent a good estimate in the first place. Controlling client expectations regarding budgets begins with the budget itself. It should always be prefaced with a written caution to the client that there will be many events in the litigation which will contribute to cost which we cannot control and that, in the event of any variance between the budget and what our time charges actually are, our time charges control, not the budget. That said, as soon as it appears that a budget is going to be exceeded, attorneys need to be proactive to warn the client. The client should not first learn that a budget will be exceeded when he receives a bill.
3. Associates or others delegating work. One sure way to lose control of staffing on a case is to tolerate associates assigning out work to other associates or paralegals. Associates are told they shouldn’t do this, but it happens from time to time. Associates need to be reminded that they do not have authority to assign work to others.
4. Associates being inefficient, spending too much time on assignments. For any significant assignment, an associate should always be given a time budget ‑‑ how much time they should spend on the project or how much time they should spend before reporting to the partner on their progress. It should never come as a surprise to a partner that an associate has spent twice as much time as the partner expected.
5. Indexing and organizing files for storage at the conclusion of a matter. This frequently results in thousands of dollars in charges which the partner wants to write off. At the end of a matter, ask the client what the client wants done with the files. If we spend time indexing and organizing the files because that’s what the client wants done, the client should be charged for it. Otherwise we should not do it.
6. Getting new lawyers up to speed. Sometimes there will be a change in personnel on a case because a lawyer gets “pulled off” to work on another matter. Unaccountably, this often seems to happen after an attorney has just been assigned to a case, but has devoted a week or two to the matter. There will then be a request to write off the “pulled off” lawyer’s time, or the new lawyers getting up to speed time, or both. These types of changes in personnel should be resisted and, if necessary, only done with a clear understanding of the consequences for the bill.
(161) 
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
Furst?
Is there anything about working for this firm that does NOT blow?
Second. As much as I hate to say it, he is right. Partners need to know how to manage litigation and their staff.
Wow, great story.
I think John Quinn asked an associate to write that memo.
looks like quinn learned how to use the shift key, finally
OMG, some interesting news on ATL.
Take that good moment, and repeat it.
When I was a summer, I delegated some work to a paralegal. Maybe I shouldn't have done that.
Still got an offer though.
Well, at least the onus here is put right where it belongs: on the partners. That being said, perhaps associates would be more efficient if large firms curtailed the culture of paranoia they love to cultivate. I was, seriously, told by a partner that associates should proofread whatever they turn into a partner at least five times.
This advice sounds like it comes from McKinsey & Co. If other managing partners don't send out these emails, they should be. Everything in here seems to make good business sense. Not sure how it affects us non-partners, but I guess it's good insight into how a big firm is run.
I like this Quinn fellow. He seems like a smart cookie.
Speaking of cookies, Elie ate all the SkaddenDC ones.
QE is a sweatshop - if you are not billing 2400 they will be very unhappy with you
Seems like excellent advice to me. Directed at the partners, giving good management advice, trying to reduce wasted time...what's the problem?
9 -
You nailed it. F this guy.
Sounds good in theory, but in the trenches, the sand shift quickly.
#5 is spot on, though.
Good job breaking this very interesting memo Elie!
You deserve an all you can eat night at Sizzler. Oh wait you're banned from there.
What a well written piece. He is totally right. The problem is that hardly anyone at a law firm has any management training. His next step should be to invest in his people and get them real training so they can run these cases effectively.
Memo sent to partners only - did a partner send this to ATL?
What partner in this firm is providing this memo to ATL?
So associates at Quinn can't be trusted to figure out how long to spend on assignments or when to delegate to others? Do they have to ask permission to go to the bathroom too?
Memo makes sense except for the indexing part. You kind of need to keep your crap in order in case you need it again years down the road, no?
Memo makes sense except for the indexing part. You kind of need to keep your crap in order in case you need it again years down the road, no?
Memo makes sense except for the indexing part. You kind of need to keep your crap in order in case you need it again years down the road, no?
19 - I love you
-chai
You guys just kept on sucking that partner cock, while they bitched and whined about this, that, and the other goddamn thing that was either totally irrelevant or not within your role on the matter. You all had another soda/candy/burger--stayed a few more hours, too.
You kept on eating that that shit right up with what was left of your youth and health running down your fat bloated thighs like the shit-lube leaking from your ass after "bonus" announcements. Kept on stressing, worrying, having no life, never seeing the fucking sun--just so you could pay down loans with the half you got after you paid 50% of your income to the government so someone's babydaddy was able to buy some new nikes and a flat screen that was nicer than yours.
You were all a bunch of fucking chumps.
But now you're going to have to justify your every .1 of an hour to some 9-5 admin bitch, who makes it clear they don't respect you or the hours you bill that pay her salary. Welcome to Quinn Fucking Emmanual, you stupid, lazy, ignorant, sloppy little brat.
Wow, this might be a first. A missive from a partner that I actually totally agree with. And as someone else mentioned, he did it the right way -- this is an issue for which PARTNERS need to be responsible. If a partner expects you to finish a memo in a day, then he needs to tell you he wants you to report back in a day. Frankly, I would really appreciate more of that kind of direction at the outset, rather than some vague sense of how comprehensive he expects the memo, and some non-deadline "deadline" that bears no relation to the importance or amount of time to be put into the memo. Kudos to John Quinn for reminding partners that they are responsible for being managers, and can't leave it up to associates to simply figure out what to do with very little information.
Also kudos to him for putting the smackdown on unwarranted write-offs. If I had a dollar for every time some overly self-important client decided it didn't want to pay for the twenty-five hours I put into a mammoth-sized pleading when I sweated through every fucking second of it...
So associates at Quinn can't be trusted to figure out how long to spend on assignments or when to delegate to others? Do they have to ask permission to go to the bathroom too?
You guys just kept on sucking that partner cock, while they bitched and whined about this, that, and the other goddamn thing that was either totally irrelevant or not within your role on the matter. You all had another soda/candy/burger--stayed a few more hours, too.
You kept on eating that shit right up with what was left of your youth and health running down your bloated thighs, like shit and lube leaking out your ass after "bonus" announcements. Kept on stressing, worrying, having no life, never seeing the fucking sun--just so you could pay down loans with the half you got after you paid 50% of your income to the government so someone's babydaddy was able to buy some new nikes and a flat screen that was nicer than yours.
You were all a bunch of fucking chumps.
But now you're going to have to justify your every .1 of an hour to some 9-5 admin bitch, who makes it clear she doesn't respect you or the hours you bill that pay her salary. Welcome to Quinn Fucking Emmanual, you stupid, lazy, ignorant, sloppy little brat. Get to work, but don't you dare spend too much time making that perfect work product--but don't you go home before 10 p.m. either.
Hey at Quinn, the only way to get 3000 hours is by breaking every one of the rules above. I bet Quinn sent this out after pissed off clients called him up about a bonus structure that contemplates associates billing 2800+. So he had to send this smackdown memo.
There is not one associate in law who warrants billing that much time: parnters possibly, but not associates. Those of you who excoriate me and tell me how justified you are in billing this much, well you're on this site in the middle of the day aren't you? Every 2800+ associate is a lying, time-wasting weasel.
-won't be applying to Quinn Emmanuel as a lateral from my federal agency.
The corollary to #4 is that partners need to realistically estimate the time for their projects.
Almost every project I've ever received in seven years of practice has taken 1.5 to 2 times the original "this will only take you X hours." I think that's even an acceptable adjustment factor. I have other colleagues I've worked with, and the adjustment is 5-9 times the original time estimate. Telling me to spend an hour on it and having me find an answer in an hour are two different things.
I don't get all the praise for this Quinn guy. Like if wht he said were rocket science...
This guy is a joke. Isn't it interesting how he forgets/doesn't find it necessary to use the shift key or check grammar when addressing associates but then does use the shift key when addressing partners? What a pathetic attempt by a 60 year old man to act "young" and "hip".
Guys at my high school used to nail paralegals and assign them some chores, it was no big deal.
30 - Quinn won't want you. So don't worry about applying.
Who exactly loves the billable hour again?
@ 29 You win the prize for the most pretentious word choice of the day with "excoriate". I bet you go to bed at 11:00 pm tonight dreaming of a threesome with Anderson Cooper and Micheal Phelps.
Item 3 is total bullshit. If mid-level associates aren't given some autonomy to figure out when to grab a junior, then the partners better damned well be mentoring the crap out of those juniors. When mid-levels delegate, junior learns, and mid-level gets to move on to something else. Sure, junior will take longer, but his rate is lower, so its a wash. And how does assigning work to a paralegal cause clients a headache? Those guys do what they do, they do it well, and they do it cheaper than the attorney. What's the problem? Or is it just a cheap client trying to weasel out of a charge because the para wasn't on the pre-approved timekeeper list?
33 - his secretary typed it.
This memo is very pro-associate. It is the associates who take the hit when time has to be cut, and it tells the partners how to avoid having to do that.
Yay, John Quinn!
(Maybe he leaked it. You all ever think of that?)
Writing off time is an aesthetic device for client (and insurer) relations. If your firm can't swallow some write-offs something more fundamental is wrong -- like no revenues. This guy's a tool.
This is mostly common sense. The fact is though, that these kinds of things happen, and happen often. Clients, in-house types who have worked at biglaw firms, know it, and don't want to pay for it, but its just them being opportunistic and hypocritical, because when they were worker drones, they knew this shit happened without their control.
People going in-house should get one of those 'men in black' mind eraser zaps of light before they depart.
10 i s correct -- it DOES sound like it was written by McKinsey. You know how I know? Because beneath the reasonable-sounding veneer, it's mostly a worthless collection of bromides whose real purpose is not to inject any more "efficiency" into the process, but rather to terrify any pathetic partner (whose draw no doubt depends on the good graces of one Mr. Quinn) staring at a bill that he knows is too high for the value he has delivered to the client.
Does Quinn know how inefficient it is NOT to let associates handle staffing for some levels of a project? Does Quinn really think it is that straightforward to set a "time budget" for each "significant assignment"?
40 - how do write offs cause associates to take the hit? Indirectly, through pissed off partners, and generally through trickle down of lower revenue, but that's it right? If your firm docks the associates' billable hours total for time his loser partner writes off.... you need to go to another firm. Good luck with that.
If this were written by McKinsey, it would be in powerpoint.
In theory, the items make sense. But as 41 mentions, it looks good to a client to see that they are getting some "free" attorney time worked on their cases. If suddenly the client stops seeing "free" hours worked on their case, then they will start to think that they are getting billed to much, even if their new bills are less than before.
Just to clear up some confusion, Quinn sent this directly to the associates saying something like it was good information for them, too. This was after he originally sent it only to the partners.
38 -- one problem is moron clients who blow up if they see too many names on a bill -- apparently they'd prefer to see fewer names on the bills while paying associates to do work that paralegals can handle at much lower cost.
Juicy. Delicious. MOAR STOARIES PLZ.
35 = Laid off from PoGo.
31 - You are completely correct. Partners rarely seem to be able to accurately estimate the amount of time that a project requires. My favorite scenario is when they keep adding research components to the same project, and then are surprised when those additional research projects add to the time billed.
GREAT scoop, and interesting story. Very informative and interesting (a helpful read for associates). Thanks!
31/51 -- the reason partners find it difficult to estimate the time a project requires often turns on the fact that associate abilities vary so widely.
26--self important client here. I'm having a tough time seeing how cutting and pasting a few headnotes from Westlaw into a Word doc. constitutes "sweating through every fucking second of it..."
Now go pick up my Southwestern eggrolls from Chilis...(and don't forget the avocado dipping sauce)...
Between this memo and that horrific bonus announcement, I'm guessing we're not going to see any more Quinn retreats in Switzerland.
Next up, layoffs?
9&25&26- highly credited
MysTTTal- you might become a good journo if you keep up with quality reporting like this. Well Done! Have a rack of lamb on me.
38/48- then how on earth are sr. associates going to manage work flow? as a mid-level, I know that each partner has his group of 2-3 srs and of counsel who manage all of his client work, including assigning us to projects. they routinely will tell us whether or not to pull in jrs
53: And partners' abilities to effectively convey what they want also vary widely. For some partners, I bill an entirely appropriate amount of time. For other partners, always the usual suspects, my time gets out-of-control because they are out-of-control. These partners are usually super-insecure about their own abilities and command of the law and demand that associates leave not a single stone unturned for simple research projects.
30 - Ignore 35, Quinn loves former feds. But you don't want to work there anyway.
I think #40 is on to something. Quinn knows that in-house lawyers read this site. These lawyers appoint outside counsel. What better way to look like you are on the straight and narrow than to leak a self-serving memo highlighting how your firm is watching out for client interests. The problem with these firms today is that the tail wags the dog. You have firm managements which are composed of non-lawyers or lawyers who never wanted to practice in the first place. These people are the ones getting paid by the billable hours worked by everyone else and yet they act as if they have a clue as to how to run a caseload. Today, lawfirm cultures are such that the practicing attiorney is looked upon as something of a slug to be ridiculed by the Managing Partners who control, more often than not, the compensation committees.
57- you said it better than I could. 51's logic is that of the builder who blames the material when the house falls down.
1. Associates don't take hits when partners write off time. Billable hours include time that's been written off.
2. Quinn sent this to associates because he thought it would be helpful for us to see (he sent it to us as an after thought). It makes sense because associates can help avoid these situations.
3. Who has a serious substantive objection with this memo? These policies makes things more efficient. Client wins. Firm wins. Associates win. Who exactly loses? Partners who want to allow over-billing but not have their clients pay for it? I'm sure that is annoying to partners, but hardly a calamity.
4. It takes literally one minute to email, call or ask a partner if work can be delegated. If an associate can't master this "skill," he or she is a poor lawyer.
5. Quinn does not use lower case in emails to impress associates. (Seriously, who would be impressed by that?) This memo was obviously typed up so it could be printed up and kept.
6. As an associate, this memo was completely neutral to me. The idea that it would upset an associate is rather bizarre. I just don't get it. I think more upsetting would be a memo announcing a freeze on pay raises, as has been seen at many other firms. I mean really, which would you rather get? (I may have to eat crow on this one, but we haven't gotten any such email yet.)
56 -
38 here. Fine, as long as some associate with half a brain is allowed to delegate. If you're at a firm where juniors, mids and seniors are all staffed on the same matter, then thanks for reminding me why I picked my firm. Its surely got its share of annoyances, but as a second year, I was working directly for partners, assigning to first years and paras. Thin is in.
At many firms, billable hours do NOT include time that is written off.
61 is right. Quinn doesn't need to use lowercase to impress, his glasses do that for him:
http://www.quinnemanuel.com/umbraco/imagegen.aspx?width=150&compression=95&image=/media/37936/quinn-web-bw.jpg
At many firms, billable hours do NOT include time that is written off.
At many firms, billable hours do NOT include time that is written off.
In fact, at many firms, billable time only includes hours that were not only billed, but for which receipts were actually collected.
61, re 4: I'm sorry, but when I'm working at midnight and I want to assign some work to a junior associate for an assignment that must be on the partner's desk at 9 AM, the partner is not around for me to ask permission. You didn't think very hard about that one.
67 -- like who? That's just crazy...
At my firm, associates can delegate work to more junior associates and paralegals. In fact, we run teams of juniors and paralegals on larger cases.
Sounds like john quinn is pissed that clients are pushing back against his firm's ridiculous billing rates.
Yeah john. Push the blame down. Shit rolls down hill.
Happy New Year.
SEVENTY FIRST!
61 - I'm not one of the ones complaining about this, and I don't think it is really that bad. If it results in unrealistic time demands, though, it could be a problem.
The biggest problem I see is about assigning work to paralegals and other associates. There is NO WAY a partner is doing all of that on my cases. I would annoy the hell out of them if I asked. I cannot see how it would be more efficient for partners to do this (although as an associate I wouldn't complain).
To follow up on what #61 said (I'm another QE associate):
At least as far as I've always operated, and all the partners I've worked with have too, it isn't "you can never give a more junior person or a paralegal any assignment without permission."
It is "don't add people to the f**king case without permission." Once they're on the case, then they're fair game. Furthermore, that permission is usually "go find a first or second year that doesn't suck and see if they have time."
What's so shocking or weird about that?
62 -- that structure is fine for some types of cases. I don't think it would work for Carter Bryant/MGA, Nokia v. Qualcomm, Parmalat, etc. etc. etc.
I know it might seem exceedingly complex, 73, but try reading the memo.
61 - from an associate's perspective this memo is perfectly fine, no doubt. These are all nice things for an associate to know, and the points made are largely unexceptional.
What I find interesting is not the points he makes, but the context in which he's making them. As 43 pointed out, what Quinn is really doing in this memo is telling his partners to stop "requesting" write-offs.
When a partner is faced with a bill that he knows is too high, the path of least resistance is usually to write off a bunch of time before presenting the bill to the client. Most firms require some sort of justification for this, and the time-honored excuses that partners use often focus on associate inefficiency and staffing transitions -- both of which are common, expected and largely unavoidable. They simply come with the territory in a big law firm, and Quinn knows that.
What Quinn is doing is telling his partners to go try to bill all this time anyway. Some clients will end up paying for it, and some won't. When the client has refused to pay, then the partner can take that excuse back to Quinn -- it's the one excuse that he doesn't mention in the memo.
Those of you who think this memo is client-friendly are off the mark.
Same thought as 6.
Thanks for sharing this, (1) Elie and (2) whoever passed this on to ATL.
65/66/67: I think my firm has a somewhat Draconian policy on write-offs, but nothing resembling this. I haven't heard of any (large) firms that have this policy.
At my firm, the write-offs do not count against your billable total, but your bonus is based almost solely on the amount that was collected. So whether a partner is bad at collections or just likes to write off your time, it still impacts your collections, and thus your bonus.
When your back's against the wall, you've got to seek forgiveness rather than permission. If the job'll get done better and more efficiently by pulling somebody new in and it's midnight, just do it. The partner's job is to deal with that kind of damage control.
This is the most moronic memo I have ever read. Just who is supposed to delegate work to the paralegals? A senior partner? I can just imagine:
Rodge: "Yes, Tim, could you please create an index for these closing documents? Make sure to put the blood letter before the circle up and our opinion. When you are through, please bring it to me for my review. I will mark it up between my conference calls today in which I am attempting to salvage the world capital markets. Now, please send Sue, your fellow paralegel in, so I can give her an assignment of making sure the data room is properly outfitted for the upcoming due diligence."
Tim: "Yes, sir, Mr. Cohen. Would you prefer I use one-inch margins on the index or one half-inch? And what about the font. People are very particular about fonts."
RC: "Good questions Tim. Let me get Tim Geithner on the phone and ask him. We were just talking fonts the other day and I think it's best to ask him what he prefers. I know that Courier is a fine looking font but Times New Roman is also smart."
If Quinn wants his partners to micromanage that much, none of the partners is going to be billing that much.
In almost all big firms (the ones that people care about on this site) hours logged is what matters. It isn' an associate's fault if a partner get get his/her client to get the client to pay a bill.
i'm surprised people had such a positive reaction to this POS memo. what that man just described is not the practice of law. or at least not a practice i want to be a part of. and associates can't give out assignments? i mean, you've gotta control the associates who are delegate whores--and they shouldn't be difficult to identify--but if quinn partners micromanage to the degree this memo implies they must, then wasted associate time isn't the problem. overpaying partners to do the job of a well trained third year is.
this memo is just a thinly veiled attempt to create a class of partners who do the work associates used to but bill for it at 2x or 3x as much. saving money? nope.
and ask yourself why it got leaked to atl.
75:
I read the memo. I read it when it came around, too.
Also, we get regular email reminders from the guy that coordinates our staffing levels telling us not to assign out work, just as the memo does.
All I'm telling people is what that warning means in practice. Think interpretation of an ambiguous contractual term, to put it in 1L terms for you.
78- that's awful
and I thought it was bad that we didn't count any non-client billable time to hours (marketing or "quality" hours).....
There's nothing substantively wrong with the memo, it's just total bullshit. The law firm system is broken. I had a partner assign me a quick research question this morning and then call me back later to tell me I was looking in the wrong place. If he would've spent 5 seconds at the beginning properly explaining what he wanted, I wouldn't have wasted two hours of time.
Does Quinn realize that the system that makes top NY law firms so profitable is built on lean staffing: a partner assigns to the senior associate who doles out the work to the junior associates who supervise the paralegals.
A system that Quinn envisions, where partners get involved in the minutiae of paralegal assignments, will cost clients much unnecessary money. Talk about ridiculous.
76: That was very well-put. It's funny - I'm at a small firm now and the partners here are far, far less bullied by clients than those I worked with in BIGLAW. If a client here complained about an unfamiliar name on a bill, the partners would laugh in his or her face. I know big/little clients are different animals, but it's great to feel that the partners aren't willing to just lay down for any client demand.
Does Quinn realize that the system that makes top NY law firms so profitable is built on lean staffing: a partner assigns to the senior associate who doles out the work to the junior associates who supervise the paralegals.
A system that Quinn envisions, where partners get involved in the minutiae of paralegal assignments, will cost clients much unnecessary money. Talk about ridiculous.
HERE'S to WORKING ON NEW YEARS EVE!!
At least I am employed and not out in that disgusting cold with the poors already massing in Times Square.
Serious question from an NYC biglaw first year associate: If I bought a couple of bottles champagne for myself and my fellow jr associates working tonight for a little midnight toast, would that be a shrewd way to enhance profile amongst my peers and spread some cheer, or a straight ticket to a) reputation as a drunk, b) reprimand from sr. associate or jr. partner.??
thanks
84:
Yeah, it's pretty annoying. Especially when it's a partner that you like or just has interesting work or whatever, but whom you know is someone who writes off a lot of time. It's a constant push and pull. I'm always wondering if I should just get the experience of this case or that case, even if I know my time will get cut for whatever reason. I usually err on the side of just doing the cases, but my bonuses have always pretty much sucked. I can never tell if it ends up being worth it.
-78
what kind of firm does not allow associates to delegate work? if anything, that keeps costs DOWN b/c you're delegating to more junior people.
65/66/67/68,
Your firm sucks. I would NEVER EVER go to a firm with such a lame policy. Billable time is written off for a host of reasons that in no way relate to the value that the associate brings to a case.
This is a crutch for weak partners, and is a sign of the firm's weakness. Luckily, no reputable firms have such a bonus or billing policy.
This memo proves how TTT Quinn is. I would never want to work for a firm where the importance of the cases/clients is SO LOW that clients care about whether work was delegated to a paralegal or whether they were charged for indexing. REAL LAW FIRMS have clients and matters that are so important ("bet the company" stuff) that the LAST thing on the GC's mind is whether an associate delegated to his secretary or some other crap.
Do you think that wachtell's clients are like, "C'mon Marty -- you can't charge us for that. Did John the associate delegate that to his paralegal?? We're not paying for that."
This is the difference between REAL law firms with true market power, and those that do only commoditized, price sensitive crap where clients scrutinize westlaw charges.
To all of those who are complaining that they can't delegate work to an associate at midnight for an assignment due at 9 am, here are some thoughts:
How did you get in a situation where you don't have enough help at midnight? If it's because you blew things off until the last minute, don't do that. If it's because the partner gave you an assignment at midnight due at 9 am, then I seriously doubt that this time would be written off. Quinn's memo talks about large projects, not a few hours here and there. Is a client going to complain about pulling on an associate for an emergency opposition to a TRO? Doubt it. Is Quinn going to write off that time? I would be not. Partners here are accessible and will respond quickly to a request to get more help, and as someone points out above, partners do not micromanage every single piddling assignment. The point of the memo is don't let associates pull others on a case and bill the shit out of a simple assignment for days on end without asking. As an associate, I find that 100% reasonable.
How about:
7. Read the f*cking document the first time if gets distributed by associates. If you wait until the night before it's finally going back to the client to ask someone to work in those extra covenants from some prior deal in 2003, a lot of extra unnecessary hours are going to get burned.
8. Respond to your blackberry. Not responding to emails or worse, giving ambiguous responses, forces associates to "hang out" at the office until the middle of the night. And you'd better believe they're going to find something to bill while they're there.
9. Don't hide the ball. If there's something you want in the document, or a specific source you want scoured, say so. Don't wait until the associate to bill 10 hours before you let him/her know that all you really wanted was a comparison against the f*cking capitalization section from the deal in 2003.
Hey cleints,
If you go to Quinn, don't bitch about your bills. You are getting the best at a very very high cost. If you have routine legal work that is not bet the company work, you don't need such expensive counsel.
"Associates need to be reminded tht they do not have the authority to assign work to others":
If that is true, it is the most ridiculous statement ever posted to this board and flies in the face of efficient, sound business practices. Who is supposed to supervise the team of paralegals on the case to ensure work quality, work flow, etc. If the management thinks a partner is going to do that, that is laughable. Having worked at a number of firms as associate and paralegal, the front line in evaluating and assessing paralegal performance rests with the junior associate. Most partners don't even know who the paralegals are, for God's sake.
It's akin to saying that MDs at Goldman should be worrying about doling out work to the college intern. It's absurd.
I think the memo is a New Year's Eve joke. It has got to be.
poop...and will hit the "Post Comment" button multiple times in protest at how bad this blog has become.
87: I've never heard of a client freaking out about an unfamiliar name in any way that's not simply a pretext for complaining about the amount of a bill. If we get the work done in a fast, fair, competent and cost-effective way, what does it matter that they're not familiar with the paralegal on the matter? Were we supposed to have a tea party at the beginning of the representation so that they could know everyone better.
I heard a GC say that he was looking for his law firms to be a scapegoat for the sh!t he took from his board. There are certainly times where that is appropriate, but to have to resort to that on multiple occasions means you can't manage well. It seems your board would wonder why every firm you hire seems to F up.
95: Quinn only does litigation. 10. Stop talking out of your ass.
89 - if you have to work on New Year's Eve then by all means bring a bottle of champagne for a midnight toast. I'd even consider charging it to the client, assuming its a $40 bottle of Veuve and not a $150 bottle of Dom. As bad as it can be sometimes to be a lawyer in a big NY firm, no one is going to think you're out of line for something like this. Cheers!
Kudos to 95!!!!!!!
DON"T HIDE THE BALL
DON"T BE A PEDANTIC DB. NO ONE NEEDS A $800 PARTNER WRITING A LONG MEMO ABOUT A SMALL TYPO.
100,
Litigation or not, it is all the same everywhere. I am sure QE associates have similar stories.
so . . . why do QE partners need to be told this? Are there really partners out there looking to have the firm foot the bill for work the plan to write off?
78/90,
Where do you work?
103: no, sorry. But it is clear what your work habits are.
As a former associate I can tell you there is nothing efficient about Quinn. The reason their bills are so expensive is precisely because JBQ has associates do work that SHOULD be delegated to staff and paralegals, and junior partners do the work that should be done by associates. This increases the firm's top line (massively inflated billables) while keeping constant its bottom line (not having to pay overtime to staff and paralegals). QE HATES paying overtime. From the associate point of view, constantly justifying the work you are delegating to a second-rate junior partner with little to offer but slavish loyalty to a senior partner gets tiresome. These junior partner's nitpick and micromanage to avoid the wrath of JBQ's profit-making formula, but are first in line to take credit when cases are won. Bravo 90-93!
God, some people on this thread are fucking retarded (and obvious low-level associates).
Here is how some clients work. At the beginning of the case, you provide them with a proposed budget. You also tell them which attorneys will be working on the case. Those attorneys' names are accompanied by their billing rates. As time goes on, if unfamiliar names crop up, the clients bring this to the partner's attention and demand to know what is going on. They do this because some firms (gasp!) pad hours by throwing unnecessary attorneys on to the case.
How do you remedy that? You institute a policy that all individuals who work on a case have to first be OK'ed by the billing partner. That way the partner can respond knowledgeably if (when) the client complains. It's just good business.
As 99 said, the teeth gnashing and hair ripping is normally just a pretext for complaining about bills (and usually by the most tight-fisted clients), but it happens nonetheless. Quinn is just recognizing the realities of the situation and implementing policies that will improve client management. (Yes, juniors, clients need management as well.)
89 - will definitely enhance rep. God I hope I work at your firm...
Okay, it's the associates' fault again. We get it, Johnny. What the fuck is the name of your TTT firm again? Right. No, never heard of it. No thanks, I don't work at a TTT firm that deals with cheap shitty clients which scrutinize every detail of the bill, like what kind of small shit an associate delegates to a paralegal.
I don't know why some clients bitch about new people being added to the bill, but they do. Everyone knows it. In light of that, any associate who adds new people onto a case without getting approval from/informing a partner is a smug self-important douchebag.
Some junior partners at QE do too much micro-managing, but for some of them it appears that's the only way they can justify their existence. It's much the same at other firms though.
And bringing Champagne to the office to share with colleagues is a classy move.
101 & 109- Thanks
and if you do work at my firm, all the jrs will swear they don't know who bought the champagne (there's only a handful of us on this tonight).
-89
Wednesday, December 31, 2008 1:29 PM
You guys just kept on sucking that partner cock, while they bitched and whined about this, that, and the other goddamn thing that was either totally irrelevant or not within your role on the matter. You all had another soda/candy/burger--stayed a few more hours, too.
You kept on eating that shit right up with what was left of your youth and health running down your bloated thighs, like shit and lube leaking out your ass after "bonus" announcements. Kept on stressing, worrying, having no life, never seeing the fucking sun--just so you could pay down loans with the half you got after you paid 50% of your income to the government so someone's babydaddy was able to buy some new nikes and a flat screen that was nicer than yours.
You were all a bunch of fucking chumps.
But now you're going to have to justify your every .1 of an hour to some 9-5 admin bitch, who makes it clear she doesn't respect you or the hours you bill that pay her salary. Welcome to Quinn Fucking Emmanual, you stupid, lazy, ignorant, sloppy little brat. Get to work, but don't you dare spend too much time making that perfect work product--but don't you go home before 10 p.m. either.
And 96, stop chugging the koolaid. QE is a second rate personality cult.
From an article on Quinn
"Quinn attributes some of the firm's success to its decentralized structure. 'Good lawyers don't need to be managed,' he says, figuring that the best way to run a law firm is, in effect, not to run it."
Yeah, right.
Article in 114: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/128/caffeinated-aggressive-amp-brash-esq.html
billable hours = baloney
113 - Maybe you could post your lame rant one more time. We didn't see it when you posted it twice an hour ago.
Can't believe we've let it go so long without being said:
BITCH SPREAD THE BUTTCHEEKS SO I CAN SMELL THE JUICY INSIDES!
95, right on.
10. Specialist partners - when the corporate associates send you requests for help on a deal, don't ignore the emails, and if the associate needs to turn the doc and get on a call with the client or other side at 6:00 pm, don't fucking give me your comments at 5:55 on your way out the door.
100 - you are an asshat. Eat a dick.
Do you people work at a big law firm? Like everything else, delegation to juniors isn't written in stone somewhere. If the partner trusts the senior/mid-level he is working with, the senior/mid-level can delegate work to juniors as needed and the partner doesn't care (the partner doesn't need to say yea or nea, it's just understood). If he doesn't trust the associate to delegate properly, he will step in and do it himself at the outset ("please work with ABC on this. . ."). Really all there is to it.
Whether your time is written off contributes to your realization rate-- as in, how much of your billable hours are realized into income for the firm. If you consistently have a low realization rate, it impacts your bonus and performance evaluations because you may be viewed as being inefficient. Of course, if you work for difficult clients or partners, then your partner(s) may understand and cut you a little slack, but I wouldn't count on that. A good way to ease the pressure is to get yourself matter credits if you can-- then you'll be seen as contributing to bringing in business.
Working for yourself is the only punk rock thing left to do.
LOL what a TTT firm LOL at all the Harvard grads that work for this shyster.
OMFG, you mean associates aren't perfect?
31/51- had the same issue at my old firm. A 15th year associate gave me an assignment to do and send "Should take 1-2 hours." I looked at the thing and conferred with the other associate on the case (I was a 1st year) who told me it would take at least 8-9 hours, which seemed right to me. Not having any respect for the 15th year toolbag, I went back to him and told him the other associate's assessment. His response? "She's probably right; try to keep it in that time frame."
This is all driven so the client see this memo and knows that Quinn is being proactive. We used to not have to turn in receipts for dinner unless it was over $100. We would go to a deli and buy cartons of cigarettes, bill it to the client and then sell them individually. The irony of it was that our client was a tobacco company....and we bought its competitor's product. Ha ha ha.
This memo is sound advice for partners and associates working within the current law firm model, but it's a good illustration of much that is wrong with that model--and with the billable hour in particular.
With the current model, law firms sell an hour of Attorney X's time, rather than selling a particular litigation or corporate "product"--a brief, or whatever the ultimate "deliverable" is. In essence, clients pay for the inputs rather than the outputs. This has a number of unpleasant consequences for clients, partners, and associates.
Since all a client is really paying for is staffing, the client will micromanage staffing. It's insane for these sorts of decisions to be so rigidly fixed in advance. Sometimes, you need to pull someone in or trade someone out of the team to efficiently get something done. Sometimes delegating to paralegals is more efficient (and cheaper!) than having an associate do a task. But the billable hour requires that all of these decisions, which are utterly ordinary micro-decisions made by people at every level of any organization, must be negotiated with the client in advance. It's a recipe for inefficiency and management disfunction.
In almost all cases, the manager has better information about the needs of the project at any given moment than the client or high-level partner. It would be much more efficient for clients to expect high-quality results, and to pay for the results. If a junior associate needs to enlist another person to help at a moment's notice, so be it--as long as the result is good. Without the billable hour, a firm makes more money by being more efficient in delivering better results. With the billable hour, the firm just sells hours.
100 has it about right.
of course there is always the "write this memo and don't spend more than three hours on it" when it takes two hours just to read the documents related to the memo. The reason for write-offs? The rates are too high and the client can't afford to pay it or will leave if you charge them too much. Sure, there are some associates who probably pad their hours a little, but I think most write-offs deal with client's inability (or hesitation) to pay - and the associate was just doing the number of hours he/she thought was necessary to not look like a dumbass in front of a partner.
126 - retarded much?
Yeah, allowing associates to delegate is a good thing -- good for the client and good for the firm.
I'm a first-year associate, and a partner once got upset with me for NOT delegating part of an assignment to a paralegal. He didn't want to bill his (admittedly, cheap) client at my rate for something a paralegal could have done at a lower rate. I hadn't really realized I could delegate, but I guess the partner just assumed I was bright enough that he didn't have to micromanage me.
I work mostly with partners, but we have an excellent third-year in the group who often delegates to first-years. He is good at delegating small chunks of his projects so that (1) we learn, thus becoming more useful to the group without requiring as much training from the partners, and (2) he saves time so he can handle all the other work coming in to his inbox, thus saving partners the effort of allocating projects among associates. As a junior associate himself, he's also particularly good at understanding what kinds of things are within a first-year's capabilities, so he lets us take on some things that certain partners are afraid to give us, but he won't send us out to screw things up when we aren't competent (which other partners will do). As 120 noted, it's all about whether the partner feels he can trust the associate. Most partners don't want to do any more hand-holding than necessary. And they shouldn't.
51 and 125 are awesome.
so basically plumbers have more market pwoer than biglaw firms??????? when my plumber comes over, he doesn't give me a "budget" or any of that crap. and when the toilet if overflowing, i don't micromanage what type of tools he uses to fix the thing.
the key is to work for a law firm that has at least as much marker power as a plumber -- one that only works on "bet the company" stuff (the equivalent of overflowing toilets).
I disagree that associates shouldn't delegate to paralegals, but it is so true that someone on the case needs to be paying attention to what is being assigned to whom, whether it's a partner or a senior associate. Otherwise you end up with an ever-ballooning team of people who each spend only a small portion of their time on a case.
This is why the billable hour needs to go away.
131 - Sounds like the ideal type of associate to work with / under.
What a joke. Old fart is having clients not pay. Wonder how tight his stinking ass will get when most of his clients don't pay. Hope he jumps out the window like all the rest of the hyper egotistical wealthy scum realize the game is up. Karma baby!
BITCH SPREAD THE BUTTCHEEKS SO JOHN QUINN CAN SMELL THE JUICY INSIDES!
133 - Too late for Comment of the Year 2008, too early for Comment of the Year 2009. (Too many grammar errors for the uptight know-it-alls that dominate ATL anyway.)
all i know is i am very, very grateful for the great training, high pay and, yes, LOVE given to me by the partners.
thank goodness for rainmakers.
I'm only a 3L so I don't know how this works, but if you bill 25 hours on something and the partner writes it off for the client, does it come off your total billables for the year for bonuses or whatever?
141,
If you are a 3L at a top schoo,l, no. If you are a 3L at a TTT, yes.
Big firm partners are the most fungible, overpaid, egotistical people on the planet. Their time is not valuable, but only high-priced. Their overestimated value of self-worth is reinforced by the brown-nosing and drooling that is engendered amongst the associates.
119 - Great post. You really nailed it.
141 - you a picklesniffer. Go back to Torts, you bumbling fucktard.
89 - boozing at work? You are a moron. Go work at fucking KFC, you junior varsity hack.
144 - wow, you are so helpful. I really appreciate all the time and attention you spent in answering my question. You have really improved the legal community and made your mother proud.
-141
141 - the answer to your question is that it depends upon the firm, and even if it doesn't affect your billable total, it might affect your bonus. See 61, 66, 67, 78, 81, 84, 92, 121.
*farts*
*shits*
aww yeah
133, Maybe you don't, but I always get a budget from a plumber before he does any work. So your entire analogy kind of stinks. (Get it? Overflowing toilet= stinks.)
141,
Seriously, please put a sock in it.
Ok, I'm just a paralegal, but isn't the legal profession supposed to be providing a service to clients? And wouldn't you think that archiving documents in a safe and reasonable manner would be considered just part of the service that we provide? I can't think of anything that invites Murphy's Law into the equation as much as just stuffing boxes without any organization and sending them to archives. I know -- I've spent a lot of time UNDOING such unorganized messes, and if you ask me, putting documents like that into archive is malpractice. Since when did practicing law become all about the bottom line and when did attorneys stop thinking of providing a service to their client? Sometimes I feel like I'm working at McDonald's.
145, you are a crybaby. Eat a dick.
Regards,
144, and everyone else at ATL that also hates you
@144 Your mother's an astronaut
i want out.
This has to be the most asinine memo ever - but at least it was directed to partners. His advice regarding delegating is ridiculous. Mid level attorneys delegate to juniors What's the problem with that? And as for clients - if you are a client who whines about the bill you receive from your top NYC firm, FIND SOMEONE ELSE TO DO YOUR WORK. If you can't afford the best, don't hire them. There are lots of good lawyers who can do most of your work at a much more minimal price. Save the NYC folks for your complex transactions.
150, keeping matter docs together is very different from indexing/organizing files, especially when matter concludes and files from several different attys are consolidated. Shame that you don't work at my firm - you actually seem to care about your work and I tend to keep my files somewhat organized so that when matter ends, usually just a matter of adding remnant files, finalizing list and shipping to storage.
Being ordered not to delegate? I greatly look forward to the slap down that will result from this in the form of court sanctions for failure to meet deadlines and failures to cite controlling authority. Perhaps QE doesn't care about these sorts of things.
Mr Quinn, what is the billing code for writing pointless memos?
*** BREAKING NEWS ***
Quinn Emanuel is in the middle of conducting stealth layoffs. A number of attorneys, mostly midlevels, have been asked to leave. Can confirm for New York, Los Angeles. Can't confirm for San Francisco, Silicon Valley.
The firm is spacing these dismissals out over December and January to cover its tracks. Not portrayed as performance related however.
*** BREAKING NEWS ***
158 - for real? Can anyone else confirm??
Quinn are one of the meanest firms around when it comes to cash. They will stoop to any level to avoid paying bills. Ask any legal recruiter.
Why the zero instead of the letter "o" in the word "MEMO" (or, rather, "MEM0") in the title? Is that a really subtle quinn emanuel reference?