Billable Hours

From Biglaw to Boutique: Working from Home

By

Tom Wallerstein

“I am having a root canal this morning, so I’ll be working from home.”

Some attorneys use the expression “working from home” to mean that they are mostly taking the day off for one reason or another. In other words, they really mean that they are “not working.”

Other times, “working from home” really means “I’m still working, just not in the office.” I might do this, for example, to avoid a long commute or because I can better tackle my project at home, perhaps because my home will offer fewer distractions.

Assuming that “working from home” means that you still are working, albeit in a different physical location, should a firm care when or whether an attorney comes into the office, provided nothing time-sensitive needs to be accomplished that day?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “From Biglaw to Boutique: Working from Home”

30 Comments

Buying In: An Interview with an In-House Insider (Part 3)

By

Over the last two weeks, we have heard from an In-House Insider, an opinionated source of insight into Biglaw-client relations — see here, here, and below. As with the two prior installments, the only changes I made to the Insider’s words were those done to protect their identity, and Insider was given the opportunity to revise their points once I added the questions and commentary. Again, I thank Insider for the candid observations and thoughtful opinions on these core issues.

AP: How firms are viewed from a value perspective is often very difficult to gauge from the outside. What criteria do you use to determine if a firm is delivering services to your company appropriately from a billing perspective?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Buying In: An Interview with an In-House Insider (Part 3)”

6 Comments

Associate Bonus Watch: Orrick Charts A Steady Course

By

Law firm bonus announcements come in two waves. In November and December, the New York-centric firms announce their bonuses (after taking their cue from Cravath). In January and February, the West Coast and also nationally oriented firms announce their bonuses for the prior year.

So the 2012 bonus season isn’t over, even though we’re now two weeks into 2013. Yesterday, for example, brought bonus news from Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe.

Orrick is a leader is the brave new world of “merit-based compensation.” What are they up to now?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Associate Bonus Watch: Orrick Charts A Steady Course”

6 Comments

Buying In: An Interview with an In-House Insider (Part 2)

By

Last week I spoke with an In-House Insider, a Biglaw refugee turned in-house counsel. You can see what our Insider has to say about the state of Biglaw and client relations here and below.

As with the initial installment, the only changes I made to the Insider’s words were those done to protect their identity, and the Insider was given the opportunity to revise their points once I added the questions and commentary.

Again, I thank the Insider for the candid observations and thoughtful opinions on these core issues. Now, on to the discussion….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Buying In: An Interview with an In-House Insider (Part 2)”

6 Comments

Biglaw: Welcome to the New Normal

By

The grass isn’t quite this green in the ‘new normal.’

In a piece from last month, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wondered: Is Growth Over? One could very easily take this question, posed with respect to the broader economy, and apply it to the world of large law firms.

And what would the answer be? According to a client advisory just issued by Citi Private Bank and Hildebrandt Consulting, “Probably.”

Their analysis is gloomy, although guardedly so; we’re not talking about “the sky is falling” pronouncements. Let’s take a look at the specifics….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Biglaw: Welcome to the New Normal”

10 Comments

New Data on Hours, Billing Rates, and Corporate Legal Spending

By

What does 2013 hold for the world of large law firms? Let’s look into our crystal ball.

Actually, scratch that. Making predictions is a tricky business. Sometimes we’re right — like when we predicted robust bonuses out of Cravath, based on their large partner class — but sometimes we’re wrong.

For now, let’s keep our powder dry, and instead check out historical data about hours, billing rates, and corporate legal spending. Can we gain any insight into the future by looking back over the past?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “New Data on Hours, Billing Rates, and Corporate Legal Spending”

2 Comments

Non-Sequiturs: 01.08.13

By

* Everybody is entitled to a competent defense. It’ll make justice possible. I’m just so thankful I don’t have to defend people like this. [CNN International]

* In other terrible rape news, make no mistake, we need more people prosecuting rapists than we need defending the few falsely accused. [Slate]

* More news that fewer people are taking the LSAT. Somebody better tell Dean Lawrence Mitchell that it’s time to fire off another op-ed. Maybe he can tell people that getting a Case Western J.D. comes with a chance to enter a drawing to attempt a half-court shot for a million bucks. [Faculty Lounge]

* If you want to put a billable hours requirement on your bonuses, things like this are bound to happen. [The Volokh Conspiracy]

* Law graduate makes fun of “sloppy” recruiters. I hope his loan officer doesn’t end up making fun of a sloppy payment schedule. [Legal Cheek]

* Here’s a real fishy case. [Winston-Salem Journal]

* Wait, so if you try to pull off Denzel Washington stuff in a real cockpit it doesn’t turn out so good? [Legal Blog Watch]

* We got this spam today too. And yes, it was annoying. [Associate's Mind]

0 Comments

Buying In: An Interview with an In-House Insider (Part 1)

By

Now that bonuses, year-end collections, and holiday parties are behind us, it is helpful to remind ourselves (early on in the new year) that it is (paying) clients that make everything possible for Biglaw firms. A few months ago, I was the fortunate recipient of some illuminating correspondence from a Biglaw refugee turned in-house counsel, offering a “customer’s” take on what is both right and wrong with the “current law firm service delivery model.” Because I truly believe in the importance of this column offering an anonymous outlet for informed discussion of Biglaw-related topics (see my posts detailing my conversations with Old School Partner and Jeffrey Lowe), I offered to make my correspondent the resident In-House Insider.

Agreement was not long in coming, together with yet more astute observations about Biglaw. For our initial “discussion,” I have (similarly to how I handled the Lowe interview) added questions and some brief commentary to our Insider’s points, and share this written interview with you. The only changes I made to the Insider’s words were related to their identity, and the Insider was given the opportunity to revise their responses once I added the questions and commentary. I hope we can continue to benefit from this In-House Insider’s perspective in the future. For now, I definitely appreciate when I get contacted by Biglaw-related personalities looking to discuss the issues raised in my column, and share their thoughts with this audience. Without further ado….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Buying In: An Interview with an In-House Insider (Part 1)”

2 Comments

Non-Sequiturs: 01.04.13

By

Don’t be a sucker!

* According to the Second Circuit, the long arm of the law doesn’t extend to the middle finger. You can’t just go around arresting dudes for flipping you the bird. [U.S. Second Circuit / FindLaw]

* President Obama jetted off to Hawaii before he could sign the fiscal cliff bill, so he ordered it be signed by autopen. Of course, people are losing their minds over it. [Volokh Conspiracy]

* Should we scrap the Constitution? Georgetown Law professor Louis Seidman continues to advocate for constitutional disobedience in this epic ConLaw throwdown. [HuffPost Live]

* Don’t celebrate your increase in California bar passage points yet. The state bar changed its tune, and a 40% pass rate is the new standard. That shouldn’t be hard, eh TJSL? [California Bar Journal]

* One of our former columnists, Jay Shepherd, has a great way to calculate what your actual hourly rate should be, if you don’t mind working for just pennies a day. Most lawyers would mind. [jayshep]

* For the love of God, even Gawker knows that going to law school these days is a fool’s errand, or in their own words: “IT’S A SUCKER’S BET. A CLEAR SUCKER’S BET.” Come on, stop being suckers. :( [Gawker]

* If you’d like to hear Dean Lawrence Mitchell of NYT op-ed fame sound off on why there isn’t a lawyer oversupply problem, and why it isn’t his job to get law students jobs, we’ve got a video for you to watch….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Non-Sequiturs: 01.04.13″

5 Comments

New Punctuality Rules Give Law Firm A Totalitarian Feel

By

One of the nice things about being a Biglaw lawyer is that you’ve got some autonomy over your schedule. You know how much work you have to do, and you know when it’s due, and within those borders you can manage your own time. If you want to come in a little bit later and stay a little it later, so be it. If you want to come in super early… well, you’re probably still going to end up staying late because of some BS that happens at 4:30 p.m., but after you bill 100 hours in a week, you can probably take it really easy once your matter closes.

The point is, Biglaw lawyers have the expectation of being treated like adults when it comes to their own time management.

So it’s a little bit surprising that a Biglaw firm is treating associates in one office like little children who need to be present when attendance is taken….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “New Punctuality Rules Give Law Firm A Totalitarian Feel”

34 Comments
Page 3 of 161234567...16