Boomer outside counsel who insists on calling me incessantly, basically demanding I call him back

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op here checking in after a day or two. curious what deputy GC and big law guy would do.

So I called him back yesterday and left a message, saying essentially 'thanks for checking in with me, but we are good, i'll reach out with updates, and fyi i'm in team meetings all day today, and trying to close several other deals before FYE (true) so things are VERY busy, but happy holidays, Bob! Thanks for everything!'

He called back immediately- I was in team meetings all afternoon for real so I didn't pick up and then he called AGAIN this AM. Both times sounding terse, and not providing any detail on why we was calling, just saying 'call me back Larla'.

Huh? I do think some cognitive decline may be at play, which also excuses some of his defensiveness over substantive work and some of his other inappropriate behaviors/comments, but he's also just damned rude IMO. I am not sure why he thinks he can dictate when we speak. He is the relationship partner so there is no one else for me to call, I just have to deal and get through this period. The business knows there is an issue, and we are watching our bills (I review, but the spend comes out of a different department). It is clear that no one wants a blow up though...

Well, I'm Biglaw Guy I guess, and honestly I'm at a loss. It's not normal behavior for a relationship manager. How old is he, really? You haven't said. And he's not saying in his follow-up calls what exactly he's calling about? Just "call me back?" That's odd too because nothing sounds open ended.

I'd ignore the calls for now, I guess, and maybe consider reaching out to one of the more junior lawyers on his team at his firm and asking them if he's ok and for their thoughts on next steps? I would try to do this in a "concerned" way, not in an "annoyed" way. Plant the seed with the law firm and see what grows, I guess.

No law firm wants an 80 year old guy on a cognitive decline managing a major client. You're doing the firm a favor. Just don't be a dick about it. Remember: you're a team.

Op here. Thanks for chiming in again. It’s a weird situation. I inherited this relationship- he’s been doing these type of deals with my co for years- and unfortunately there is never a junior associate involved. Which is problematic too. There was one for awhile on my watch - a female POC - but he marginalized her and then made rude comments about her behind her back (as I mentioned earlier, there’s misogyny there). Fwiw I debate whether using just one lawyer is all bad (more efficient and lower fees to work with just one senior partner, rather than a partner plus a junior team in training and their billables) but then there’s no bench and you can end up here.

Anyway, no one else to tell, I have to just try to be as graceful as possible but it’s stupidly taking up more time in my brain than it should. He did finally email yesterday and this time he has something slightly substantive to ask about- he is looking for payment by FYE on his November bills. A fair request but we’ve already discussed it with him, I’ve approved his bills, so has the business and, we’ve reached out to accounts payable to expedite (we are usually net 60). He knows all this and could have just emailed with a status update question. His November bills are relatively tiny fwiw

This makes it seem like he needs the money to settle up with his firm before the end of the year. I would not necessarily use just one lawyer or even just one firm. We use several firms and don't rely on one person.

Biglaw Guy again. No it doesn't -- not at all. Big Law lawyers are under tremendous pressure by firm management at virtually all firms to collect on all of their outstanding bills by the end of the fiscal year and regardless of their size so the firm can hit their budget. It's a race to the finish line in every firm. This is not unusual in the slightest. OP, you did the guy a solid by expediting payment and I hope he appreciates it. And now that he knows it's coming he might actually stop bothering you for a while!

How is what you said different from what PP said? It sounds like he's desperate to have the money in by the end of the year, whether from firm pressure or because he needs the money. Ideally he would be bothering an administrator about this and not the GC.

[Anonymous]

This sounds annoying. Keep track of the times he's bothering you about nothing and make sure it's not billed. If it is, strike through it. If you want to see it changed, you need to be willing to do something about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry. I'm new to what Big Law is. So, basically old men can harass young women with stupid, irrelevant, and sometimes toxic emails and calls - and these old men get paid per 10 minutes for their harassment and annoyance?

Is this correct? This is what Big Law is?

And I’ll snipe more and say you can charge 1k/hour and not understand accounting 101

Big Law is very expensive legal counsel. 1k hr/can equal a $300 bill since he is probably putting down 18 minutes (6 minute increments) of follow up for each time he reaches out.

.1 account review
.1 phone call with voice memo
.1 email follow up

= .3 billable hours = $300 every week doing absolutely nothing other than following up on outstanding invoice. Maybe more than that if he reviews client matters. It's a crock.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry. I'm new to what Big Law is. So, basically old men can harass young women with stupid, irrelevant, and sometimes toxic emails and calls - and these old men get paid per 10 minutes for their harassment and annoyance?

Is this correct? This is what Big Law is?

Wow. You really want to play the victim role here, OP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's sexist and stupid, and his age does have something to do with it, unfortunately.

Don't pick up. Your time and mental health are your priority. You can respond by email and write in the email that you prefer to communicate via this method.

Please do whatever it takes to not use him again for another project.

Yes, unfortunately age is part of it. He likely grew up at a time when there were no women lawyers at firms. Women were secretaries only. I'm sure he has come a long way, but it does affect one's perception, unintended or not.

That just is impossible for any Boomer lawyer. We have retired female partners from my firm who are in their 70s -- it's not like there weren't women at law firms in the 1980s and 1990s! This is not a new thing. It's also very, very rare for even older lawyers not to understand how email works. I have literally only one opposing counsel that is this way, and it's not due to his age -- it's becasue he's incompetent and also a little shady, so doesn't want things in writing.
Do you review the bills, or is that your inhouse GC? If it's your inhouse GC, let him or her know that this is going on, and that you don't think you should be paying for all these unnecessary and lengthy calls. But generally speaking, I don't see how he can force you to do this. Just don't answer his calls and send an email. Or set a quick 15 minute call for updates bimonthly, and then tell him "I'm sorry -- I need to run to my next meeting." Or just say "Thanks for the update, Bill, This call is running long and I'll need to jump off now, but please email me if there's anything I need to know."

If he's close to 80- which he probably is- then he probably went to law school in the early 70s, and no, there were not many (if any) women partners or really many women lawyers at all. Even when I started practicing in the 2000s, there were still far more many male partners than women partners.

Why 80?

Boomers were born post WW2.

They are 70 and 80 year old senior citizens.

Pelosi, Trump, Schumer, Elizabeth Warren... All boomers.

The youngest boomers are in their 60s (Barack and Michelle Obama) parents of the millennials and just starting to have grandchildren. Nancy Pelosi is not a boomer (born in 1940) nor is Trump technically since he was born before the second half of 1946, the official start of the baby boom. Schumer and Warren are boomers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op here checking in after a day or two. curious what deputy GC and big law guy would do.

So I called him back yesterday and left a message, saying essentially 'thanks for checking in with me, but we are good, i'll reach out with updates, and fyi i'm in team meetings all day today, and trying to close several other deals before FYE (true) so things are VERY busy, but happy holidays, Bob! Thanks for everything!'

He called back immediately- I was in team meetings all afternoon for real so I didn't pick up and then he called AGAIN this AM. Both times sounding terse, and not providing any detail on why we was calling, just saying 'call me back Larla'.

Huh? I do think some cognitive decline may be at play, which also excuses some of his defensiveness over substantive work and some of his other inappropriate behaviors/comments, but he's also just damned rude IMO. I am not sure why he thinks he can dictate when we speak. He is the relationship partner so there is no one else for me to call, I just have to deal and get through this period. The business knows there is an issue, and we are watching our bills (I review, but the spend comes out of a different department). It is clear that no one wants a blow up though...

Well, I'm Biglaw Guy I guess, and honestly I'm at a loss. It's not normal behavior for a relationship manager. How old is he, really? You haven't said. And he's not saying in his follow-up calls what exactly he's calling about? Just "call me back?" That's odd too because nothing sounds open ended.

I'd ignore the calls for now, I guess, and maybe consider reaching out to one of the more junior lawyers on his team at his firm and asking them if he's ok and for their thoughts on next steps? I would try to do this in a "concerned" way, not in an "annoyed" way. Plant the seed with the law firm and see what grows, I guess.

No law firm wants an 80 year old guy on a cognitive decline managing a major client. You're doing the firm a favor. Just don't be a dick about it. Remember: you're a team.

Op here. Thanks for chiming in again. It’s a weird situation. I inherited this relationship- he’s been doing these type of deals with my co for years- and unfortunately there is never a junior associate involved. Which is problematic too. There was one for awhile on my watch - a female POC - but he marginalized her and then made rude comments about her behind her back (as I mentioned earlier, there’s misogyny there). Fwiw I debate whether using just one lawyer is all bad (more efficient and lower fees to work with just one senior partner, rather than a partner plus a junior team in training and their billables) but then there’s no bench and you can end up here.

Anyway, no one else to tell, I have to just try to be as graceful as possible but it’s stupidly taking up more time in my brain than it should. He did finally email yesterday and this time he has something slightly substantive to ask about- he is looking for payment by FYE on his November bills. A fair request but we’ve already discussed it with him, I’ve approved his bills, so has the business and, we’ve reached out to accounts payable to expedite (we are usually net 60). He knows all this and could have just emailed with a status update question. His November bills are relatively tiny fwiw

This makes it seem like he needs the money to settle up with his firm before the end of the year. I would not necessarily use just one lawyer or even just one firm. We use several firms and don't rely on one person.

Biglaw Guy again. No it doesn't -- not at all. Big Law lawyers are under tremendous pressure by firm management at virtually all firms to collect on all of their outstanding bills by the end of the fiscal year and regardless of their size so the firm can hit their budget. It's a race to the finish line in every firm. This is not unusual in the slightest. OP, you did the guy a solid by expediting payment and I hope he appreciates it. And now that he knows it's coming he might actually stop bothering you for a while!

Op again. I posted before I saw this. Why is it such a big push? You can book the revenue and then have an a/r. This is a tiny bill fwiw.

That's not how Big Law operates. If the money doesn't come in by the end of the fiscal year it's not counted in the firm's revenue for the year and therefore can't be included in calculating profits per partner. Any A/Rs aren't counted as revenue until the year they're received.

It also doesn't matter how "tiny" the bill is. As my firm's management is quick to say, no bill is too small not to collect.

Hmmm as I said…. Lawyers are not good with accounting. Cash collection is not the same as revenue recognition. I’m 99.99 % sure your accounting is accrual based so yes, it does count as revenue. But you are probably right in terms of payout comp. An a/r won’t be factored in for cash payouts this year. So I see why he/the firm cares, but we have net 60 terms so there’s not much I can do. The business/me approved it in legal tracker immediately so it went on to the next step and that’s as far as I can take it.

You're an in house lawyer, right? Did you start at a law firm? Because, I have to tell you, you really don't seem to understand how a law firm works.

Law firms do not practice accrual accounting . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op here checking in after a day or two. curious what deputy GC and big law guy would do.

So I called him back yesterday and left a message, saying essentially 'thanks for checking in with me, but we are good, i'll reach out with updates, and fyi i'm in team meetings all day today, and trying to close several other deals before FYE (true) so things are VERY busy, but happy holidays, Bob! Thanks for everything!'

He called back immediately- I was in team meetings all afternoon for real so I didn't pick up and then he called AGAIN this AM. Both times sounding terse, and not providing any detail on why we was calling, just saying 'call me back Larla'.

Huh? I do think some cognitive decline may be at play, which also excuses some of his defensiveness over substantive work and some of his other inappropriate behaviors/comments, but he's also just damned rude IMO. I am not sure why he thinks he can dictate when we speak. He is the relationship partner so there is no one else for me to call, I just have to deal and get through this period. The business knows there is an issue, and we are watching our bills (I review, but the spend comes out of a different department). It is clear that no one wants a blow up though...

Well, I'm Biglaw Guy I guess, and honestly I'm at a loss. It's not normal behavior for a relationship manager. How old is he, really? You haven't said. And he's not saying in his follow-up calls what exactly he's calling about? Just "call me back?" That's odd too because nothing sounds open ended.

I'd ignore the calls for now, I guess, and maybe consider reaching out to one of the more junior lawyers on his team at his firm and asking them if he's ok and for their thoughts on next steps? I would try to do this in a "concerned" way, not in an "annoyed" way. Plant the seed with the law firm and see what grows, I guess.

No law firm wants an 80 year old guy on a cognitive decline managing a major client. You're doing the firm a favor. Just don't be a dick about it. Remember: you're a team.

Op here. Thanks for chiming in again. It’s a weird situation. I inherited this relationship- he’s been doing these type of deals with my co for years- and unfortunately there is never a junior associate involved. Which is problematic too. There was one for awhile on my watch - a female POC - but he marginalized her and then made rude comments about her behind her back (as I mentioned earlier, there’s misogyny there). Fwiw I debate whether using just one lawyer is all bad (more efficient and lower fees to work with just one senior partner, rather than a partner plus a junior team in training and their billables) but then there’s no bench and you can end up here.

Anyway, no one else to tell, I have to just try to be as graceful as possible but it’s stupidly taking up more time in my brain than it should. He did finally email yesterday and this time he has something slightly substantive to ask about- he is looking for payment by FYE on his November bills. A fair request but we’ve already discussed it with him, I’ve approved his bills, so has the business and, we’ve reached out to accounts payable to expedite (we are usually net 60). He knows all this and could have just emailed with a status update question. His November bills are relatively tiny fwiw

This makes it seem like he needs the money to settle up with his firm before the end of the year. I would not necessarily use just one lawyer or even just one firm. We use several firms and don't rely on one person.

Biglaw Guy again. No it doesn't -- not at all. Big Law lawyers are under tremendous pressure by firm management at virtually all firms to collect on all of their outstanding bills by the end of the fiscal year and regardless of their size so the firm can hit their budget. It's a race to the finish line in every firm. This is not unusual in the slightest. OP, you did the guy a solid by expediting payment and I hope he appreciates it. And now that he knows it's coming he might actually stop bothering you for a while!

How is what you said different from what PP said? It sounds like he's desperate to have the money in by the end of the year, whether from firm pressure or because he needs the money. Ideally he would be bothering an administrator about this and not the GC.

OP isn't the GC. And, no, outside counsel doesn't typically go to a client's "administrator" to get their bills paid. They go to the in house counsel who they work with.

Are you with Big Law?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry. I'm new to what Big Law is. So, basically old men can harass young women with stupid, irrelevant, and sometimes toxic emails and calls - and these old men get paid per 10 minutes for their harassment and annoyance?

Is this correct? This is what Big Law is?

And I’ll snipe more and say you can charge 1k/hour and not understand accounting 101

Big Law is very expensive legal counsel. 1k hr/can equal a $300 bill since he is probably putting down 18 minutes (6 minute increments) of follow up for each time he reaches out.

.1 account review
.1 phone call with voice memo
.1 email follow up

= .3 billable hours = $300 every week doing absolutely nothing other than following up on outstanding invoice. Maybe more than that if he reviews client matters. It's a crock.

Big Law lawyers don't bill for collecting bills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry. I'm new to what Big Law is. So, basically old men can harass young women with stupid, irrelevant, and sometimes toxic emails and calls - and these old men get paid per 10 minutes for their harassment and annoyance?

Is this correct? This is what Big Law is?

And I’ll snipe more and say you can charge 1k/hour and not understand accounting 101

Big Law is very expensive legal counsel. 1k hr/can equal a $300 bill since he is probably putting down 18 minutes (6 minute increments) of follow up for each time he reaches out.

.1 account review
.1 phone call with voice memo
.1 email follow up

= .3 billable hours = $300 every week doing absolutely nothing other than following up on outstanding invoice. Maybe more than that if he reviews client matters. It's a crock.

Big Law lawyers don't bill for collecting bills.

Sure they don't. They code it as other client matters and move forward

[Anonymous]

OP look over the bills and strike all the extraneous calls, he may be billing every Larla call me. Keep records.

For January send him a letter by email reiterating guidelines: you say when and what he works on, you tell him when work is needed, communication is by email not telephone.