"Staff Attorney"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Document review as it once was no longer exits. The technology is so advanced that those never ending, year long reviews with rooms full of attorneys rarely exist anymore. The staff attorneys used to implement the technology are highly specialized. Of course there is some review happening but firms are after attorneys who know about the technology and know about cutting cost to their clients.

Does anyone else remember reading the firsthand accounts from toiletlaw on jdunderground?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BIG law attorneys -- what do staff attorneys do? Are they associates who aren't on a partner track?

TIA, I've only worked in the government and am looking at positions with private firms.

The last thing you want to be is a staff attorney. They primarily do document review (e-discovery) work. They get zero respect in their firms and are the first to be let go when things get slow. They are glorified paralegals. They are definitely not associates who are not on partnership track – they are much lower than that on the totem pole. It’s a terrible job and you don’t want it.

This is not always true. (Mostly yes, but not always.) What is the practice area, OP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm, but usually they focus on e-discovery. Sometimes they just do document coding, but often they manage contract attorney reviews, prepare priv logs, do custodian interviews, and draft summaries of documents. It’s not a great job if the biglaw associate/partner track is open to you, but if it’s not, then being a staff attorney can be a decent outcome. A lot of them earn six figures, sometimes close to $200k depending on how useful they are, and the work is relatively easy.

The pay is fine but to be frank you will be disrespected and viewed as "beneath" associates even though you are older.

Some people don't care.

Raising my hand! I was a staff attorney and worked 20-30 hours per week, which was ideal with young kids, one with some special needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm, but usually they focus on e-discovery. Sometimes they just do document coding, but often they manage contract attorney reviews, prepare priv logs, do custodian interviews, and draft summaries of documents. It’s not a great job if the biglaw associate/partner track is open to you, but if it’s not, then being a staff attorney can be a decent outcome. A lot of them earn six figures, sometimes close to $200k depending on how useful they are, and the work is relatively easy.

Is PP a staff attorney. The work may or not be easy. Does OP have any legal tech experience?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm, but usually they focus on e-discovery. Sometimes they just do document coding, but often they manage contract attorney reviews, prepare priv logs, do custodian interviews, and draft summaries of documents. It’s not a great job if the biglaw associate/partner track is open to you, but if it’s not, then being a staff attorney can be a decent outcome. A lot of them earn six figures, sometimes close to $200k depending on how useful they are, and the work is relatively easy.

The pay is fine but to be frank you will be disrespected and viewed as "beneath" associates even though you are older.

Some people don't care.

Raising my hand! I was a staff attorney and worked 20-30 hours per week, which was ideal with young kids, one with some special needs.

I would - no joke - be more interested in the Staff Attorney position than being an associate and having my time owned by the partners, even if that meant a 120k salary instead of 250k+++.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the firm, but usually they focus on e-discovery. Sometimes they just do document coding, but often they manage contract attorney reviews, prepare priv logs, do custodian interviews, and draft summaries of documents. It’s not a great job if the biglaw associate/partner track is open to you, but if it’s not, then being a staff attorney can be a decent outcome. A lot of them earn six figures, sometimes close to $200k depending on how useful they are, and the work is relatively easy.

The pay is fine but to be frank you will be disrespected and viewed as "beneath" associates even though you are older.

Some people don't care.

Raising my hand! I was a staff attorney and worked 20-30 hours per week, which was ideal with young kids, one with some special needs.

I would - no joke - be more interested in the Staff Attorney position than being an associate and having my time owned by the partners, even if that meant a 120k salary instead of 250k+++.

Back in the day, staff attorneys made $22 an hour. I'd be interested to know what these 20-30 hour a week staff attorney jobs make now. I doubt they make $120k.

[Anonymous]

Back in the day, staff attorneys made $22 an hour. I'd be interested to know what these 20-30 hour a week staff attorney jobs make now. I doubt they make $120k.

My firm bills out staff attorneys at ~$400-$500 an hour. I have no idea what their salaries are. Let’s assume they bill 1500 hours a year. Applying the 1/3 rule (1/3 overhead; 1/3 profits to firm; 1/3 salary) my guess would be a fair salary is $225k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back in the day, staff attorneys made $22 an hour. I'd be interested to know what these 20-30 hour a week staff attorney jobs make now. I doubt they make $120k.

My firm bills out staff attorneys at ~$400-$500 an hour. I have no idea what their salaries are. Let’s assume they bill 1500 hours a year. Applying the 1/3 rule (1/3 overhead; 1/3 profits to firm; 1/3 salary) my guess would be a fair salary is $225k.

I think you're delusional if you think the firm is going to share the same 1/3 with staff attorneys that they share with profit and non-profit partners.

We have some kind of e-diligence group in our firm, and they bill out in that same rate (300-500) and i know nothing about them except that the firm thinks they are a highly profitable cash cow. Meaning, the firm makes as much or more per hour off those attorneys than it makes per hour off your typical associate. If they're not making as much off these lawyers as first years, teh firm isn't going to put the effort into running this program.

If the firm is making $250/hour off a typical 1st year associate (billing at $750/hr), then the math has to work that they're making at least $250/hr on the staff attorneys. For the staff attorneys billing $400k, i'm sure the firm needs at least $100 for overhead (compared to $250 overhead for associates), leaving $50/hour for the attorney. At 1500 a year, that's $75k.