Convalescent Leave at Law Firm

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should also never be within just a few hours of your billable requirement such that this would be an issue. People who just tick the box are first on the pile for layoffs. I always made sure to go at least 100 hours over.

Also, based on the initial post, OP apparently could have hit her hours, but chose not to. ("I thought that these were real days of “paid leave” and didn’t make-up the hours with other work.") That is *always* notices, and those kind of do the minimum associates rarely have long careers.

Such a weird way for her to think? Not every day is 8 hours billable is it? Some days you have firm business, or pro bono work or something right? Those days would be less billable.

I mean billable means submitted to the client, so this would be 3 days the firm is paying salary and the income that would have been those billable to client, which is a huge number.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here: Phew, it turns out my evaluator didn’t know the policy and actually the bereavement leave counts as billable hours. My lessons here are that at a law firm you shouldn’t assume the partners know the policies and you need to clarify everything in writing.

I know I am posting anonymously to a message board so snark comes with the territory, but why does everyone here blame the poster (or her generation)?!?! I think it’s entirely reasonable to understand “treated as time worked” means what it says. It turns out I was right.

Oh that's great news - glad to hear it. People blame the poster because (1) there's a lot of judgey people here, and (2) they feel like if they can figure out what someone else did wrong it insulates them from ever making a mistake or getting hurt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

This is why the job is tough. I didn’t find the work that difficult and I actually enjoyed my practice area. But billing time as the only metric that really matters means the only thing that really matters is your time. That is all they care about. Which is understandable given how they compensate. For many people, it isn’t worth it, especially once you have kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here: Phew, it turns out my evaluator didn’t know the policy and actually the bereavement leave counts as billable hours. My lessons here are that at a law firm you shouldn’t assume the partners know the policies and you need to clarify everything in writing.

I know I am posting anonymously to a message board so snark comes with the territory, but why does everyone here blame the poster (or her generation)?!?! I think it’s entirely reasonable to understand “treated as time worked” means what it says. It turns out I was right.

Oh that's great news - glad to hear it. People blame the poster because (1) there's a lot of judgey people here, and (2) they feel like if they can figure out what someone else did wrong it insulates them from ever making a mistake or getting hurt

That makes no sense. It isn’t billable work. At the end of the day, that is all big firms care about. The amount you bill that they can collect. The end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

1800 hours a year, over 48 weeks, is about 37 hrs a week. If you are efficient that should be easy to hit, and keep you to a 50 hour work week.

They don’t care about kids, or sleep, or grandparents (and a grandparent dying is such a normal event, you would have had very little recourse — no one cared when my mom died in her 50s, and I work in a far more family friendly corp).

Yea, most big law partners have a SAH partner; it sounds like yours isn’t pulling their weight at home so you probably should look for other employment, that is fairly common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

I was a mom in BigLaw with two little kids (ages 6 months- 4.5 years old) and routinely billed 2300 hours a year. It wasn't fun, but it's absolutely possible to bill more than 1800 or 1900 hours.

But you were an associate right, so had no demands from juniors, BD work, etc? You just had your piles of work from partner and plowed through, almost every hour at work billable? Still hard with 47 hr needed to be billable, hats off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, billable hour requirement doesn’t change unless there is a formal change to your work schedule (you go 80% or have maternity leave). Sick days, funerals, vacation. Billable requirement is the same.

OP here: If that is true, in what sense is this “paid time off”? I checked the written policy and it says bereavement leave is paid time off “treated as time worked.” I supposed it doesn’t says “billable time worked,” but then what is the point of it? The policy has different amounts of time for different relatives. What is the point if the hours requirement is the same???

You got paid; you just didn't get credit for billable hours you didn't bill.

If you had a formal arrangement to work part-time, your eligibility for a bonus likely would be based on pro-rated hours that reflect an adjusted schedule.

But if you missed a billable hours target because of taking unscheduled bereavement leave, those are the breaks. If you make a fuss about it, you'll just come across as a schmuck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

1800 hours a year, over 48 weeks, is about 37 hrs a week. If you are efficient that should be easy to hit, and keep you to a 50 hour work week.

They don’t care about kids, or sleep, or grandparents (and a grandparent dying is such a normal event, you would have had very little recourse — no one cared when my mom died in her 50s, and I work in a far more family friendly corp).

Yea, most big law partners have a SAH partner; it sounds like yours isn’t pulling their weight at home so you probably should look for other employment, that is fairly common.

Billable hours expectation was 1950 three years ago.

~80% billable efficiency (37/50) is high for non-litigation/non-deal practice groups.

Some of us actually want to see our kids. I knew a Big Law partner who bragged she never put her kids to bed the nannies did. Another set of Big Law parents I know ship their three kids to their grandparents for weeks at a time whenever they can..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here: Phew, it turns out my evaluator didn’t know the policy and actually the bereavement leave counts as billable hours. My lessons here are that at a law firm you shouldn’t assume the partners know the policies and you need to clarify everything in writing.

I know I am posting anonymously to a message board so snark comes with the territory, but why does everyone here blame the poster (or her generation)?!?! I think it’s entirely reasonable to understand “treated as time worked” means what it says. It turns out I was right.

Oh that's great news - glad to hear it. People blame the poster because (1) there's a lot of judgey people here, and (2) they feel like if they can figure out what someone else did wrong it insulates them from ever making a mistake or getting hurt

OK; you're lucky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

Look, I’m trying to help you. Being defensive won’t help your situation. I never asked anyone to look up to me. This is how I did it. I delayed having children to my late 30s. I worked my @ss off and was the highest billing associate in my entire firm one year. I stayed late, I worked weekends, and if something came up on vacation I handled it. IT’S THE JOB. You are getting paid a premium. If you want better hours go to the fed or inhouse (not being snarky). I was very aware of what my billable and receivables were every week. I kept track (my firm was super transparent). They also told us what our overhead was and how we didn’t turn a profit for them until we collected over our overhead.

It’s a business. It’s the real world. Life’s not fair. I wish it were easier. I get no joy out of younger associates having to make the same sacrifices. But I want young women to have better business sense and a better grasp of their employment situation. I wish the best for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

Look, I’m trying to help you. Being defensive won’t help your situation. I never asked anyone to look up to me. This is how I did it. I delayed having children to my late 30s. I worked my @ss off and was the highest billing associate in my entire firm one year. I stayed late, I worked weekends, and if something came up on vacation I handled it. IT’S THE JOB. You are getting paid a premium. If you want better hours go to the fed or inhouse (not being snarky). I was very aware of what my billable and receivables were every week. I kept track (my firm was super transparent). They also told us what our overhead was and how we didn’t turn a profit for them until we collected over our overhead.

It’s a business. It’s the real world. Life’s not fair. I wish it were easier. I get no joy out of younger associates having to make the same sacrifices. But I want young women to have better business sense and a better grasp of their employment situation. I wish the best for you.

High five. Transparency is great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

1800 hours a year, over 48 weeks, is about 37 hrs a week. If you are efficient that should be easy to hit, and keep you to a 50 hour work week.

They don’t care about kids, or sleep, or grandparents (and a grandparent dying is such a normal event, you would have had very little recourse — no one cared when my mom died in her 50s, and I work in a far more family friendly corp).

Yea, most big law partners have a SAH partner; it sounds like yours isn’t pulling their weight at home so you probably should look for other employment, that is fairly common.

PP here (who wrote “serious question”) - I don’t disagree with anything you said above. My spouse is a GS 15 and does about 50% at home. The problem is that most women are uncomfortable outsourcing all childcare to their spouse, in a way that men with SAH wives are not. A very wise (male) partner pointed this out to me very early on. Now that I have kids, I realize he’s right. But - importantly - I don’t think women’s attitudes are the problem here. Nobody should feel comfortable spending such little time with their kids, no matter how much money they make. So the entire biglaw model is unworkable (to the extent others agree with me - and I think many in my generation do). It’s sad because sure, I can and will leave, but I like the work and I’m very good at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

1800 hours a year, over 48 weeks, is about 37 hrs a week. If you are efficient that should be easy to hit, and keep you to a 50 hour work week.

They don’t care about kids, or sleep, or grandparents (and a grandparent dying is such a normal event, you would have had very little recourse — no one cared when my mom died in her 50s, and I work in a far more family friendly corp).

Yea, most big law partners have a SAH partner; it sounds like yours isn’t pulling their weight at home so you probably should look for other employment, that is fairly common.

PP here (who wrote “serious question”) - I don’t disagree with anything you said above. My spouse is a GS 15 and does about 50% at home. The problem is that most women are uncomfortable outsourcing all childcare to their spouse, in a way that men with SAH wives are not. A very wise (male) partner pointed this out to me very early on. Now that I have kids, I realize he’s right. But - importantly - I don’t think women’s attitudes are the problem here. Nobody should feel comfortable spending such little time with their kids, no matter how much money they make. So the entire biglaw model is unworkable (to the extent others agree with me - and I think many in my generation do). It’s sad because sure, I can and will leave, but I like the work and I’m very good at it.

I don’t think it is sad. I liked the work and was good at it. I left. The ones who stayed were willing to put more time in to the job. Good for them. We all have choices. Make them according to how you want your life to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

Look, I’m trying to help you. Being defensive won’t help your situation. I never asked anyone to look up to me. This is how I did it. I delayed having children to my late 30s. I worked my @ss off and was the highest billing associate in my entire firm one year. I stayed late, I worked weekends, and if something came up on vacation I handled it. IT’S THE JOB. You are getting paid a premium. If you want better hours go to the fed or inhouse (not being snarky). I was very aware of what my billable and receivables were every week. I kept track (my firm was super transparent). They also told us what our overhead was and how we didn’t turn a profit for them until we collected over our overhead.

It’s a business. It’s the real world. Life’s not fair. I wish it were easier. I get no joy out of younger associates having to make the same sacrifices. But I want young women to have better business sense and a better grasp of their employment situation. I wish the best for you.

I appreciate this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is showing to me a serious generational gap. Maybe the entire concept of how billable hours, bonuses, etc are calculated wasn't fully explained but it sounds like OP made many false assumptions on how law firms/corporate world/ jobs in general work.

If you miss time, whether it is for vacation, sick days, bereavement, need PTO because it's a snow day and your kid's school is closed, you are expected to make up that time/work. It never would have crossed my mind that "Paid time off" = readjustment of my billable hours requirement. For ex. if billable hrs requirement is 1800 billable, and I took 80 hours vacation (2 weeks) and 40 hours of sick days (5 days over the year), my billable requirement doesn't suddenly get reduced by 120 hours to 1680. Huh? I have to make up that time, whether I work more billable some days, on weekends, or even *gasp* work some on vacation.

On my team, the younger/20 something associates are having a hard time with this sinking in and don't think this is "fair" when it comes to vacation (we have one of those you can take as much vacation as you want as long as your work gets done policies). But that's the way it is.

OP chose not to meet his/her billable REQUIREMENT (which honestly is the minimum, not an exception). Usually bonuses are based on billing over the minimum. OP has a lot to learn. Learn it, work harder, better luck in 2024. Sorry about your grandmother.

Serious question - when do you want us to make up that time? Because for parents of young children, it’s gotta come out of either sleep or childcare. We are already sleeping the bare minimum and seeing our kids max 2 hours a day. I know, it’s not your problem - that’s the whole point of your post. But see why young people (women especially) think making partner is for suckers? We don’t look up to you.

1800 hours a year, over 48 weeks, is about 37 hrs a week. If you are efficient that should be easy to hit, and keep you to a 50 hour work week.

They don’t care about kids, or sleep, or grandparents (and a grandparent dying is such a normal event, you would have had very little recourse — no one cared when my mom died in her 50s, and I work in a far more family friendly corp).

Yea, most big law partners have a SAH partner; it sounds like yours isn’t pulling their weight at home so you probably should look for other employment, that is fairly common.

PP here (who wrote “serious question”) - I don’t disagree with anything you said above. My spouse is a GS 15 and does about 50% at home. The problem is that most women are uncomfortable outsourcing all childcare to their spouse, in a way that men with SAH wives are not. A very wise (male) partner pointed this out to me very early on. Now that I have kids, I realize he’s right. But - importantly - I don’t think women’s attitudes are the problem here. Nobody should feel comfortable spending such little time with their kids, no matter how much money they make. So the entire biglaw model is unworkable (to the extent others agree with me - and I think many in my generation do). It’s sad because sure, I can and will leave, but I like the work and I’m very good at it.

Most men with Big Jobs are very comfortable spending little time with their kids.