Reply to Cannot do COVID anymore

Forum Index » General Parenting Discussion

Reply to "Cannot do COVID anymore"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

[b]Where do you work that billing 2,100 hours is considered working all the time?[/b][/quote]

Pre-pandemic I was billing 1700 or so, so it is a lot for me! And it sure feels like a lot on top of everything else. I mean, that doesn't count non-billables, so I'm working 60+ hours a week on top of childcare.[/quote]

[b]OP, don't feed that troll.  I don't work in law[/b] and I got the gist of what you were saying.  And you are doing a lot.

I agree with PPs that a lot of this would feel insanely hard even without COVID.  You are not getting enough sleep.  You are producing food for your baby.  You are doing everything.

My DH is a generally great guy, but he will not jump in and say "let me take care of XYZ!"  When our first kid was a baby, I made a list of everything I was doing--and I mean, everything, even if it was something that took me 30 seconds like paying a bill online.  I showed this to my DH and told him to pick half of the stuff.  This has not held--our kids are much older now and the needs are different--but he still makes dinners on weekends, does all of our laundry, handles yardwork, and does some other kid-related stuff.  It's not half of what I was doing, and that's why we have had a nanny when our kids were little and more recently have hired house cleaners.

The risk of having a nanny coming in and out of your home every day isn't zero, but if you can find someone you trust, it is reasonably low IMO.  However, it is also okay, as PPs have said, to share with your husband what he needs to do.  He should be taking the baby out for long walks, handling nap time, etc etc.  If he can't do it, outsource it.

Also, our house cleaners came back in June.  It really is okay and I think you need all the help you can get.  They stay out of the office; kids leave the house and hang out in the yard while they work.  There was a piece in the Post a couple months back where they asked all the "experts" (Fauci, etc) and I will tell you that every single one of them had their house cleaners coming in at least every 2 weeks.  [/quote]

Especially because you don't work in law, you shouldn't be so quick to call troll when you don't really know what you are talking about.  And that's not what a troll means, regardless.

1,700 billable hours a year is considered pretty light at a lot of firms, light enough that you wouldn't be in good standing at some.  2,100 is hardly notable at plenty of firm, and of course people factor in that you also have to do non-billable work.  That's not to say that OP isn't busy and doing a lot, both at work and on the home front.  But still, if she is at a decent size firm, it isn't a noteworthy amount.

And, lest you think the question is just mean, it makes a difference in terms of what I would advise.  If she is at a firm where 1,700 is normal and 2,100 is considered a lot, then she has more ability to try to dial it back at work some.  But, if she is at a true Biglaw firm where 1,700 is borderline unacceptable and 2,100 is pretty normal, it would be a lot harder for her to go to the firm to try to get a little bit of relief.[/quote]

Full-time employment is 2080 hours a year.  If op is billing out 2100, that means she's billing over a full-time week, plus she has more hours of non-billable time that she works.   The question was "Where do you work that billing 2,100 hours is considered working all the time?".  The answer is pretty much anywhere, except for perhaps the masochistic people in biglaw who think 60 hours a week is a light load.[/quote]

2080 hours a year is full-time if you are working 40 hours per week.  This is apparently news to you, but at most firms you will not work 40 hours per week.  It is not a matter of masochistic people -- it is a question of (arguably) masochistic firms.  If OP is in Biglaw, or even potentially mid-law, her current hours are nothing noteworthy and she likely wouldn't get much sympathy if she went to the firm and asked for some relief.  If she is at a firm with lower expectations where 2,100 is considered working all the time, then she would have greater ability to try to scale back some without damaging her employment at the firm.

You are simply wrong that "pretty much anywhere" in law considers 2,100 working "all the time."

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics