Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bonuses are always based on hours the firm can bill, not on what an attorney puts on a timesheet. And sometimes bonuses are based on the hours a firm is paid. If a client disputes your hours and the firm agrees to cut them, that can reduce your bonus as well.

This really is the norm. I have never heard of anything different with firms that pay based on billable hours. The name says it all - billable, not hours worked or recorded on the timesheet.

Of course we're not talking about a timesheet. I got paid $0 for training, hiring paperwork, etc. I am only getting paid for actually billable hours.

E.g., my "timesheet" (if I used one) may say 8 AM-8 PM (12 hours) but my billable hours that day may only be 7 for whatever reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it a little surprising that a senior attorney would not understand the difference between time billed to client matters, for which the firm will be paid, and time billed to internal activities or pro-bono, for which the firm no only won't be paid but often cost money.

There are some gray area activities around business development and attorney development that you could argue will make the firm money in the long run, but which are an expense in the short run, but firms tend to be stingy about how these are allocated regarding billable hour requirements.

But even when a firm allows such activities to contribute to a billable hours requirement for purposes of bonus structure, they generally cap them. While your firm has a somewhat unusual system for billable requirements, it's very common for firms to set out billable targets for associates for them to qualify for certain bonuses, and there is no firm out there that would allow an associate to count hours billed to internal firm matters, as opposed to actual client work the firm can charge for, as a significant portion of that billing target.

Again, it is really surprising to me that you would not know this... I'm guessing you have spent most of your career in government service or an in-house position? This is very standard for law firms and even if you find a job elsewhere that does an annual billing target instead of a monthly one, you will not find a firm that doesn't make this distinction with its billables and tie it to bonus structure. It would be irresponsible for them to do otherwise because it can seriously hurt firm profitability if you don't incentivize attorneys to focus on client billings.

I read this more as OP was billing client matters, but the numbers where cut. Like PP said, a client isn't paying 4 times the hours for a new associate to get up to speed. I doubt this is a case of pro bono or firm committee work not getting paid.

Anonymous wrote:Probably something you should cleared up. If you don’t want to leave, you could ask your boss what kind of hours are cut and how you could avoid that in the future, or for a written definition of billable hours. Also, are you sure that the firm actually wrote off those 20 hours and did not collect payables for the hours you worked? If they did, that seems way more messed up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it a little surprising that a senior attorney would not understand the difference between time billed to client matters, for which the firm will be paid, and time billed to internal activities or pro-bono, for which the firm no only won't be paid but often cost money.

There are some gray area activities around business development and attorney development that you could argue will make the firm money in the long run, but which are an expense in the short run, but firms tend to be stingy about how these are allocated regarding billable hour requirements.

But even when a firm allows such activities to contribute to a billable hours requirement for purposes of bonus structure, they generally cap them. While your firm has a somewhat unusual system for billable requirements, it's very common for firms to set out billable targets for associates for them to qualify for certain bonuses, and there is no firm out there that would allow an associate to count hours billed to internal firm matters, as opposed to actual client work the firm can charge for, as a significant portion of that billing target.

Again, it is really surprising to me that you would not know this... I'm guessing you have spent most of your career in government service or an in-house position? This is very standard for law firms and even if you find a job elsewhere that does an annual billing target instead of a monthly one, you will not find a firm that doesn't make this distinction with its billables and tie it to bonus structure. It would be irresponsible for them to do otherwise because it can seriously hurt firm profitability if you don't incentivize attorneys to focus on client billings.

I read this more as OP was billing client matters, but the numbers where cut. Like PP said, a client isn't paying 4 times the hours for a new associate to get up to speed. I doubt this is a case of pro bono or firm committee work not getting paid.

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t go nuclear over your first month. It takes a little time to figure out each firm’s billing structure. If you are still having this problem after 4 months, it might not be a good fit for you.

I usually have to write off a lot of « billable » hours for my new associates, even the senior ones. If something normally takes 5 hours and the client is used to paying for 5 hours, I can’t bill the client for 20 hours just because it took a new associate that long. I just have to eat that cost myself at my firm. Your firm makes you eat that cost. I don’t really mind if it only takes a few months for the associate to get up to speed. It starts to bother me when I have to continuously eat those hours out of my own numbers. Your firm seems to have realized that associates don’t care when they tank a partner’s numbers if they keep getting paid and they have no incentive to work faster or more efficiently. You have an incentive to get faster because it will increase your pay.

Anonymous wrote:Bonuses are always based on hours the firm can bill, not on what an attorney puts on a timesheet. And sometimes bonuses are based on the hours a firm is paid. If a client disputes your hours and the firm agrees to cut them, that can reduce your bonus as well.

This really is the norm. I have never heard of anything different with firms that pay based on billable hours. The name says it all - billable, not hours worked or recorded on the timesheet.

Anonymous wrote:I find it a little surprising that a senior attorney would not understand the difference between time billed to client matters, for which the firm will be paid, and time billed to internal activities or pro-bono, for which the firm no only won't be paid but often cost money.

There are some gray area activities around business development and attorney development that you could argue will make the firm money in the long run, but which are an expense in the short run, but firms tend to be stingy about how these are allocated regarding billable hour requirements.

But even when a firm allows such activities to contribute to a billable hours requirement for purposes of bonus structure, they generally cap them. While your firm has a somewhat unusual system for billable requirements, it's very common for firms to set out billable targets for associates for them to qualify for certain bonuses, and there is no firm out there that would allow an associate to count hours billed to internal firm matters, as opposed to actual client work the firm can charge for, as a significant portion of that billing target.

Again, it is really surprising to me that you would not know this... I'm guessing you have spent most of your career in government service or an in-house position? This is very standard for law firms and even if you find a job elsewhere that does an annual billing target instead of a monthly one, you will not find a firm that doesn't make this distinction with its billables and tie it to bonus structure. It would be irresponsible for them to do otherwise because it can seriously hurt firm profitability if you don't incentivize attorneys to focus on client billings.