Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Is 1950 about average for billable requirements or is that on the low side?
About average.
At my firm, it is a real requirement, not a floor. You would be in good standing and able to progress if you hit that number. But we also didn't have a culture of padding bills which is very prevalent and how many people bill 2400+ hours/year.
To hit 1950 in my practice area required me to work a lot, including about 50% of weekends. Combined with the non-billable requirements, I am very suspect that anyone really bills very high hours.
Right.
An honest 1950 is a lot of 60 hr. weeks including weekends.
What you're describing is a 62% realization rate. That's terribly inefficient. While I am skeptical of New York lawyers that are billing more than 90% of the time they are in the office, there is no reason non-billable work needs to be more than a third of your time. Even if you bill only 75% of your time (which you can certainly do honestly), 60 hours a week for a full calendar year is 2400 hours.
and p.s., I'm just talking billed, not collected (which as we know is what matters far more than what's billed)....
I didn't say it was 60/wk. every week for a calendar year, I said it was a lot of 60 hr. weeks. That's the reality that I've seen for many years in many different situations. I don't do this, but many do. Not to mention that 1950 seems on the low end.
If it was that easy I wouldn't see hordes of people swarming to get out of BigLaw (which I do).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Is 1950 about average for billable requirements or is that on the low side?
About average.
At my firm, it is a real requirement, not a floor. You would be in good standing and able to progress if you hit that number. But we also didn't have a culture of padding bills which is very prevalent and how many people bill 2400+ hours/year.
To hit 1950 in my practice area required me to work a lot, including about 50% of weekends. Combined with the non-billable requirements, I am very suspect that anyone really bills very high hours.
Right.
An honest 1950 is a lot of 60 hr. weeks including weekends.
What you're describing is a 62% realization rate. That's terribly inefficient. While I am skeptical of New York lawyers that are billing more than 90% of the time they are in the office, there is no reason non-billable work needs to be more than a third of your time. Even if you bill only 75% of your time (which you can certainly do honestly), 60 hours a week for a full calendar year is 2400 hours.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Is 1950 about average for billable requirements or is that on the low side?
About average.
At my firm, it is a real requirement, not a floor. You would be in good standing and able to progress if you hit that number. But we also didn't have a culture of padding bills which is very prevalent and how many people bill 2400+ hours/year.
To hit 1950 in my practice area required me to work a lot, including about 50% of weekends. Combined with the non-billable requirements, I am very suspect that anyone really bills very high hours.
Right.
An honest 1950 is a lot of 60 hr. weeks including weekends.
Anonymous wrote:My dad is a partner at a Big Law law firm. It's a stressful life, and he works a lot, but on the other hand he has a lot of flexibility and freedom about when he bills and what hours he works. When I was a baby, he was an associate in a large firm and my mom worked full time. He worked more than my mother hours-wise, but since he is not a litigator, he was available to work from home as backup care when I was sick and take conference calls with clients and write briefings in between taking care of a sick kid. They also staggered their schedules, so my mom worked 7:30-4 and my dad got to the office around 9 to minimize child care hours. After my brother was born, he switched to working as a lawyer for the federal government. This gave him a lot more family time with two small children and he was able to get out of the office by 5 most days for a large pay cut. He did that until my brother was around 7 and I was 10. At that point, he was concerned about being able to pay for college and started working for a big national firm again. He works crazy hours sometimes, especially when closing a deal, and frequently works weekends. He often doesn't get home until 9 PM (less of an issue when we were in junior high/high school) during a busy time. He has months where he travels every other week. However, to an extent there is a degree of flexibility about when he bills. He has been on the phone with a client picking me up from the airport, or if he needs to go to a doctor's office in the middle of the day, that's fine unless he has a meeting. He can step out of a family gathering to take a conference call from home. He has the money to afford a really nice lifestyle--much cushier than when he was a fed. Also, when he went back to private practice, my mom stopped working, so she pretty much takes care of all the life stuff which is a big factor in terms of what makes it work. His firm also allows people to work from home as long as they bring in the billable hours, so sometimes he does that. There is a woman partner who almost never comes in unless there is a meeting and cuts child care hours by removing her commute.
He can do things that I would never be able to do at my job, like randomly decide to take a two week vacation (again, it doesn't matter when he works, as long as he gets his hours in...also he can afford to). So I guess it depends on the culture of the office. Do they allow working from home? Are you the sort of person who is comfortable working any spare time (like after your kids are in bed?) He saw it from both sides...the compatibility with having a small child (flexibility, ability to work from home, availability to provide back up care on occasion when I had a fever as a toddler provided I was asleep most of the time) and incompatibility with having small children (having to work late all the time, working on weekends).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Is 1950 about average for billable requirements or is that on the low side?
About average.
At my firm, it is a real requirement, not a floor. You would be in good standing and able to progress if you hit that number. But we also didn't have a culture of padding bills which is very prevalent and how many people bill 2400+ hours/year.
To hit 1950 in my practice area required me to work a lot, including about 50% of weekends. Combined with the non-billable requirements, I am very suspect that anyone really bills very high hours.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The problem is that that is the requirement, but it is a minimum - if there is more work, you're going to have to exceed it. Once you have the offer in hand, I would ask to speak to associates there and find out more about how much they actually bill/work.
THIS.
My firm's minimum is 1800, but if I billed less than 2100 - 2300 per year, they would fire me.
You know what, if you want me to wear 37 pieces of flair, like your pretty boy over there, why don't you just make the minimum 37 pieces of flair?
Because they don't want to tell potential new hires that. They tell them that we value work/life balance.
Anonymous wrote:Really sad stories.
OP don't leave the Feds. Even as a non-lawyer I know that is a coveted family position.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The problem is that that is the requirement, but it is a minimum - if there is more work, you're going to have to exceed it. Once you have the offer in hand, I would ask to speak to associates there and find out more about how much they actually bill/work.
THIS.
My firm's minimum is 1800, but if I billed less than 2100 - 2300 per year, they would fire me.
You know what, if you want me to wear 37 pieces of flair, like your pretty boy over there, why don't you just make the minimum 37 pieces of flair?