Please refrain from ever talking about law firms as if you know anything, as the bolded statement makes it completely clear that you know absolutely nothing. The culture of law firms has changed dramatically even since when I started at a firm in 2002. What you are saying is similar to saying that cars in the 1920s are not significantly different from current cars. Do you understand that you are talking about a time in which there was no internet?????
Anonymous wrote:Big Law has changed SIGNIFICANTLY since your dad worked at a law firm when you were a child. Most "big law" partners in their 60s and 70s would not want to be lawyers again if they had to start over today. Salaries were much more on par back then with other professionals (i.e., salaries were lower), but the culture and lifestyle were much more family-friendly.
I was born in the late '80s, so I'm talking late '80s, early '90s when we was working as a lawyer in private practice when I was a child. The culture of firms in the '80s and '90s, from what I can tell, is not significantly different from now. He's still working in a large law firm where he is now partner. I agree that much of his flexibility/ability to go on vacation for 2 weeks, etc. stems from the fact that he is already a partner and has contacts, and is a pretty hot shot in his area of law and has been working for decades, etc. He certainly couldn't do that when I was younger. But in the late '80s, he DEFINITELY was able to provide back up care when I was sick and take a conference call from home when he was an associate. At that point, he was at a San Francisco firm, so maybe things were more progressive on the west coast, I dunno. His current firm (and his current colleague) is the partner who is able to work from home so she can avoid the commute/save money on childcare with her small children. Her kids are toddlers and elementary school age. Some firms have made a push to make things more "family friendly" in recent years, allowing working from home as long as the hours are billed. He told me it is definitely more difficult to get away with less face time as a man, though. However, I'm not talking about the '60s/'70s. My dad was born in 1954, so in 1960 he would have been 6 years old! He wasn't even done with law school until the '80s!
Anonymous wrote:14:46, also consider your Dad has decades of experience, contacts, etc., that let him get away with more than J. Random 4th Year Associate or OP (unless OP is bringing along a massive Rolodex or knowledge of some really niche area.) If someone can make it rain, then he gets more latitude.
Anonymous wrote:I was a partner on a case where the senior associate emailed the entire trial team (25 lawyers, including the client) that her C was scheduled for the following Tuesday at 9am so the weekly call would have to be moved from 10 am to noon. I think she saw it as a sign of strength and commitment. She was an outstanding lawyer and this made her seem a little off actually.
I've suspect some law-talkers don't even notice/care aside from having to change their calendar, a few think women like this are nuts nuts nuts, and others think "You go girl". I just don't know the percentages, and I've always wondered if that sort of extreme behavior really does get them ahead in the office.
Big Law has changed SIGNIFICANTLY since your dad worked at a law firm when you were a child. Most "big law" partners in their 60s and 70s would not want to be lawyers again if they had to start over today. Salaries were much more on par back then with other professionals (i.e., salaries were lower), but the culture and lifestyle were much more family-friendly.
Anonymous wrote:I'm aware people pad bills. But if you average a 60 hour work week, take a full four weeks of vacation, and bill only 75% of the time you're in the office (which you can do without padding), your billables for the year will be 2160. It is simply not true that you have to work a 60 hour work week to get to 1950.
(I agree though, that you often feel compelled to work above the minimum to advance at a law firm).
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:I was a partner on a case where the senior associate emailed the entire trial team (25 lawyers, including the client) that her C was scheduled for the following Tuesday at 9am so the weekly call would have to be moved from 10 am to noon. I think she saw it as a sign of strength and commitment. She was an outstanding lawyer and this made her seem a little off actually.
Anonymous wrote:I'm aware people pad bills. But if you average a 60 hour work week, take a full four weeks of vacation, and bill only 75% of the time you're in the office (which you can do without padding), your billables for the year will be 2160. It is simply not true that you have to work a 60 hour work week to get to 1950.
(I agree though, that you often feel compelled to work above the minimum to advance at a law firm).
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.
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:Um no... if you are a primary or "equal" care giver. I am married to a biglaw lawyer and there is no way in hell we give even comparable amounts of time to our family. He is great when he is on... he does the before school routine from 6:30-7:45 since every other lawyer in the world is still sleeping. Gets into the office at 9 and on "good days"(2/3 times per week) will be home by 7:30 (we have nearly no commute... CP to Farragut so 12 minutes on metro) which are not predictable at all. Other days he is at office till somewhere between 9 - midnight. The unpredictability is what makes it hard. Do I love the life this affords, yes, we are not fancy but get to live in a good house in a good location and are financially secure (until he gets fired, which could happen at any point). It also depends on the type of law you are doing... if you are an estates & trust lawyer your life is completely predictable. litigation, think otherwise.
Anonymous wrote:mAnonymous 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.
Padding bills is a huge problem in many law firms. Everyone knows this.
mAnonymous 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.