Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My theory: if it's fillable, it's billable. When in doubt, put a mirror behind you. When you show them your front, they'll see you're back.

I don’t get it.

Basically: Jurisdiction vs. standing. Vessel or vassal? Fillable > billable. YMMV

Anonymous wrote:My theory: if it's fillable, it's billable. When in doubt, put a mirror behind you. When you show them your front, they'll see you're back.

I don’t get it.

This is practice group dependent. If everyone else around your level in the group is going well over, you’re expected to. If everyone else is cutting it close - you can too.

I’d also say that this was likely the attitude 5-10 years ago and what I was told when I started. Now it might be different, but that’s because fewer and fewer people are making partner, much less equity partner.

Rookie question: Where do Of-Counsel types fall in the food chain?

My theory: if it's fillable, it's billable. When in doubt, put a mirror behind you. When you show them your front, they'll see you're back.

My husband was also laid off from his law firm the January after the year he took paternity leave. He was told it wouldn’t count against him. This was 16 years ago so paternity leave (2 weeks) was seen as more of a “favor” than it is now. It changed the entire trajectory of our finances and his career, and not for the better.

Anonymous wrote:My husband works at a law firm. When he was an associate he would stop working the second his hours were .1 over his mark—usually right around Christmas. He is a partner now.

This is practice group dependent. If everyone else around your level in the group is going well over, you’re expected to. If everyone else is cutting it close - you can too.

I’d also say that this was likely the attitude 5-10 years ago and what I was told when I started. Now it might be different, but that’s because fewer and fewer people are making partner, much less equity partner.

Don’t get me started on the scam that is non-equity partnership….

this post is almost comical, except for OP's loss. That part is sad. The part about you thinking you would receive some sort of credit toward your hour requirement has to be some kind of joke. You went to a fancy school and got stellar grades (an entry requirement for Biglaw) and yet you come up with this idea that they're giving you credit toward your hours? You must be joking.

I worked in non big law. The requirements were very clear from the start. unlimited paid sick and vacation leave. You must meet your hours and meet other client expectations. beyond that, nobody cared.

If 24 hours will make or break you, you're cutting it way too close.

When I was billable 100 percent chargeable was billing 8 hours a day 52 weeks a year so even Xmas and 4th of July you had to make up the time.

Our tax team hit 120 percent one year.

And yes I wife went into Labor Wednesday day night I was off Thursday and Friday and had to work 16 hours OT the next week to cover it

Yep. I got screwed by this once when I was in biglaw. My parent died during the same year I took maternity leave and I didn’t realize they prorated for the maternity leave weeks but not the days I took for bereavement.

That was an expensive mistake and a kick in the teeth from a supposedly family friendly employer.

Anonymous wrote:My husband works at a law firm. When he was an associate he would stop working the second his hours were .1 over his mark—usually right around Christmas. He is a partner now.

It doesn't really work that way. If partners need work it's not like you can say no and expect to get more work from them the next year when you do need the hours.

Anonymous wrote:My husband works at a law firm. When he was an associate he would stop working the second his hours were .1 over his mark—usually right around Christmas. He is a partner now.

How old is he? Times have changed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband works at a law firm. When he was an associate he would stop working the second his hours were .1 over his mark—usually right around Christmas. He is a partner now.

We're supposed to be impressed that he supposedly didn't bill the week between Christmas and New Years?

I think the point of this story is that the mostly women on this forum are too hard on themselves and each other.

Anonymous wrote:My husband works at a law firm. When he was an associate he would stop working the second his hours were .1 over his mark—usually right around Christmas. He is a partner now.

We're supposed to be impressed that he supposedly didn't bill the week between Christmas and New Years?

My husband works at a law firm. When he was an associate he would stop working the second his hours were .1 over his mark—usually right around Christmas. He is a partner now.