Related Posts
Rising Star
Please do not show to client before Partner review!
Bowl Leader
Rising Star
More Posts
Rising Star
Additional Posts in Law
Any family lawyers here?
If I leave big law for ADA will I get canceled?
How do you wind down after a rough day?
Pro
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
This is why I’ve had to take an alternative track despite a “big law” kind of resume. My ADHD and the typical law firm billable hour requirement are irreconcilable. When I’m “on,” I can do the same quality and standard of work as many others in a fraction of the time, but I need a mental break between projects to prevent burnout. Of course, I can only bill for the time I’m “on,” even if I do a great job and complete the same volume of work as everyone else. I tried for years, but it was unsustainable. The billable hour incentivizes inefficiency, and my brain cannot adapt.
How about having private convos with your significant other on a private phone line while the attorneys and paras made a mockery of my private call the day after wasn’t hostile you must be smoking
AI is going to change the billable hour model. Why would clients continue to pay associates for hours of research and case review etc when AI can do it in a fraction of the time with appropriate supervision?
Whatever happened to just practicing law? It’s so twisted now.
Because it’s profitable—for firms, not for people. The whole system’s designed to burn through associates and bill clients blind. We’re just cogs with a J.D.
The system was set up by the clients (insurance companies in my case) and therefore, benefits them fully. Basically firms figured out a way to squeeze the most out of their attorneys and paralegals to fit into the billable model. It’s just a horrific system for lawyers and paras.
At my old firm I was tasked with trialing some billing software and in that context got to see daily time entries for a couple partners. It became clear really quickly that they hit their hours/revenues goals not because they were that much better as attorneys than me (although that was still true) but largely because they’d mastered the art of billing for everything. “Status check” “client update” “file review” “phone call to.” There were a dozen or two entries per day for each of these with 0.1 and 0.2 hours each. These partners weren’t working 12 hours/day but they certainly billed that much.
Billed so much they created a whole damn forum based on me, get to your billing you obviously have too much time in your hands 🙌
Firms should employ a tiered structure for billing. No more hours. Quarterly flat fees. Done.
Incentivize on case closed, files completed. I have a client that does this… and they’re workers comp! Lol - it works well tho
I’ve always been concerned about how we turn $500 problems into $5,000+ problems.
I feel this in my bones. I’m a few months in and burning out disturbingly fast
Ditto
Chief
I think the mindset changes (or should) as you grow in experience and within the ranks; being slow and have doesn’t work in the long run for either the firm or the associate. In my experience some work is well suited to flat fee arrangements but not everything works well under that model.
I think a lot of it is a result of billing structures staying stagnant for so long despite tech advances. Like, research is so much easier now, and even the fact that pretty much every associate is typing at a speed far greater than older lawyers who didn’t grow up with computers affects how long the exact same task takes. But like people have mentioned, it “works” for firms, and clients don’t really seem to be pushing for reform.
The problem isn't the billable hour, it's the targets for retention and bonuses. If those targets are achievable by, e.g., a normal human being with a life outside of work, then the incentives for cheating are reduced. When you've got to hit, e.g., 2,000 billable to keep your job, then padding and all the bad feelings that come with that start to creep in.
It is profitable and the old dinosaur lawyers and gcs don’t like change. Also, there has not been a suitable alternative in all instances. Afas are great for some types of cases, but simply wouldn’t work for others.
Wow. Hot take.
I have built flat fee programs of all manner and size: from one case to hundreds, five digits to eight. They are exceedingly difficult to get right. They usually require heavy management and skill sets that need to be learned over time doing them. Even then, differing views on how profitability should be calculated and defined can still create issues.
Hourly rate work is relative child’s play to manage on both sides of the relationship. Expectations are clearer because they’ve been built over decades. The issue is more than change management, and the stickiness of the billable hour is more than greed.
If my charges didn’t scale by volume, every client would take complete advantage of me.
I feel this everyday. 4 years in insurance defense and I’ve had all I can take.
Decades of ID. I hear you.
One thing is clear - you don’t work in ECVC. Incentives are the opposite because clients are “bootstrapping.” I’m regularly self haircutting my time.
Evergreen post
This field is full of things that keep being done in the same manner out of a need to engage in “hazing” and “tit for tat” behavior. Partners absolutely know the position they’re putting associates in and they do it because they had to do it to keep their jobs and make the partners money. They feel like it’s okay to continue the cycle because they paid their dues and feel like it’s their turn on top. They keep forgetting that being on top costs everyone their ethics, but who’s going to report it and ruin their career?
The legal field needs a total overhaul. All of these rules exist that everyone is required to follow and is encouraged to report when those rules are broken. The problem is nobody actually protects you for doing the right thing. It’s entirely hypocritical.
Because fixed-fee is worse. With fixed-fee, the client will say, "We won't pay more than X amount for this work, because we can get it for the same or cheaper at another firm." X amount is always less than what it would have cost to do hourly, meaning you have to somehow fit the same amount work in less time or cut corners. You are incentivized to work as fast as possible, resulting in burnout and exhaustion, without compromising quality so much that you lose the client. It creates its own constant anxiety loop where doing quality work is a career risk.
For flat fee agreements, I was taught that before you agree to this arrangement, you have to really analyze a case and try to figure out how much time you can anticipate on spending with various aspects of the case. For the pre-litigation client, if you’re going to file a complaint, depending on the complexity of it - apply a fee. Once in litigation, if you’re going to be drafting and filing motions like MTDs or MSJs - apply a fee. If you’re writing a demand letter, depending on the depth you deem necessary to expound upon - apply a fee. Your retainer agreement needs to detail these terms. Have an evergreen clause present.
How do you prepare financially for the unexpected when you’ve quoted a flat fee to the client? The client who drags their feet in providing info; the client who calls, texts, and emails you every other day; the OC who won’t respond to your emails; discovery delays; etc., - yet the client still expects performance? Do you quote the fee with $1-2k added as a precaution?
Once I heard a top lawyer who did a successful IPO for her client say, " Oh John, just pay me what you think I'm worth". My eyes widened and I then saw how this billing game could be played at the next level.