Related Posts
Conversation Starter
W/L balance at VMLY&R?
More Posts
Enthusiast
Isn’t this a meme itself, to be a meme enthusiast
Bowl Leader
Chief
Guys need your help here. I have three offers in hand -ABB(23 LPA for bengaluru), Valuelabs(21 LPA remote),Pwc India(19 LPA remote) Tech stack : . Net/.Net Core YOE: 5.5 YEARS Please provide your valuable reviews here. Which one will be best to join. Valuelabs PwC Abb india limited Nagarro Delloite Infosys Tata Consultancy Accenture
Mentor
Bowl Leader
This pic says everything...
Additional Posts in Law
Rising Star
Is there truly such a thing as a lifestyle firm?
Is it possible to be both lit and transactional?
Chief
My firm has a 1600 requirement - I still have absolutely insane periods, but the low requirement acts as permission to enjoy the slow periods without stressing about hours. I make less than market in my city, but am still making six-figures & very comfortable overall. I can’t imagine jumping up to a 1900 hour requirement.
Pro
I bill between 1600-1750 a year, and I hardly ever work weekends, and I'm usually done by 6pm. I have a toddler at home. And I'm on partner track.
Pro
I mean, my salary is commensurate with what I wrote above. But it's worth the lower pay.
My firm is at 1850, counting certain pro bono and non billables, and I find it pretty reasonable for the most part. I think what makes the bigger difference though is the attitudes of the partners you work with, not just the number. I.e. if the number is 1850 but the real (unspoken) expectation is 2000, or the expectation is that you have to drop everything and work on an evening or weekend regularly for no good reason and you can’t take a vacation without a laptop...that to me is what crushes your work/life balance.
I think 1800 would be a good compromise
In my mind, some room for flexibility, without negatively affecting my career, would be ideal. For example, treating an hours goal as simply a “standard” for the “standard” compensation. For example, if 1900 is the target, you get the standard compensation. If You hit 2000 or more, however, additional compensation would be fair. On the other hand, maybe it’s worth it to work 1600 hours and accept a pay cut some years. At my firm at least, I know our salaries are formulaic enough that this should not be too much of a challenge from a compensation perspective.
But the key in my mind is to allow for genuine flexibility that doesn’t result in being off the partner track or being shown the door as long as the work is solid and an associate is making appropriate substantive (not simply hours-based) progress. (E.g. Maybe it takes a little longer to make partner if you consistently work less than the “standard”, but maybe not if the substantive work and progress is on target.)
Pro
If you’re efficient with your time, 1900 per year can be done and still have time for a life. Really just a question of having adequate work.
1900 is challenging but maintains some balance. In my experience every 100 hour increment more becomes exponentially challenging. I will bill in the 2400 range, which with my unbillable marketing, and associate coaching, and admin time feels crushing. I would expect a considerable discretionary bonus at that level. That being said, there are some practice area (asbestos comes to mind) where attorneys may bill a lot for sitting in multi-party deps - easy hi billable. So it really depends on the work type. With overhead costs, it starts seeming unfair if some attorneys are allowed to go much below 1900. Just my experience and opinion.
Chief
Mine is 1200 and is obviously about as well as you can possibly do in private practice. Something around 1500 would probably be fine. But anyone saying 1900 is good balance is deluding themselves.
Chief
Real estate transactional
It depends. High billable hours will not automatically result in higher profitability, but it can certainly be a key element. The hourly rate, the amount of hours actually billed and collected on, and the total overhead required to collect those $$$, all go into profitability.
Also, litigation vs transactional, and the area of practice can impact how many hours are reasonable to retain work life balance. I have billed over 200 hrs in a month working on large transactions and felt like I worked less than I did during a month I billed 100 hrs, just due to the nature of the work.
I personally think firms would be better served moving away from the fixation on a one size fits all billable hour goal and better understand (and better explain) the economics of different practices and the overall firm, and then use that info to establish more substantive attorney goals. Maybe one day when I rule the world....
There is other value to add such as generating business and mentoring jr lawyers. The challenge then is fairness if the 2200/yr and 1700/yr both carry the same burden of generation and coaching. Intangibles are worth adding to the mix so long as they are not a proxy for favoritism or shirking an equal share of the workload.
I’m required to bill1800 and it’s not...horrible. I imagine 1600-1700 would be ideal.