B-Scale Lawyers

Polar742

All the responsibility none of the authority
Source

So, the B-Scale comes to law firms....

I read this and there are just so many parallels to stuff we have all been through over the last 20 years or so...

Note - all emphasis in the article is added by me

At Well-Paying Law Firms, a Low-Paid Corner


CATHERINE RAMPELL, On Tuesday May 24, 2011, 8:40 am EDT
WHEELING, W.Va. — The nation’s biggest law firms are creating a second tier of workers, stripping pay and prestige from one of the most coveted jobs in the business world.

Make no mistake: These are full-fledged lawyers, not paralegals, and they do the same work traditional legal associates do. But they earn less than half the pay of their counterparts — usually around $60,000 — and they know from the outset they will never make partner.

Some of the lawyers who have taken these new jobs are putting the best face on their reduced status. “To me there’s not much of a difference between what I’m doing now and what I would be doing in a partner-track job,” said Mark Thompson, 29, who accepted a non-partner-track post at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe when he could not find a traditional associate job. “I still feel like I’m doing pretty high-level work — writing briefs, visiting client sites, prepping witnesses for hearings.”

Asked whether he hopes someday to switch onto the partner track, given the higher pay for this same work, he is diplomatic. “I’m leaving all my possibilities open,” he said.

Lawyers like Mr. Thompson are part of a fundamental shift in the 50-year-old business model for big firms.

Besides making less, these associates work fewer hours and travel less than those on the grueling partner track, making these jobs more family-friendly. And this new system probably prevents jobs from going offshore.

But as has been the case in other industries, a two-tier system threatens to breed resentments among workers in both tiers, given disparities in pay and workload expectations. And as these programs expand to more and more firms, they will eliminate many of the lucrative partner-track positions for which law students suffer so much debt.

Mr. Thompson is one of 37 lawyers in Orrick’s new program, which is based in this small Rust Belt city an hour southwest of Pittsburgh. An international firm headquartered in San Francisco, Orrick is one of a handful of law firms, including WilmerHale and McDermott Will & Emery, experimenting with ways to control escalating billing rates.

“For a long time the wind was at the back of these big law firms,” said William D. Henderson, a historian at Indiana University-Bloomington.

“They could grow, expand and raise rates, and clients just went along with absorbing the high overhead and lack of innovation. But eventually clients started to resist, especially when the economy soured.”

For decades, firms used essentially the same model: charging increasingly higher rates for relatively routine work done by junior associates, whose entry-level salaries in major markets have now been bid up to $160,000 (plus bonus, of course), a sum reported by the big law schools. Even under pressure to reduce rates, firms are reluctant to lower starting salaries unilaterally for fear of losing the best talent — and their reputations.

“Everyone acknowledges that $160,000 is too much, but they don’t want to back down because that signals they’re just a midmarket firm,” said Mr. Henderson. “It’s a big game of chicken.”

So now firms are copying some manufacturers — which have similarly inflexible pay because of union contracts — by creating a separate class of lower-paid workers.

At law firms, these positions are generally called “career associates” or “permanent associates.” They pay about $50,000 to $65,000, according to Michael D. Bell, a managing principal at Fronterion, which advises law firms on outsourcing.

These nonglamorous jobs are going to nonglamorous cities.

Orrick moved its back-office operations to a former metal-stamping factory here in 2002, and in late 2009 began hiring career associates. Costs of living are much cheaper in Wheeling than in San Francisco, Tokyo or its 21 other locations, saving $6 million to $10 million annually, according to Will A. Turani, Wheeling’s director of operations.

“It’s our version of outsourcing,” said Ralph Baxter, Orrick’s chief executive. “Except we’re staying within the United States.”

Similar centers have cropped up in other economically depressed locations. WilmerHale, a 12-office international firm, has “in-sourced” work to Dayton, Ohio.

“There’s a big, low-cost attorney market there,” said Scott Green, WilmerHale’s executive director. “That means we can offer our services more efficiently, at lower prices.”

What’s good for clients, of course, isn’t quite as good for those low-cost lawyers.

Lower salaries make it even more difficult for newly minted lawyers to pay off their law school debt — like the $150,000 in loans that David Perry accumulated upon graduation from Northwestern University School of Law in 2009.

Mr. Perry, 37, became a career associate at Orrick after unsuccessfully seeking public service work (which would offer the option of loan forgiveness). But he says he loves his “lifestyle job,” which enables him to work from home and spend time with his infant son while still doing interesting work.

“I didn’t have the strong desire to make loads of cash,” he said.

Other career associates at Orrick said they too were content, even if this track was not their first choice out of law school.

Heather Boylan Clark, 34, was a seventh-year associate at Jones Day before applying for a career associate position after the birth of her second child. She makes 40 percent less than before, but says she still does “challenging work,” and, more important, has greater control of her schedule.

“I’m not killing myself to be hitting specific numbers of billable hours in any given year,” said Ms. Boylan Clark, a graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law. “Now I’m always home for bedtime.”

To some extent, firms have been using lawyers off the partner track for years, known as staff attorneys, although usually on an ad-hoc basis. Executives at Orrick were quick to clarify that the new class of career associates should not be confused with such attorneys, and emphasized efforts to make career associates feel valued.

“There are no second-class citizens at Orrick,” said Mr. Baxter. “This is a career path for people who want it because they prefer the attributes.”

But while Ms. Boylan Clark and others switched from partner tracks at other firms, Orrick has not encouraged associates on its partner track to switch to career associate out of concern that it would seem like a demotion, according to Laura Saklad, Orrick’s chief lawyer development officer.

“That’s just about perception, though,” Ms. Saklad said. “These are not second-class jobs, but the program is so new that they may be perceived that way.”

Working for Less: This is the first article in a series examining how new workers are being hired at lower pay and benefits.
 
It is present in academia at a multiple of levels, too. There are post-docs and lecturers who do similar research and teaching work, respectively, as full tenured professors, but are paid much less and lack the job security.
 
Hmmmm...regionals for lawyers too? Sounds like the ambulance chasers are going to have to learn to eat Ramen too. I wonder if they will make them sleep under their desks if they have a standup overnight.
 
Who in their right minds ever thought a lawyer should bill $200+/hr? $60k seems low but some of those starting salaries were unfathomable.
 
Who in their right minds ever thought a lawyer should bill $200+/hr? $60k seems low but some of those starting salaries were unfathomable.

If the lawyer adds more value to the product than the summation of the final bill, I'd say it's worth it. I mean would you ever want the 2nd best lawyer? I hope not because that means your opponent could hire the best.
 
We discussed this today in a meeting. We are actually thinking about adding some doctors that wouldn't be on a partnership track, yet still be able to have a decent job. We are primarily going to focus on women who want to stay home with their kids and yet still work three or four days per week. Of course the pay is significantly higher than the legal pay (even on partner track) but the difference in what you'd have to pay a radiologist out of school on a partner track, to what a partner makes, and what a three or four day a week Mom would want to make is significant. I'm creating a "B" scale bitches!
 
If the lawyer adds more value to the product than the summation of the final bill, I'd say it's worth it. I mean would you ever want the 2nd best lawyer? I hope not because that means your opponent could hire the best.

Therein lies the rub. Most times their value is not worth the final bill. My friend had to spend $3,000 to go to court to when his ex wanted more money. Even though in their agreement she was not allowed to ask for more in this certain situation. At $200/hr to prepare, drive to
Courthouse, reschedule proceedings, etc it adds up. Non-lawyers are at a disadvantage because we have to get a lawyer to null out the other persons.
 
If the lawyer adds more value to the product than the summation of the final bill, I'd say it's worth it. I mean would you ever want the 2nd best lawyer? I hope not because that means your opponent could hire the best.

Never make the mistake of thinking the best lawyer or doctor is the more expensive one.
 
Never make the mistake of thinking the best lawyer or doctor is the more expensive one.

That's a fact, but if the best individual is the most expensive, then the bill is fine, if they bring that value.
 
Who in their right minds ever thought a lawyer should bill $200+/hr? $60k seems low but some of those starting salaries were unfathomable.

entry-level salaries in major markets have now been bid up to $160,000 (plus bonus, of course), a sum reported by the big law schools

My emphasis. I have no idea how true those numbers are, but we know how realistic the reported aviation salaries are, especially the schools saying you'll be making $200k on a 777 in 6 years....
 
This hits a little close to home. My wife worked for the most prestigious law firm in Atlanta, GA.and one of the most prestigious firms in the U.S., King and Spalding. I doubt when they hired her that they considered her as a potential partner material, and she never had the desire to work the 80+hrs a week or schmooze the lucrative clients necessary to make partner, but they hired her anyway. I also had a female student that worked for Jones Day. I don't think that she ever had the desire to make partner either.
But that's not the way it used to be with law firms or accounting firms, everyone that they hired they expected not only to be capable of being partner, but also have to drive and motivation to be partner, it's similar to they way some airlines say that they don't hire FOs they hire future captains.
I think the best comparison is the FO who doesn't want to upgrade because of QOL reasons. He could work harder for more pay, but chooses not to.
 
I worked at a law firm last summer, and I will never understand the lawyers who work 7am-11pm mon-fri and 7-2 saturday. You really can't have a life working like that. And what do you do with all that money you make if you're never around for it?
 
Who in their right minds ever thought a lawyer should bill $200+/hr? $60k seems low but some of those starting salaries were unfathomable.
that's like asking who in his right might would pay 50$+ an hour for a flight instructor. If an attorney is charging less than 150/hr I would wonder why he is undercutting his fellow attorneys.
 
I worked at a law firm last summer, and I will never understand the lawyers who work 7am-11pm mon-fri and 7-2 saturday. You really can't have a life working like that. And what do you do with all that money you make if you're never around for it?

He did that because he wanted to make partner and make a lot of money, and apparently that's what you have to do in the lawyer business. Lots of money and lots of time off don't generally go together.

I wouldn't consider this "B-scale" for lawyers. The lower pay comes lower expectation. Contrast that with airline b-scales, where he b-scalers were expected to do everything the a-scalers were, but for less money.
 
He did that because he wanted to make partner and make a lot of money, and apparently that's what you have to do in the lawyer business. Lots of money and lots of time off don't generally go together.

I wouldn't consider this "B-scale" for lawyers. The lower pay comes lower expectation. Contrast that with airline b-scales, where he b-scalers were expected to do everything the a-scalers were, but for less money.

They were already partners, so I guess they just wanted the money...
 
I wouldn't consider this "B-scale" for lawyers. The lower pay comes lower expectation. Contrast that with airline b-scales, where he b-scalers were expected to do everything the a-scalers were, but for less money.

You'd hope so, but look what happened with the advent of the RJ. It transformed time-building, puddle-jumping pilots into 1,200NM stage length jet drivers (no knock on regional guys at all, just the "creep" that occurred in regional flying). The "scope" of legal work needs to be clearly defined to keep those expectations lower.

Edited to add: look at how MDs force PAs to work "under their supervision" and not start independent practice. I greatly appreciate PAs (and the training required to become one), but physicians definitely put a limit on their responsibility. I hear that there is even some animosity towards NPs/DNPs as they can independently practice, therefore POTENTIALLY biting into MDs' market.
 
Back
Top