New York Lawyer
April 26, 2001

Q:
I�m an associate in a large law firm. Recently one of the partners told me that I wasn�t billing enough. He said, �We could probably get another 75 hours or so out of you a month.�

I didn�t really say much, but here�s what I was thinking: �Actually I was just being efficient, which presumably the client would approve of, doing my work and going home. I was just not lying like everyone else and padding my hours. But I�m perfectly happy to bill for when I go to dinner, or go to the bathroom, or what have you. If you want me to lie to you I�ll do that.�

I find the firm�s attitude astonishing. How can I deal with this so that I maintain my self-respect but hang on to my job?

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:
The law firm economic model based on billable hours is at the root of many management issues. For the moment we�re stuck with it, although some firms have started to investigate alternative approaches that help to chip away at punishing lifestyles as well as the problem you identify -- the disincentive for efficiency. After all, a relentless push for hours rewards facetime and working as long as possible on an assignment far more than it encourages efficient performance.

The way to reconcile this issue on a personal basis is to keep being honest, work efficiently, but -- if you want to stay where you are -- recognize that billing a certain number of hours is probably non-negotiable. Ask for more matters and keep being efficient on each one. It isn�t necessary for you to compromise your sense of honesty and integrity. And if the hours are killing you, better start looking around, since a wholesale move away from the billable hour economic model isn�t coming anytime soon.

A larger issue presented by your question is that of lawyers padding their bills, which is obviously completely forbidden by ethical rules and basic common sense (but certainly happens nonetheless). Precise expectations about accounting for hours are often not discussed, either because methods of keeping track of time are considered �obvious� or because it�s a topic no one wants to take a real good look at, for fear of what they might find.

Often there are wide variations within a firm on timekeeping, mainly because there is no shared agreement and understanding about the rules associated with hours. Ideally a firm should have widely understood and explicit policies about billing that are enforced publicly and routinely by partners. That way it�s easier to follow up when there�s a suspicion that too many dinner hours are winding up on time sheets.

Sincerely,
Holly English
Principal Consultant, Values at Work