Always be padding? Forum

[Anonymous User]

The system is very much set up to reward bill padding right up to the point where it's so obvious that you get caught. Being a higher biller makes you (1) more likely to keep your job in a downturn, (2) look busier and therefore less likely to get more work, (3) get paid more, (4) more likely to make counsel/partner. It also makes partners more money so they're not incentivized to look too hard for it.

It's pretty much impossible to know how widespread it is, but I'd venture to guess there's a high level of overlap between people who last a long time in biglaw and people who pad their hours. I can think of a few sixth+ year associates who just...don't really seem to add much of value on deals but always make hours somehow. I know one of them DEFINITELY pads to an actually reckless degree and somehow hasn't been called on it yet.

[Anonymous User]

Agree, there is just no incentive to crack down on liberal billing habits and it doesn't seem like anyone is monitoring it closely. And even if potential over-billing is identified, time is just written off and there do not appear to be repercussions for overbillers unless it was very egregious. I am like OP in that I have always been very meticulous with my time b/c I want to be ethical, but there is no reward to being this way other than to feel like you are doing the right thing, and being meticulous hurts you in several ways. Liberal billing is more the norm than the exception, and sometimes I feel like I have short-changed myself.

[Anonymous User]

Should never feel bad about billing thinking time (if that’s what you’re doing) on the train, toilet, wherever. You’re paid for your analysis and advice. Thinking is working just as much as digging a ditch counts as working for a construction worker. Don’t work for free.

What I do think is interesting is whether you keep a running timer or log individual entries and add up at the end. Like if you keep track of .1’s throughout the day for a client and add, it may be 1.2 (for example). But if you had actually tracked the seconds by using a running timer, it would be .7 or something less than 1.2 because the .1’s have rounding.

[Anonymous User]

Whoever said above that they don’t bill for looking up precedents for a document—that’s crazy, you should definitely bill for that. That is the definition of providing legal services, you are using your skill as a corporate lawyer to identify which document is the appropriate one for this use case. Bill away!!

But this got me thinking about other things I bill for that maybe other people don’t, or don’t bill for that other people do. Would you bill for the following (note: not saying I bill for all of the below):

1. Drafting a document but run into a Word (or other) error and it takes you a little bit of time to reboot, etc or you have to call tech support

2. Double billing when you’re listening in on a call but drafting a document for another client at the same time

3. You are thinking about what to draft but not staring aimlessly out the window—like reading an article in the NYTimes or something while also thinking about how to prepare the document.

4. Quick (less than 5 minutes) break to get food or water.

5. Waiting for a client (or opposing counsel) to turn a document that you need to review tonight. Can you bill for the waiting time?

On 5 I think it depends, if I'm waiting on someone for something and literally have to sit by my computer waiting for the email to arrive to get things moving and can't do something else - like eat or watch tv or something, then I'll bill the time as long as its not unreasonable - like 5, 10, maybe 15 min. But anything more than that I'll just cap and wait for it to come over.

[Anonymous User]

How frequently is padding caught by firms? I think the unethical, but financial, incentives align among both associate and firm/partner for padded hours, so I assume that it is rarely exposed.

I am aware of an occasional ATL story in which random biglaw associate billed like 100 hours in a week or 30 in a day, got fired, and the firm apologized and refunded the client.

Has anyone heard of their colleague getting caught and if so what happened to them? To be clear, I’m not looking for a detailed explanation that could be used as a blueprint to evade detection. No one in my very busy group has any reason to pad.

[Anonymous User]

Should never feel bad about billing thinking time (if that’s what you’re doing) on the train, toilet, wherever. You’re paid for your analysis and advice. Thinking is working just as much as digging a ditch counts as working for a construction worker. Don’t work for free.

What I do think is interesting is whether you keep a running timer or log individual entries and add up at the end. Like if you keep track of .1’s throughout the day for a client and add, it may be 1.2 (for example). But if you had actually tracked the seconds by using a running timer, it would be .7 or something less than 1.2 because the .1’s have rounding.

Seconded. So for the majority of clients where you list all your tasks and calculate the chunk of time spent each day, I count the minutes range and have a running doc that I convert/enter into billing program daily. The minutes all add up only once, so there’s no risk of stacking 0.1s.

But there are those other annoying clients that make billing take way longer by requesting that you identify how long you take for each specific task, and enter that individually. It’s these situations that can (very ethically) lead to stacking 0.1’s...so by the time you get to 30 mins it could be 0.5 or it could theoretically be 10 0.1’s if you did a ton of different things during that period.

in the latter scenario (though billing 1.0 in stacked 0.1s for 30 mins is pretty egregious), I think it’s the client’s fault that this occurs because it’s literally how they requested it and it makes tracking/entering take way longer.

Overall, in my view, the client should either trust the way you bill or not. And if they don’t then they should make a stink or find a new lawyer or request a new associate or whatever. But if they do trust you (which they should unless you give them reason not to), then there’s no reason to identify every amount of time spent on every single task. It takes longer to do the billing, it is distracting to think about while completing the task, and it can be more expensive for the client over time.

Thoughts?

[Anonymous User]

Should never feel bad about billing thinking time (if that’s what you’re doing) on the train, toilet, wherever. You’re paid for your analysis and advice. Thinking is working just as much as digging a ditch counts as working for a construction worker. Don’t work for free.

What I do think is interesting is whether you keep a running timer or log individual entries and add up at the end. Like if you keep track of .1’s throughout the day for a client and add, it may be 1.2 (for example). But if you had actually tracked the seconds by using a running timer, it would be .7 or something less than 1.2 because the .1’s have rounding.

Seconded. So for the majority of clients where you list all your tasks and calculate the chunk of time spent each day, I count the minutes range and have a running doc that I convert/enter into billing program daily. The minutes all add up only once, so there’s no risk of stacking 0.1s.

But there are those other annoying clients that make billing take way longer by requesting that you identify how long you take for each specific task, and enter that individually. It’s these situations that can (very ethically) lead to stacking 0.1’s...so by the time you get to 30 mins it could be 0.5 or it could theoretically be 10 0.1’s if you did a ton of different things during that period.

in the latter scenario (though billing 1.0 in stacked 0.1s for 30 mins is pretty egregious), I think it’s the client’s fault that this occurs because it’s literally how they requested it and it makes tracking/entering take way longer.

Overall, in my view, the client should either trust the way you bill or not. And if they don’t then they should make a stink or find a new lawyer or request a new associate or whatever. But if they do trust you (which they should unless you give them reason not to), then there’s no reason to identify every amount of time spent on every single task. It takes longer to do the billing, it is distracting to think about while completing the task, and it can be more expensive for the client over time.

Thoughts?

Had this exact thought this morning and totally agree. If you put me in a situation where tightening your bill and your rigid billing rules conflict, I’m going to lean on the side of what keeps my direct employers (partners) happy.

[Anonymous User]

How frequently is padding caught by firms? I think the unethical, but financial, incentives align among both associate and firm/partner for padded hours, so I assume that it is rarely exposed.

I am aware of an occasional ATL story in which random biglaw associate billed like 100 hours in a week or 30 in a day, got fired, and the firm apologized and refunded the client.

Has anyone heard of their colleague getting caught and if so what happened to them? To be clear, I’m not looking for a detailed explanation that could be used as a blueprint to evade detection. No one in my very busy group has any reason to pad.

Padding is almost never caught because firms have little incentive to guard against it. It only becomes a problem for the billing partner if he knows the work wasn't done, the client will object, or he has to write down enough time to draw scrutiny from the firm.

Two instances I've heard about from other associates:

- An associate billed several hours for doc review despite having not logged into Relativity at all that day. The billing partner was already suspicious, so he pulled the user data from Relativity and confirmed the associate hadn't done anything. The associate was fired.

- An associate received an email about a matter several months after it closed. He then asked another associate a couple questions about the matter and then billed the client something like 1.5 for the day. No one else had billed anything to the matter at all that month so the billing partner received a bill with a single entry for 1.5. The associate was given a stern warning but otherwise not disciplined.

[objctnyrhnr]

How frequently is padding caught by firms? I think the unethical, but financial, incentives align among both associate and firm/partner for padded hours, so I assume that it is rarely exposed.

I am aware of an occasional ATL story in which random biglaw associate billed like 100 hours in a week or 30 in a day, got fired, and the firm apologized and refunded the client.

Has anyone heard of their colleague getting caught and if so what happened to them? To be clear, I’m not looking for a detailed explanation that could be used as a blueprint to evade detection. No one in my very busy group has any reason to pad.

Padding is almost never caught because firms have little incentive to guard against it. It only becomes a problem for the billing partner if he knows the work wasn't done, the client will object, or he has to write down enough time to draw scrutiny from the firm.

Two instances I've heard about from other

- An associate billed several hours for doc review despite having not logged into Relativity at all that day. The billing partner was already suspicious, so he pulled the user data from Relativity and confirmed the associate hadn't done anything. The associate was fired.

- An associate received an email about a matter several months after it closed. He then asked another associate a couple questions about the matter and then billed the client something like 1.5 for the day. No one else had billed anything to the matter at all that month so the billing partner received a bill with a single entry for 1.5. The associate was given a stern warning but otherwise not disciplined.

I feel like this should result in getting blackballed and disbarment. It’s just so brazen. Assuming there’s no more to the story, I think it can be inferred from that anecdote alone that the associate lacks both the ethical makeup and the judgmental makeup to be a member of the bar.

[Anonymous User]

On 5 I think it depends, if I'm waiting on someone for something and literally have to sit by my computer waiting for the email to arrive to get things moving and can't do something else - like eat or watch tv or something, then I'll bill the time as long as its not unreasonable - like 5, 10, maybe 15 min. But anything more than that I'll just cap and wait for it to come over.

I dunno...this may vary by practice but I sometimes have to wait on a proof to come back from the printer for over an hour late at night. I think that's reasonable to bill, especially if I'm having to stay late at the office (in pre-COVID times) or stay up past my bedtime. If I need to cut sleep to wait for something to come in that a client needs done that night, I think the client should have to pay for that.

[Anonymous User]

I've been in many, many scenarios where a deal is attempting to sign way after midnight. Often the deal team stays up all night and ends up signing at 6 or 7 AM. Much of that time is spent waiting around for the other side to return the purchase agreement or schedules - but you can't go to sleep because you have to sign that day. Do you bill for that time spent waiting?

[Wearthewildthingsr]

Wow, the answers and reasoning here are pretty... "creative."

Does anybody else just use the timer in their time entry system, and well whatever it is it is? Of course, sometimes... I'll write something down if it's just ridiculous something took me longer (e.g., I went down a rabbit hole that I shouldn't have gone down, the actual request was simpler but I misunderstood it, I had to learn something that should've taken me a second vs. the 45 minutes spent reading something overly minute).

[Anonymous User]

How frequently is padding caught by firms? I think the unethical, but financial, incentives align among both associate and firm/partner for padded hours, so I assume that it is rarely exposed.

I am aware of an occasional ATL story in which random biglaw associate billed like 100 hours in a week or 30 in a day, got fired, and the firm apologized and refunded the client.

Has anyone heard of their colleague getting caught and if so what happened to them? To be clear, I’m not looking for a detailed explanation that could be used as a blueprint to evade detection. No one in my very busy group has any reason to pad.

Padding is almost never caught because firms have little incentive to guard against it. It only becomes a problem for the billing partner if he knows the work wasn't done, the client will object, or he has to write down enough time to draw scrutiny from the firm.

Two instances I've heard about from other associates:

- An associate billed several hours for doc review despite having not logged into Relativity at all that day. The billing partner was already suspicious, so he pulled the user data from Relativity and confirmed the associate hadn't done anything. The associate was fired.

- An associate received an email about a matter several months after it closed. He then asked another associate a couple questions about the matter and then billed the client something like 1.5 for the day. No one else had billed anything to the matter at all that month so the billing partner received a bill with a single entry for 1.5. The associate was given a stern warning but otherwise not disciplined.

I don't really see the issue in the second case. Is this a corporate thing? I'm in regulatory and matters open and close all the time. I couldn't see anyone getting a "stern warning" for billing on an inactive matter (if they actually did the work).

[tlsguy2020]

I'll write something down if it's just ridiculous something took me longer

But why are you the arbiter as to what's ridiculous and what isn't? My reasoning is that the client is paying for my time. If I'm an idiot that takes too long to do a simple task, that's the client's problem for paying an idiot. I wouldn't intentionally take longer to do something, but I also wouldn't deflate something that did take longer than I thought I should.

[Anonymous User]

Let's get serious. Would you bill for the following (note: not saying I bill for all of the below):

1. TLS mental break for 2 minutes
2. TLS mental break for 5 minutes
3. TLS mental break for 10 minutes where you accidently left the timer running. If no, would you remove all 10 minutes of time or less?
4. Beginning of calls where you are the first to arrive and/or partners asking about the client's Hamptons vacation home
5. Chatting about the weekend or weather before discussing a mark-up with an associate

[Anonymous User]

I don't really see the issue in the second case. Is this a corporate thing? I'm in regulatory and matters open and close all the time. I couldn't see anyone getting a "stern warning" for billing on an inactive matter (if they actually did the work).

He didn't do any work. Basically he was included on some administrative email and then used it as an excuse to chitchat about the matter with someone else, and then billed 1.5 for doing nothing but chatting and thinking about it. There was no reason for anyone to have done any work on the matter.

What he did was extremely stupid. No one is likely to catch you making up 1.5 hours on an active matter but billing to a dead matter is going to draw scrutiny since the billing partner is going to wonder why anyone was working on it and why he should send a client a monthly bill for $900 or whatever.

[jotarokujo]

On 5 I think it depends, if I'm waiting on someone for something and literally have to sit by my computer waiting for the email to arrive to get things moving and can't do something else - like eat or watch tv or something, then I'll bill the time as long as its not unreasonable - like 5, 10, maybe 15 min. But anything more than that I'll just cap and wait for it to come over.

I dunno...this may vary by practice but I sometimes have to wait on a proof to come back from the printer for over an hour late at night. I think that's reasonable to bill, especially if I'm having to stay late at the office (in pre-COVID times) or stay up past my bedtime. If I need to cut sleep to wait for something to come in that a client needs done that night, I think the client should have to pay for that.

what's the difference between if that waiting occurs after hours or during the day? shouldn't you bill either way by your reasoning?

[Anonymous User]

On 5 I think it depends, if I'm waiting on someone for something and literally have to sit by my computer waiting for the email to arrive to get things moving and can't do something else - like eat or watch tv or something, then I'll bill the time as long as its not unreasonable - like 5, 10, maybe 15 min. But anything more than that I'll just cap and wait for it to come over.

I dunno...this may vary by practice but I sometimes have to wait on a proof to come back from the printer for over an hour late at night. I think that's reasonable to bill, especially if I'm having to stay late at the office (in pre-COVID times) or stay up past my bedtime. If I need to cut sleep to wait for something to come in that a client needs done that night, I think the client should have to pay for that.

what's the difference between if that waiting occurs after hours or during the day? shouldn't you bill either way by your reasoning?

During the day I'm there anyway. If it's late at night then waiting on the proof would be the only reason I'm there at all (or even awake, in some cases). I think that's easily distinguishable. If the client's telling me (either explicitly, or implicitly based on the realities of the timeline they've imposed) that I HAVE to be awake at 3 am to wait for something, then they should be paying for that.

[Anonymous User]

I think it’s important to keep in mind that “padding” means something different to each associate. I had a junior once who was reminded that it’s okay to bill the time he spent reading client emails. Another had to be told it’s not okay to bill time he spent waiting for the paralegal to print a draft of the agreement.

[Anonymous User]

I think it’s important to keep in mind that “padding” means something different to each associate. I had a junior once who was reminded that it’s okay to bill the time he spent reading client emails. Another had to be told it’s not okay to bill time he spent waiting for the paralegal to print a draft of the agreement.

Do you all bill time reading emails? I’m sometimes on email chains where I’m not expected to do anything. I don’t bill that time. I only bill time when I’m expected to do something. Am I being dumb?

[Iowahawk]

How frequently is padding caught by firms? I think the unethical, but financial, incentives align among both associate and firm/partner for padded hours, so I assume that it is rarely exposed.

I am aware of an occasional ATL story in which random biglaw associate billed like 100 hours in a week or 30 in a day, got fired, and the firm apologized and refunded the client.

Has anyone heard of their colleague getting caught and if so what happened to them? To be clear, I’m not looking for a detailed explanation that could be used as a blueprint to evade detection. No one in my very busy group has any reason to pad.

Padding is almost never caught because firms have little incentive to guard against it. It only becomes a problem for the billing partner if he knows the work wasn't done, the client will object, or he has to write down enough time to draw scrutiny from the firm.

Two instances I've heard about from other

- An associate billed several hours for doc review despite having not logged into Relativity at all that day. The billing partner was already suspicious, so he pulled the user data from Relativity and confirmed the associate hadn't done anything. The associate was fired.

- An associate received an email about a matter several months after it closed. He then asked another associate a couple questions about the matter and then billed the client something like 1.5 for the day. No one else had billed anything to the matter at all that month so the billing partner received a bill with a single entry for 1.5. The associate was given a stern warning but otherwise not disciplined.

I feel like this should result in getting blackballed and disbarment. It’s just so brazen. Assuming there’s no more to the story, I think it can be inferred from that anecdote alone that the associate lacks both the ethical makeup and the judgmental makeup to be a member of the bar.

I assume they would be referred, the firm GC would be involved and misconduct to that degree triggers MRPC 8.3

[Dcc617]

I think it’s important to keep in mind that “padding” means something different to each associate. I had a junior once who was reminded that it’s okay to bill the time he spent reading client emails. Another had to be told it’s not okay to bill time he spent waiting for the paralegal to print a draft of the agreement.

Do you all bill time reading emails? I’m sometimes on email chains where I’m not expected to do anything. I don’t bill that time. I only bill time when I’m expected to do something. Am I being dumb?

Yes.

[Anonymous User]

I've been in many, many scenarios where a deal is attempting to sign way after midnight. Often the deal team stays up all night and ends up signing at 6 or 7 AM. Much of that time is spent waiting around for the other side to return the purchase agreement or schedules - but you can't go to sleep because you have to sign that day. Do you bill for that time spent waiting?

Imo yes after a certain hour where you are literally only awake because of this deal. If you stayed up all night turning docs as they came in even if in increments, you worked all night. Part of the service is having a team of lawyers be up all night so the deal can get done by the arbitrary deadline the client set, not just every .5 spent revising disclosure schedules from 2:30-3:00 am.

[Bobby_Axelrod]

I assume they would be referred, the firm GC would be involved and misconduct to that degree triggers MRPC 8.3

Woah woah.. cool it with the references. We don't do that here.

[Anonymous User]

I think it’s important to keep in mind that “padding” means something different to each associate. I had a junior once who was reminded that it’s okay to bill the time he spent reading client emails. Another had to be told it’s not okay to bill time he spent waiting for the paralegal to print a draft of the agreement.

Do you all bill time reading emails? I’m sometimes on email chains where I’m not expected to do anything. I don’t bill that time. I only bill time when I’m expected to do something. Am I being dumb?

Yes.

This is actually very depressing. I usually put this under training or some biz dev matter just for myself, and it’s like 100+ hours for the last year.