Page 1 of 2
So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:59 pm
by sadsituationJD
Scary stuff:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/05/scien ... wanted=all
and
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/03/ne ... wyers.html
Of course, this also means less hours for the Biglaw associates who used to run/manage/supervise these projects. Also another "mark-up" service taken away from Biglaw. Not to mention one of the last paying jobs available to TTT grads.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:32 pm
by Morgan12Oak
Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:03 pm
by 2LLLL
Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:30 pm
by nsbane
2LLLL wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
In 1790 90% of the workforce was farmers. Now it's like 1%. Change happens dude.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:42 pm
by fatduck
nsbane wrote:2LLLL wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
In 1790 90% of the workforce was farmers. Now it's like 1%. Change happens dude.
1790, also known as 90 fucking years before
electricity
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:51 pm
by sunynp
Morgan12Oak wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
Do you understand how the biglaw pyramid is structured? And where the partners' draws/salaries come from? This automation is not only going to effect the contract attorney but the size of the classes at the bottom of the pyramid.
One of the truths about biglaw firms is that the partners really can do the deals on their own, with a handful of associates and staff to help crank documents. Everyone else is just replaceable staff, until they make the partnership cut. We've already seen how the partners act when their livelihood is threatened.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:51 pm
by Julio_El_Chavo
Morgan12Oak wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
(Ebeneezer Scrooge)
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:21 pm
by Anonymous User
2LLLL wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
Maybe 7 people work in steel mills in Pittsburgh anymore. I think one is still left.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:26 pm
by fundamentallybroken
nsbane wrote:2LLLL wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
In 1790 90% of the workforce was farmers. Now it's like 1%. Change happens dude.
Fucking Wickard, ruining things for the family farm.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:30 pm
by fatduck
Anonymous User wrote:2LLLL wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
Maybe 7 people work in steel mills in Pittsburgh anymore. I think one is still left.
the US used to produce over 3/4 of the world's steel. now it's less than 5%. it's not because of robots. it's because china and japan do it way cheaper.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:31 pm
by sadsituationJD
Do you understand how the biglaw pyramid is structured? And where the partners' draws/salaries come from? This automation is not only going to effect the contract attorney but the size of the classes at the bottom of the pyramid.
One of the truths about biglaw firms is that the partners really can do the deals on their own, with a handful of associates and staff to help crank documents.
Obviously the "efficiency" poster you referenced above has no clue whatsoever about law firm revenue structure/income.
A law firm has one "product" to sell: billable hours. That's it. To get $$$, people have to bill clients X amount of hours, period (except in cases like mass tort or other contingency-based cases, i.e, personal injury, which of course mostly do not apply to Wall St white-shoe Biglaw.
Doc review wasn't just rooms full of loser temps from TTT's reading corporate emails and spreadsheets. On the average review, the associates would have at least 150-200 hours of billable time per project writing the training manuals/case overview guides, developing the coding platform/tabs, doing 2, 3 or even 4 days of "training" the temps in a seminar, etc. They'd also review the resumes of the temps which the staffing agency supplied, interview the proposed temps, as well as negotiate contracts with the temp agencies, lease off-site space, etc. And this is simply in PREPARATION for the project.
Once the project started, there would always be at least 2 associates on the project site full-time to answer questions and "baby-sit" the temps. They'd also be "on call" to the partners and clients if a motion decision or something expanded the amount/type of docs that were to marked responsive, etc. And of course they also dealt with the software vendors if there was an issue with the technology and such. They also reviewed the individual temps performance logs and made decisions on which temps to can and which ones to "promote" to second level review or Q.C.
Then there was the huge "mark-up" the firms charged the clients for the temps. From the 35 to 40 an hour we (the temps) used to get, about another $15 per hr. went to the temp. staffing agency. On the usual project the temps (if bar admitted attorneys) were billed at 150 to 200 per hour, sometimes more (that's why the firms always wanted JD/bar admitted people on these gigs- it allowed them a fatter mark-up margin as it was all billed as "attorney" time).
Thus, these reviews were massive profit centers to the firms. I was on projects in the mid 2000s that lasted 6+ months of 12 hour days, often 7 days a week, with over 200 temps and sometimes 4 or 5 associates all billing like mad.
Now this cash cow is, at the client's demand, being replaced with automated software that has reached a level of speed, performance and accuracy which has been deemed acceptable by a major Federal jurisdiction. It is only a matter of time before other Federal courts also green-light this "robot coding." The firms are losing a major source of easy profits in the process, and to think this won't have an effect on associate-level hiring is insane. As the poster above said, the partners don't really want or need very many associates to crank out these "deals." Most of the big M&A's and such are based on the partner's political connections and clout, not any legal mumbo-jumbo. If you'd seen how doc review really works the way I have, you'd have an entirely different take on this development. The poster who is "happy" about all this probably thinks it will free up his future Biglaw time to work on SCOTUS briefs and other fascinating areas of practice. He/she apparently doesn't realize that it will instead result in his/her future unemployment/non-Biglaw career.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:59 pm
by Julio_El_Chavo
fatduck wrote:Anonymous User wrote:2LLLL wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
Maybe 7 people work in steel mills in Pittsburgh anymore. I think one is still left.
the US used to produce over 3/4 of the world's steel. now it's less than 5%. it's not because of robots. it's because china and japan do it way cheaper.
Actually, according to Wikipedia, it's closer to 10% now (and rising).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... production
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:28 am
by fatduck
please explain how you get 10% out of 86.2 million (US) and 1.49 billion (world)
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:30 am
by Morgan12Oak
sunynp wrote:Morgan12Oak wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
Do you understand how the biglaw pyramid is structured? And where the partners' draws/salaries come from? This automation is not only going to effect the contract attorney but the size of the classes at the bottom of the pyramid.
One of the truths about biglaw firms is that the partners really can do the deals on their own, with a handful of associates and staff to help crank documents. Everyone else is just replaceable staff, until they make the partnership cut. We've already seen how the partners act when their livelihood is threatened.
Of course I understand how the "big law pyramid" is structured. I love how soon to be lawyers think that they are in the only profession/industry that utilizes a "pyramid" structure so that they can talk about how it is a unique problem for lawyers. LMAO. Fact is, many lucrative professions utilize this structure because it works and its a business model that makes sense in the industry. I like this because I plan to strive to the top and now my profits won't be dwindled by bottom feeder contract attorneys.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:37 am
by sambeber
Morgan12Oak wrote: I plan to strive to the top
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:18 pm
by Julio_El_Chavo
fatduck wrote:
please explain how you get 10% out of 86.2 million (US) and 1.49 billion (world)
Fail on my part. This is why I went to law school instead of any grad school which requires math.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:22 pm
by NinerFan
Morgan12Oak wrote:sunynp wrote:Morgan12Oak wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
Do you understand how the biglaw pyramid is structured? And where the partners' draws/salaries come from? This automation is not only going to effect the contract attorney but the size of the classes at the bottom of the pyramid.
One of the truths about biglaw firms is that the partners really can do the deals on their own, with a handful of associates and staff to help crank documents. Everyone else is just replaceable staff, until they make the partnership cut. We've already seen how the partners act when their livelihood is threatened.
Of course I understand how the "big law pyramid" is structured. I love how soon to be lawyers think that they are in the only profession/industry that utilizes a "pyramid" structure so that they can talk about how it is a unique problem for lawyers. LMAO. Fact is, many lucrative professions utilize this structure because it works and its a business model that makes sense in the industry. I like this because I plan to strive to the top and now my profits won't be dwindled by bottom feeder contract attorneys.
I like this because you ignored the above poster who went into detail about how these "bottom feeder contract attorneys" contribute a nice slice of profits to attorneys at the top. His point was that your profits aren't dwindled by those so-called bottom feeders, but that they were a good source of them.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:27 pm
by sunynp
NinerFan wrote:Morgan12Oak wrote:sunynp wrote:Morgan12Oak wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
Do you understand how the biglaw pyramid is structured? And where the partners' draws/salaries come from? This automation is not only going to effect the contract attorney but the size of the classes at the bottom of the pyramid.
One of the truths about biglaw firms is that the partners really can do the deals on their own, with a handful of associates and staff to help crank documents. Everyone else is just replaceable staff, until they make the partnership cut. We've already seen how the partners act when their livelihood is threatened.
Of course I understand how the "big law pyramid" is structured. I love how soon to be lawyers think that they are in the only profession/industry that utilizes a "pyramid" structure so that they can talk about how it is a unique problem for lawyers. LMAO. Fact is, many lucrative professions utilize this structure because it works and its a business model that makes sense in the industry. I like this because I plan to strive to the top and now my profits won't be dwindled by bottom feeder contract attorneys.
I like this because you ignored the above poster who went into detail about how these "bottom feeder contract attorneys" contribute a nice slice of profits to attorneys at the top. His point was that your profits aren't dwindled by those so-called bottom feeders, but that they were a good source of them.
The other aspect of this, besides looking at your profit as a partner when you hit the bigtime
, is that associate class sizes will be smaller. The associates aren't bringing in much to the bottom line, are easy to cut, but that means biglaw hiring will be smaller. I didn't think biglaw hiring was ever (or at least not in the next couple of years) going back to pre-ITE, but this is also a downward pressure on 1st and 2nd year class size.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:31 pm
by BeenDidThat
2LLLL wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
Quite a few, actually. They are reopening a number of mills as I type. Nice try, though.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:20 pm
by Gail
Morgan12Oak wrote:sunynp wrote:Morgan12Oak wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
Do you understand how the biglaw pyramid is structured? And where the partners' draws/salaries come from? This automation is not only going to effect the contract attorney but the size of the classes at the bottom of the pyramid.
One of the truths about biglaw firms is that the partners really can do the deals on their own, with a handful of associates and staff to help crank documents. Everyone else is just replaceable staff, until they make the partnership cut. We've already seen how the partners act when their livelihood is threatened.
Of course I understand how the "big law pyramid" is structured. I love how soon to be lawyers think that they are in the only profession/industry that utilizes a "pyramid" structure so that they can talk about how it is a unique problem for lawyers. LMAO. Fact is, many lucrative professions utilize this structure because it works and its a business model that makes sense in the industry. I like this because I plan to strive to the top and now my profits won't be dwindled by bottom feeder contract attorneys.
oh hai.
fuck you.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:56 pm
by Anonymous User
I'm a junior associate at a V10 and I fucking wish I had doc review. It's not that I don't like the work that I 'm doing; I enjoy it. But it's demanding to do substantive work 24/7. You need some days where you can pipe in some music, kick your feet on the table, click "relevant" and "not relevant" and still get paid. Haven't had any of those days for about 7 months now.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:58 pm
by Morgan12Oak
Gail wrote:
oh hai.
fuck you.
Y u mad bro? Calling it like i see it
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 1:10 am
by romothesavior
I, for one, welcome our new terminator overlords.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 1:25 am
by Army2Law
fundamentallybroken wrote:nsbane wrote:2LLLL wrote:Good, I like this a lot. Getting rid of low skilled jobs and making them automated is always a boost to efficiency. Big step forward for the industry if this gets implemented broadly.
The steel industry has taken "big step
forward" over the last 60 years. But how many people in Pittsburgh still work in steel mills?
In 1790 90% of the workforce was farmers. Now it's like 1%. Change happens dude.
Fucking Wickard, ruining things for the family farm.
180. Actually lol'd.
Re: So long, doc review
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:10 am
by Anonymous User
Anonymous User wrote:I'm a junior associate at a V10 and I fucking wish I had doc review. It's not that I don't like the work that I 'm doing; I enjoy it. But it's demanding to do substantive work 24/7. You need some days where you can pipe in some music, kick your feet on the table, click "relevant" and "not relevant" and still get paid. Haven't had any of those days for about 7 months now.
One of the younger associates at my SA this summer told me she likes a moderate amount of doc review for similar reasons: it's an easy way to bill a shit ton of hours. I think she can do it from home too.