Considering the idea of being a lawyer Forum

[PeanutsNJam]

OP if you like to argue, I think elite boutique litigation firms might be your calling.

You do have to go to Yale/Harvard/Stanford, clerk for a court of appeals judge in the area you want to work in, and work for a few years at a top tier litigation big firm like W&C though. But you get to sit around, work 5-9, and argue cases of first impression a bunch so that's nice right.

[Boggs]

Liking to argue is related to being a litigator, but it's less relevant than you might think. If that's your thing, stick to debating people on Facebook. Stripping away all the nonsense, lawyers are simply professional rule followers.

[GFox345]

Basically, if you're in it for the emotional high of winning and humiliating people, you probably won't be the best advocate.

Could be a good Halo player though

Too bad they don't pay $160k for you to do that 60-80 hours a week.

I have always wanted to ask about this particular piece of data. I hear it mentioned all the time that associates in Big Law work 60-80 hours a week, and in my experience that just isn't true. I have seen invoices that outline the numbers of hours that associates are billing (which I know are the primary matters that they work on) and based on my experience, they are working more like 50 hours a week. Of course there are weeks where the hours can approach the 60-80 range, but these are the exception rather than the rule. Perhaps this is due to the fact that I have not yet worked on a matter that has gone to trial (I have heard that this can result in months that exceed 350 hours). I would really like to hear some more fleshed out perspectives on this!

Edit: I have heard that Associates at some firms are encouraged to break the 2200 hours per year mark (the more the better, obviously) to be seriously considered to make partner. Assuming you work 48 weeks a year, that comes out to just under 46 hours a week. If someone were consistently working 60-80 hour weeks, that would put them in the 2900 -3800 hour range, and that seems really excessive.

[lymenheimer]

I have always wanted to ask about this particular piece of data. I hear it mentioned all the time that associates in Big Law work 60-80 hours a week, and in my experience (as a paralegal) that just isn't true. I have seen invoices that outline the numbers of hours that associates are billing (which I know are the primary matters that they work on) and based on my experience, they are working more like 50 hours a week. Of course there are weeks where the hours can approach the 60-80 range, but these are the exception rather than the rule. Perhaps this is due to the fact that I have not yet worked on a matter that has gone to trial (I have heard that this can result in months that exceed 350 hours). I would really like to hear some more fleshed out perspectives on this!

Edit: I have heard that Associates at some firms are encouraged to break the 2200 hours per year mark (the more the better, obviously) to be seriously considered to make partner. Assuming you work 48 weeks a year, that comes out to just under 46 hours a week. If someone were consistently working 60-80 hour weeks, that would put them in the 2900 -3800 hour range, and that seems really excessive.

work[ing]...hours a week

=/=

numbers of hours that associates are billing

[A. Nony Mouse]

I know you know this, but hours worked and hours billed aren't the same thing. Billing 2200 a year is going to require working more than 46 hours a week (assuming 48 weeks), because even the most efficient associate isn't going to be able to bill every hour they work.

(Edit: scooped by lymen)

(Also you can't assume 48 weeks - I'm sure for most it's possible but I was just talking to someone about a friend who hasn't taken vacation in 2 years.)

That said, I'm not a firm guru, and I was spitballing for the joke. I don't think it's literally 60-80 hours a week, every week. I think those weeks certainly happen, but for most people most of the time, they're not consistent. From everything I've seen here, though, they're not uncommon (though probably closer to 60, unless a trial or deal). There are a lot of examples of people discussing their hours in the legal employment forum here. There's one poster who's been on track for 3000 hrs.

[jfiaff]

I have always wanted to ask about this particular piece of data. I hear it mentioned all the time that associates in Big Law work 60-80 hours a week, and in my experience that just isn't true. I have seen invoices that outline the numbers of hours that associates are billing (which I know are the primary matters that they work on) and based on my experience, they are working more like 50 hours a week. Of course there are weeks where the hours can approach the 60-80 range, but these are the exception rather than the rule. Perhaps this is due to the fact that I have not yet worked on a matter that has gone to trial (I have heard that this can result in months that exceed 350 hours). I would really like to hear some more fleshed out perspectives on this!

Edit: I have heard that Associates at some firms are encouraged to break the 2200 hours per year mark (the more the better, obviously) to be seriously considered to make partner. Assuming you work 48 weeks a year, that comes out to just under 46 hours a week. If someone were consistently working 60-80 hour weeks, that would put them in the 2900 -3800 hour range, and that seems really excessive.

In my experience hours worked != hours billed. You can't bill the time you spend going to the bathroom, eating lunch, getting coffee, reading general emails, going to department meetings, pretending to care about your coworker's weekend, etc. I can usually bill around 5 hours during a 7 hour workday. At that rate, if I had to bill 2200 hours a year, I would be "working" ~3000 hours.

[GFox345]

I have always wanted to ask about this particular piece of data. I hear it mentioned all the time that associates in Big Law work 60-80 hours a week, and in my experience (as a paralegal) that just isn't true. I have seen invoices that outline the numbers of hours that associates are billing (which I know are the primary matters that they work on) and based on my experience, they are working more like 50 hours a week. Of course there are weeks where the hours can approach the 60-80 range, but these are the exception rather than the rule. Perhaps this is due to the fact that I have not yet worked on a matter that has gone to trial (I have heard that this can result in months that exceed 350 hours). I would really like to hear some more fleshed out perspectives on this!

Edit: I have heard that Associates at some firms are encouraged to break the 2200 hours per year mark (the more the better, obviously) to be seriously considered to make partner. Assuming you work 48 weeks a year, that comes out to just under 46 hours a week. If someone were consistently working 60-80 hour weeks, that would put them in the 2900 -3800 hour range, and that seems really excessive.

work[ing]...hours a week

=/=

numbers of hours that associates are billing

I understand your point, Lymen. I wasn't trying to suggest that I have complete knowledge of the situation, however, as a paralegal I do have access to more information than most people that don't work in Big Law at all would have.

I can say that I have been around it for a year, and it seems to me that the associates are working a lot of hours, but they aren't absolutely killing themselves working 60-80 hours each week like most people on this forum suggest.

As evidence, I cite the amount of correspondence that they engage in and the amount of requests for assistance that I receive (I understand that this is by no means perfect), but it seems to me that there are weekends where associates are working less than 5 hours and most nights they are able to stop working by 6 or 7 o'clock. Assuming that they're not coming in at 3 in the morning, an 80 hour week just isn't possible under these circumstances.

I really wasn't trying to be adversarial. I have just paid close attention since I aspire to one day work in BigLaw, and I am just sharing my findings (which again, I recognize are not perfect).

[GFox345]

I know you know this, but hours worked and hours billed aren't the same thing. Billing 2200 a year is going to require working more than 46 hours a week (assuming 48 weeks), because even the most efficient associate isn't going to be able to bill every hour they work.

(Edit: scooped by lymen)

(Also you can't assume 48 weeks - I'm sure for most it's possible but I was just talking to someone about a friend who hasn't taken vacation in 2 years.)

That said, I'm not a firm guru, and I was spitballing for the joke. I don't think it's literally 60-80 hours a week, every week. I think those weeks certainly happen, but for most people most of the time, they're not consistent. From everything I've seen here, though, they're not uncommon (though probably closer to 60, unless a trial or deal). There are a lot of examples of people discussing their hours in the legal employment forum here. There's one poster who's been on track for 3000 hrs.

Yeah, all I can say is I am expected to bill every single hour that I am clocked in at the office, but there may be a large difference between the policy for attorneys and paralegals. I have also heard that it is common practice to write off almost all hours worked by first and even second-year associates (as the clients almost always refuse to pay for their work because they do not have the experience). How does this play into the 2200 hour requirement? I realize that these are hard questions to answer, and the answers themselves are highly firm and situation-dependent. I just have always wondered about this and thought I would put it out there.

[lymenheimer]

I understand your point, Lymen. I wasn't trying to suggest that I have complete knowledge of the situation, however, as a paralegal I do have access to more information than most people that don't work in Big Law at all would have.

I can say that I have been around it for a year, and it seems to me that the associates are working a lot of hours, but they aren't absolutely killing themselves working 60-80 hours each week like most people on this forum suggest.

As evidence, I cite the amount of correspondence that they engage in and the amount of requests for assistance that I receive (I understand that this is by no means perfect), but it seems to me that there are weekends where associates are working less than 5 hours and most nights they are able to stop working by 6 or 7 o'clock. Assuming that they're not coming in at 3 in the morning, an 80 hour week just isn't possible under these circumstances.

I really wasn't trying to be adversarial. I have just paid close attention since I aspire to one day work in BigLaw, and I am just sharing my findings (which again, I recognize are not perfect).

No adversary recognized. Go through the legal employment forum a bit more and you'll see what nony is talking about. Also, learn to recognize hyperbole and temper your literal understanding of people's comments - like, the context of the comment was in regards to playing video games. I can't imagine anyone taking the comment that followed 100% literally in any circumstance. Regardless, 80 might not be the norm, but 60 isn't a rare week for some people.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Yeah, associates don't get to bill every hour clocked in at the office.

Also, because someone isn't engaging in correspondence or asking for assistance at 11 pm doesn't mean they're not working at 11 pm. Lots of people go home and work a couple of hours from home after dinner. If you don't have actually billing sheets to go by (which you might), I don't think correspondence and requests for assistance are going to show the whole story.

And honestly "there are weekends where associates are working less than 5 hours" sounds a little horrifying to someone like me who generally doesn't work weekends at all.

[GFox345]

Yeah, associates don't get to bill every hour clocked in at the office.

Also, because someone isn't engaging in correspondence or asking for assistance at 11 pm doesn't mean they're not working at 11 pm. Lots of people go home and work a couple of hours from home after dinner. If you don't have actually billing sheets to go by (which you might), I don't think correspondence and requests for assistance are going to show the whole story.

And honestly "there are weekends where associates are working less than 5 hours" sounds a little horrifying to someone like me who generally doesn't work weekends at all.

I looked through some of the billing policies, and it looks like that same rule applies to associates and staff alike, but I don't pretend to know for sure.

And your point about correspondence and requests for assistance is definitely true. It's just the best means that I have to form an impression. I also generally agree with the impression that associates work a few hours after leaving the office. My experience has definitely verified that.

If I just go by correspondence and requests for assistance, it really seems like associates regularly work less than 5 hours total over the weekend, but again this is only going off or correspondence and requests that they send me or my teammates directly.

5 hours on the weekend really isn't bad when you're just sending an email here and there and doing a small project. For me, the worst part of the job is being chained to the desk all day, and being able to work remotely would improve my quality of life a lot (or so I think right now). I think that working on the weekend stings a lot less when you are able to at least do it from home.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I hate working from home, though. (I know not everyone feels this way.)

[GFox345]

I hate working from home, though. (I know not everyone feels this way.)

Oh, I mean I hate working at all, but writing an email from my couch without pants on is much better than dragging my ass into the office on Saturday.

[zot1]

I hate working from home, though. (I know not everyone feels this way.)

Oh, I mean I hate working at all, but writing an email from my couch without pants on is much better than dragging my ass into the office on Saturday.

BigLaw associates also work weekends sometimes...

[zot1]

For those people reading this thread, being a paralegal does not give you a good idea of what being a BigLaw associate will be like. The same goes for SAs... which are definitely not like being an associate.

[Boggs]

Yeah, associates don't get to bill every hour clocked in at the office.

Also, because someone isn't engaging in correspondence or asking for assistance at 11 pm doesn't mean they're not working at 11 pm. Lots of people go home and work a couple of hours from home after dinner. If you don't have actually billing sheets to go by (which you might), I don't think correspondence and requests for assistance are going to show the whole story.

And honestly "there are weekends where associates are working less than 5 hours" sounds a little horrifying to someone like me who generally doesn't work weekends at all.

I looked through some of the billing policies, and it looks like that same rule applies to associates and staff alike, but I don't pretend to know for sure.

And your point about correspondence and requests for assistance is definitely true. It's just the best means that I have to form an impression. I also generally agree with the impression that associates work a few hours after leaving the office. My experience has definitely verified that.

If I just go by correspondence and requests for assistance, it really seems like associates regularly work less than 5 hours total over the weekend, but again this is only going off or correspondence and requests that they send me or my teammates directly.

5 hours on the weekend really isn't bad when you're just sending an email here and there and doing a small project. For me, the worst part of the job is being chained to the desk all day, and being able to work remotely would improve my quality of life a lot (or so I think right now). I think that working on the weekend stings a lot less when you are able to at least do it from home.

No way in hell are associates billing every hour they are in the office. Doing so would be fraudulent. Good points have already been made here, but (1) I'm in the office more hours then I'm billing and (2) I normally leave between 6:30-8, but usually work more hours from home. The other point is that work flow isn't steady from week to week, and as an associate, you can't control that. So yeah, you want to hit your yearly target, but you can't count on steady 45-50 hour weeks. Some weeks will be lower, which means you'll have to crush other weeks. There's no such thing as a typical week in terms of hours billed.