March 27, 2008
New Advocate Group Targets Work-Life Balance At Law Firms
A guest blogger for JDBliss writes on March 20th about a 3L law student at Standford Law School who has built a new organization trying to influence how Big Law firms treat their associates. The law student
"was disturbed by the stories he heard from lawyer friends about 60-hour weeks poring over mind-numbing documents, young associates getting little feedback on their performance, and the small percentage of associates who made partner after years of toil."
Instead of accepting the "status quo", he started an organization focused on reforming law firms. According to the post, the group has already made an impact on firms as many have started to:
- provide more flexibility for lawyers who are parents,
- offer mentorship programs for newer attorneys,
- change or eliminate the billable hour in favor of fee and compensation arrangements that reduce pressures on associates,
- evaluate newer lawyers based on the skills they have developed rather than their longevity at the firm, and
- give employees credit for pro bono service and other firm-related work such as recruiting.
Wait a second. Something is missing from the above. Where is the "reduction of obnoxiously high starting salaries for graduating law school students"? Must have been an oversight. I have little worry, though. Through the commitment of this brave group, I am certain law firms will respond by lowering associate salaries from their current ridiculous levels through the group's "influenc[ing] the employment practices of law firms by highlighting firms' commitment to their lawyers' work-life balance, to diversity, and to professional development during the lawyers' careers."
If this too is not a goal of the group, the membership of "more than 1,000 students" may have unwittingly given firms a reason to do so.
One of the above bullet points does appear, in principle at least, to validate findings in a recent Harvard Business Review article about which I wrote on March 14th. The desire to move away from billable hour requirements in exchange for other arrangments that are more task oriented fits into the HBR argument of "Gen Y"'s focus on results rather than method.
I also can't argue with the need for mentorship programs and merit-based promotion. Both of these needs help the firm increase revenue and value not only to clients but firm professionals as well.
If the group wants others to take it seriously, though, it may want to consider a few things:
- If you want a work-life balance, you have to understand that your salary will not be as high. There are costs to balancing your life. Make the same argument for reducing pay for associates.
- Clean up the site. I can't take seriously a movement to drive down work standards written with such a lazy approach. No capital letters starting sentences? The grammar is so bad that it reads like a rambling manifesto rather than a reasoned argument.
- Highlight your pro bono initiatives and how it has affected the life of the members who participate.
I can't help but think of what those in other industries would think reading that site (besides the poor drafting). Imagine a coal miner or construction worker or any other type of industry where long hours are required reading it. Attorneys who get paid upwards to hundreds of thousands of dollars a year starting pay complaining about their plight.
As they say in the south, "bless your heart".
Related posts
Filed under Firm Culture, Life by Brian J. Ritchey
Leave a Comment