| Topic Name: |
only 2000 hours?? |
| Message Name: |
it does cut both ways |
| Date Posted: |
12/31/2001 |
| In Reply To: |
Maybe if it only takes us 2 1/2 hours to do a PTO response (Patent law) for a whole $400 dollars (it's happened several times for me), that we know would somehow be billed out at over $2,000 by similarly experienced associates at our firms and our competitors, then should we "bulk up" the hours?
No way (of course). Just a point that the experience thing cuts both ways! Leave it to the partners to cut unless its something we learned, or should have learned, in law school. Just my .02 cents. |
| Message: |
It's true that one can sometimes do work with a bit of experience much more efficiently. My view is that the client gets the win each time--in other words,if you are cheaper than other firms, the client gets billed less.
If you are less efficient, you cut your bill, the client gets billed less.
I do agree that oldskool has made the point, though, that as long as you are working on the client's file, the best rule should be bill the file according to what you work, and leave it for the responsible partner to iron it out. When I was an associate, that was the rule, but I knew other folks at other firms for whom different rules applied, and for whom partners tracked write off efficiency as a big deal. In those firms, I can see an argument for some self-editing.
|
|
