« Owner of LLC Cannot Sue Another Business For Discrimination Under Minn. Law | Main | SSRN Top-10 List of Recent Employment & Labor Downloads »

January 2, 2009

How to Bail Out Truckers and Lawyers

La_law Steven Pearlstein has an interesting column in the Washington Post discussing ways to reduce some of the sting in the labor market during a recession.  As Pearlstein notes, an alternative to significant layoffs during downturns in the labor market is to spread the pain by reducing pay and hours.  The Teamsters have just made such a deal with YRC Worldwide, including a stock purchase by employees, and we've obviously seen similar concession in the auto industry among others.  Pearlstein then analogizes the trucking industry to law firms:

You may have read that in recent years, the competition among major law firms to attract top talent became so intense that first-year associates were paid as much as $180,000, plus bonus, at the top Wall Street firms -- in some cases, more than federal judges make.

By any standard, it is a ridiculous amount of money. One reason the firms could afford to pay it is because corporate clients are billed at equally ridiculous rates of $250 an hour for greenhorns. The other reason is that the associates are expected to routinely put in 60 and 70 hours a week if they want any chance of making partner. The result has been a system that basically overcharges clients while leaving stressed and overworked associates feeling as if they are trapped in a gilded cage.

With the drought in deal flow and securities work, however, any number of these white-shoe firms have had to retrench. Underperforming partners are quietly being "de-equitized" (a euphemism for being kicked out of the partnership), associates have been laid off, offers of employment to new associates have been rescinded and summer programs for law students are being curtailed. In just the last few weeks, a number of firms have even frozen pay for associates at current levels.

The more interesting question, however, is why the firms haven't gone further and significantly reduced the pay of all associates, as well as the number of hours they are expected to work, along the lines of what the Teamsters and YRC have done. That way, firms could avoid further layoffs and perhaps even continue to hire a modest number of new associates. More significant, the plan might actually put an end to the arms race in associate pay and allow associates to get a life.

Undoubtedly, there would be some highly desirable law school students who would decide not to apply to a firm that dares to break from the pack and reduce associate pay. But given the high levels of dissatisfaction among law firm associates, it's a pretty good guess that there would also be a sizable number of top graduates from top law schools who would flock to a prestigious firm that offers a healthier trade-off between pay and lifestyle. It should tell you something about the legal business that no major firm has had the courage or the imagination to try it.

Personally, I've never understood how savvy corporate clients accepted these huge law firm billables so quietly--although some clients have pushed back more in recent years (Wal-Mart being a prime example).  I don't expect to hear about associates have more spare time soon, but it's an interesting thought.

Hat Tip:  Dennis Walsh

-JH

January 2, 2009 in Labor and Employment News | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef010536a37aed970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference How to Bail Out Truckers and Lawyers:

Comments

Obviously, there's no real-world or legal implication for any of this, but reading this note made me think how the image of the associate/firm employment relationship compares to labor/management relations.

The Teamsters, of course, have a built-in mechanism for making such across-the-board changes because of their status as a bargaining agent for employees. Interesting, then, that they are not analogized to associates (employees) but partners (management, arguably).

I had never thought of it this way before, but the lockstep, incremental pay rates and public dissemination of salary and benefit information at the large law firms looks ostensibly like what you would expect from a collective bargaining negotiation.

Also, if a firm maintains a lockstep pay scale and a billable hour requirement, and then reduces both, it's linking hours billed (and, therefore, hours worked) with pay in a way that isn't normally seen in a salaried position.

Posted by: Tim Eavenson | Jan 2, 2009 4:07:49 PM

Since we are evaluating compensation for a particular "profession" it seems appropriate to open the conversation to other thoughts regarding other "professions" as well. For example, perhaps all academics will subscribe to footnote number one in all papers noting all funding sources for their "research". And, government attorneys could account for all time paid at taxpayer expense.

Posted by: JR | Jan 4, 2009 2:12:49 PM

Post a comment