First, the term "boutique" gets thrown around quite a bit but has no specific meaning. To me, the term connotes a smaller firm focused on one or two specialized niches. Partners are usually former biglaw specialists or government lawyers who put in serious time in the trenches and associates are usually brought in laterally from big firms rather than being hired in as first years. Boutiques, as I understand the term, provide top-notch legal services in their narrow field of expertise at lower (although not dramatically lower) hourly rates than biglaw firms.
Switzer uses the term to refer to small or mid-size firms as if the legal world is split into a dichotomy of biglaw and boutiques (and maybe solos).
I've spent time working for a solo (who, technically, wasn't a solo once she hired me), a small firm (10 lawyers), a huge firm (1,000+ lawyers), and now a mid-size firm (40ish lawyers). With this backround, Switzer's reasons why one should eschew biglaw for a "boutique" ring false and, as is usual for AtL, will likely create some unrealistic expectations for AtL's readership. Let's dive in.
Question: When you have a firm of thousands of lawyers, how do you avoid client conflicts when there are lawyers all over the world handling all sorts of different transactions, different litigation, different regulatory issues? Is it ever possible to have a clean conflict check? Your client is your client and you don’t want to relinquish that work because a partner (and not a PINO) in another part of the country or somewhere else in the world outranks you and you lose the work. What is your client’s reaction? Your client knows you are a “partner.” Yes, but….Well, Jill, there's these funny boxes called "computers" that can be pretty good at storing data. Big firms make big money and can justify purchasing pretty advanced computer systems and even hire consultants to create their own conflict check systems based on existing software platforms. Most large firms have their own in-house IT departments overseen by a competent CIO who will implement a conflict check system. At my last firm (with 1,000+ lawyers spread across 40 or so offices nationwide), we sent in a new matter memo to our ... wait for it ... conflicts department. The conflicts department would run the names against the database it maintains and then return a "conflicts report" to the originating attorney within an hour or so. The conflicts report listed, among other things, all prior matters where we represented or opposed any party on the conflicts memo, as well as the matter number and billing partner on the file. It also provided this same information for clients/opposing parties with similar names. Once the originating attorney gets the conflict report, he or she can reach out to the billing partner on any possible conflicting matters to discuss the issue and determine if a conflict existed. If a close call, the firm's own General Counsel would make the call.
Believe it or not, big firms like making money and they put into place sophisticated systems to avoid the embarrassment and financial sting of either being ordered to disgorge or morally compelled to refund fees charged for representing conflicting interests.
There is also an "emerging" (only if you're old as shit) body of law in the context of megafirm conflicts. The long and short of it is that, even if the firm has a conflict, the firm can still ethically represent the client if appropriate measures are taken to lock attorneys out of access to a former client's confidential information (aka a "Chinese Wall" or, in PC jurisdictions, an "ethical wall").
Next up:
Why make the switch? Boutiques provide the experience that newer lawyers crave and cannot get in Biglaw — there are opportunities to do both paid and pro bono work, and in these smaller firms, the associates often drive the pro bono work. In boutiques, they not only do the depo prep but they take the deposition. There’s a partner by your side at the depo, but you’re taking it, not the partner. You go to court with a partner and argue the motion, but you are arguing, not the partner. All three of the lawyers said making the switch gave them the opportunity to get “boots on the ground” experience, rather than just observing others. They are doing, not watching.Bullshit. The "opportunity" to do pro-bono work depends on: (1) what you do; and (2) whether your firm's ownership wants to do it. If you work at a boutique focusing on representing companies trying to go public, there's not a goddamned thing you have to offer to a pro bono client. Similarly, if the owner of your firm likes money more than poor people, he's not going to be cool with forgoing a significant amount in billings so that you can buy some deadbeat another month in their apartment because the landlord forgot to file form A-665-103 along with the eviction complaint.
The part about getting practical experience with a partner hovering around? That's a case-by-case basis and is by no means universal. I've seen it done. I've been both the associate and the partner in the scenario, but it's very uncommon. You know why? Clients don't appreciate paying for two attorneys to do what one can do. Either the associate or the partner has to write the time off. Guess who's time usually gets written off - that's right - the one with the lower rate (the associate). If this happens too often, the associate runs into a billing deficit and has to work nights and weekends to make up for the lost time.
Next:
Benefits play a part as well in the decisions to switch — availability of both childcare and elder care, flexible schedules, to name just a few.Nope. Bigger firms - and this is a shocker - have more attorneys. They are better suited to absorb the workload of an absent attorney. Also, big firms have better benefits. Know why? More people. Bigger firms have more sophisticated payroll departments and can efficiently offer and administer benefits like group disability plans, group life insurance plans, flexible (health and dependent care) spending accounts, and other cafeteria plans. Smaller firms can't match the rates that larger firms can get for some of these group insurance plans and smaller firms don't have entire departments of people to implement them by making appropriate payroll deductions and paying the correct amounts to the benefit providers.
Next up:
It’s easier to have a voice in a smaller firm, and, as one lawyer noted, it’s harder to get buy-in for a project, an idea for associate development, across a ginormous firm. It’s also easier for newer lawyers in a boutique firm to build business, to be entrepreneurial, because the firm can be flexible, especially when representing startups and billings can be deferred. Smaller firms are nimbler in what they’re willing to do to get their associates up and running, to help them succeed.It's way harder for an associate at some unknown firm to build business. You're servicing the partners' clients and that's about it. Your business card, reading "Bumbleshit & Grootfinger, Associate" neither opens doors nor impresses the average consumer. Bigger firms, especially insurance defense ones (like Lewis Brisbois or Wilson Elser) actually provide a good opportunity for business development for associates. Insureds get free lawyers without having a say, you work the file, and if you do a good job, there's a good chance the insured client comes back to you if they need legal services in the future.
Also, the "voice" issue depends on ownership. Ironically, I felt I had the loudest voice as an associate when I worked in biglaw. The small firm I worked at previously was run by a freaking dictator who would sooner stab your dog than listen to any business ideas.
Finally:
And implicit in what all three lawyers said is the collegiality that a boutique law firm can provide. Yes, we all became lawyers to do good and, as a collateral benefit, to have a comfortable lifestyle. We knew we were all in this together. At least, we were. Not so much any longer.Again, this depends on who you work for. My office of the biglaw firm was generally pretty nice. The small firm was not. It's possible to work in a laid back office of a big firm with nice people. It's also possible to work for Idi Amin in a suit in a small shop. The variable is the personalities of the humans with whom you work, not the number of humans employed by your employer.
In closing: Jill the dinosaur should shut the hell up and turn into crude oil already.
No comments:
Post a Comment