Slate's Bizbox
jurisprudence: The law, lawyers, and the court.

Free the Baby Lawyers!Deprogramming the associates at Clifford Chance.

By Dahlia Lithwick
Posted Tuesday, Oct. 29, 2002, at 6:30 PM ET

One of the strangest and most wonderful things about young associates at big law firms is their seemingly infinite capacity for unhappiness. In exchange for starting salaries of $125,000 a year, they put in 17-hour days, work weekends, and leave jackets on their chair backs on Friday at midnight so it looks like they haven't gone home. They toil away on extravagantly complex cases that are, for the most part, uninteresting to them, and they do all this without complaint. They know what they bargained for, and they unfailingly uphold their end of the deal.

This is why the whimpers coming out of the New York office of Clifford Chance last week are so incredible. The prisoners are unhappy. They have, it would seem, some issues. Clifford Chance, a British law firm, is the largest in the world. Its U.S. offices ranked dead last in almost every category in an associate survey conducted by the American Lawyer this month, so partners held a big "town hall meeting." ("Town hall meeting" is law-school-speak for "Someone is about to bleat at you about Feelings, but the bagels are free.") The partners requested that the associates draft a memorandum detailing the problems at the firm. Six associates promptly promulgated a 13-page document detailing the indignities of a baby lawyer's life at Clifford Chance.

News accounts have seized on the associates' principal complaints, including: their staggering 2,420 annual billable hours requirement to qualify for a bonus (even the sweatshops among the New York firms ask for only 2,000 hours a year); allegations that the partners "hate" the associates and "resent" paying their salaries and bonuses; allegations of "favoritism" (i.e., "If the assignment system isn't corrupt, ask yourself: Why aren't attractive female associates ever out of work?"). For the most part, this week's big news has been the firm's frantic efforts to reassure the public (and New York clients including AOL Time Warner, General Electric, and JP Morgan Chase) that associate claims notwithstanding, no one at Clifford Chance was being encouraged to "pad" bills to meet the 2,420 billable-hour requirement.

But all this seems to overlook the real story—the psychological tragedy embodied by the memo itself. A close reading of the document reveals it to be a cry for help. These are sad and desperate associates. What they really need is a lot more than reduced billables. What they need is deprogramming.

First of all, the harrowing evidence of Stockholm Syndrome: The memo is drafted in perfect outline form, with each section Roman-numeraled, lettered, and numbered for easy reference. It features numerous examples of formal, legal sillyisms. It is rife with "id"s and "see below"s. It uses the word "putative" for no reason. It is written, in other words, in the tongue of the oppressor.

But even more perplexing than the creepy legalism of the memo is its astonishing naiveté: Associates propound the crazy Communist theory that, when it comes to bonuses, "this is one firm and that all should be treated equally." Others suggest reducing the numbers of billable hours to 1,900-2,000. Another complains that "[t]he firm feels like a fiefdom." (And this is a surprise?) Many complain that partners are mean. One is "yelled at" and told "we own you." In another instance, an "associate was invited to a partner's party, then asked by that same partner what he was doing there." In its saddest manifestation of chronic battered-child syndrome, the memo pleads: "Allegedly, partners have a monthly budget for socializing with associates. We call on all partners to spend it. If you choose to do one thing to improve partner-associate relations, at least say 'hello' in the hallways. It sounds like a small thing, but simply talk to us. Get to know the associates; you might even like a few."

Associates in law firms knowingly sign away their health, leisure time, and relationships for a monstrous salary and hefty bonuses. This is not news. What is news is that the associates at Clifford Chance ask for both too much and too little. They want law firm life to be about more than just the commodification of their time, even when it is. And yet faced with an opportunity to reclaim their lives, they are willing to settle for a "hi" in the hallways and a better-appointed cage. Consider their final suggestions for improving quality of life at their firm:

  • "Put plates and utensils in the pantries, so that people working late can avoid eating out of containers"
  • "Get an online food delivery system ... so that people working late can order food easily"
  • "Set up a recreation room with a TV"
  • "Get concierge service for things like dry cleaning"
  • "Free shoeshines"
  • "Give out corporate accessories and toys"

Do these people even understand that one could eat dinner, watch television, or shine one's shoes at home? And wouldn't it be fun for them to socialize with real people instead of malevolent bosses? The absurdity of the Clifford Chase memo isn't that these associates regret their Faustian bargain. It is that they just want shiny shoes for their troubles.

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Dahlia Lithwick is a Slate senior editor.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Notes From The Fray Editor:

While sympathy for corporate lawyers is hard to come by, the contrarian Fray has managed some. One note: Many non-lawyers are unclear as to the difference between "billable" hours and hours worked, and they have posted criticisms of lawyers for whining about a "46 ½ hour week." Vast swaths of a baby lawyer's time are non-billable: continuing legal education, recruiting future babies, department meetings, professional reading (you know, keeping up with The Jurisprudence Fray) and office administration, to name a few. (The Clifford Chance system encouraged 2200 billable hours and 220 "firm" hours to reach its 2420 hour total.) Those who find this particular wrinkle fascinating should read the associates' exchange beginning here.

Remarks From The Fray:

First year associates don't make the decision to take on the outrageous hours in exchange for a lot of money voluntarily. There is no other way to pay for the degree they have just earned. Ten years ago, I graduated from law school with $70,000 of loans. I had already paid my undergrad loans when I started and I had well paid summer jobs both summers (the one between first and second year was a lucky fluke). I assure you I am a very frugal person - that $70,000 of debt was as low as it could have been without what we called a "genetic scholarship" (daddy pays). Today's law school grads can easily have $120,000 to $140,000 of debt. You can't pay that off on a normal salary. The young associates aren't employees - they are indentured servants.

This is nothing new. At my first firm, the cafeteria was deserted at lunch time. Everyone went out to grab something and get a little fresh air. The cafeteria was busy from 6 to 8 - dinner. We all trooped down with client and matter numbers jotted on post it notes or our hands. We ate and had stimulating conversations - really - for about an hour. Then we went back to work (with a stash of chocolate chip cookies in a napkin) until at least ten and usually much later. Ten was the first moment you could charge the car service home to a client.

The despair is standard operating procedure for people caught in such a situation. A dear friend of mine (who is now a partner in the same firm) summarized it neatly. "What is the difference between resentment and bitterness in an "X" associate?" she would ask. The answer? "About six months."

-- Pollymath

(To reply, click here.)


In many ways, its counter-intuitive to view highly paid people like lawyers, (some) entertainers, and athletes as exploited and oppressed. Certainly, they all have options. Certainly, many of them are selfish and nasty people.

However, people who sympathize with those at the top always have reasons to disparage those who are abused. They've always find reasons to sneer at blacks for racial discrimination, women for rape and sexual harassment, and manual workers for low pay. And the story is the same. Those being oppressed always had a choice.

But in fact, these rationalizations are always garbage. Nothing that can justify the treatment of these law associates. And that's even more the case for those who make less money and have less status.

-- Keep a Clear Eye

(To reply, click here.)


Do you honestly want me to feel sorry for a bunch of overpaid lawyers? A 17 hr. workday is pure luxury. There isn't a single surgical resident in this country who would love the opportunity to only work 17 hrs. a day for a whopping $125,000 a year. Grow up and get a grip!

-- Dr. Dave

(To reply, click here.)


[S]ome of us actually find big complicated cases interesting and would hate to be stuck, say, writing Supreme Court dispatches for an internet magazine, even if it too paid $125K+ a year.

-- Big firm associate

(To reply, click here.)

(10/30)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Let the Oil Deals Flow
Raad Alkadiri | Congress should not interfere in the oil industry's contract negotiations with the Iraqi government.