• Home
  • News
  • After Layoffs, Some Law Firms Have 1 Staffer for Every 4 Lawyers

Law Practice Management

After Layoffs, Some Law Firms Have 1 Staffer for Every 4 Lawyers

Posted Mar 2, 2009 11:45 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Cuts in legal support staff ranks have pushed the staffing ratios at some law firms to one support staffer for every four lawyers.

The Connecticut Law Tribune and the Philadelphia Business Journal have stories on the change that is forcing associates to take on more legal research and other tasks once handled by paralegals and law librarians.

David Sturgess, managing partner of Updike, Kelly & Spellacy in Hartford, told the Connecticut Law Tribune that his firm has a ratio of one support staffer for every three lawyers after layoffs, but he knows of some firms with 1-4 ratios.

Law firm consultant Peter Giuliani told the Law Tribune that many of the staff cuts are being made in departments handling information technology, billing or other areas that can be outsourced. In New York, he said, many law firms made significant layoffs in their law libraries.

For the most part though, firms aren't cutting secretaries, he told the Law Tribune. “In my experience, secretaries are usually a protected class,” he said.

Comments

1.

B. McLeod
Mar 2, 2009 11:56 AM CST

So, the tighter ratios are forcing “associates” to bill for tasks once performed by paralegals or law librarians.  Now that these functions are being handled directly by “associates,” they will be more valuable (to the firm, if not to clients), as the higher billings will increase revenue.  (At least as long as the clients put up with it).

Flag this comment

2.

tim
Mar 2, 2009 1:24 PM CST

this just means that the lawyer can now bill at $500 an hour to make copies.

Flag this comment

3.

John Ryan
Mar 2, 2009 1:43 PM CST

This should translate to lower bills for clients as they will no longer be paying for more overhead, and will be buying their services from a more efficient law firm (assuming they take the time to get more efficient)

Flag this comment

4.

Bill Dugan
Mar 2, 2009 2:23 PM CST

Ryan, A good firm is one with staff support.  Do I really want to spend my time making copies and proof reding when I can get a cute paralegal to do it for me?

Believe me, no one wants to see me screwing up a collate job at the copier.

Flag this comment

5.

Jill
Mar 2, 2009 3:05 PM CST

This is wrong.  Check out published stats for number of secretaries laid off and you will see that they are not a protected class.  Some librarians have been laid off, but there are plenty who weren’t and who are quite busy doing research—and not on Google.  When business slows & legal staff is cut, non-legal staff is also cut.  The real question is—is this downsizing permanent?

Flag this comment

6.

Mary Mallory
Mar 2, 2009 4:33 PM CST

For many years, associates have been taking on paralegal work because they are the “protected class.”  If firms cared about cost savings to their clients for good work, they would use more paralegals and fewer attorneys. An experienced paralegal is worth her or his weight in gold. And yes, I am a laid off paralegal.

Flag this comment

7.

B. McLeod
Mar 2, 2009 7:40 PM CST

One of the problems contributing to the mass layoffs is that staff at every level have been grossly overcompensated by the larger firms for years.  When the economy goes south, the first thing to go has to be the salaries that are so far in excess of real value.  If the laid off professionals were really “worth” the salaries they were drawing, they wouldn’t be on the street.

Paralegals have been as much a part of this as “associates.”  While Mary’s comment is correct insofar as it is true that a good paralegal can be valuable, the “weight in gold” part is symptomatic of how salary expectations have been irrationally inflated.  Note that a paralegal with a weight of 120 avoirdupois pounds would balance with a gold weight of approximately 1,749.96 Troy ounces.  Using today’s closing spot price for gold, of approximately $929.80/Troy ounce, a 120 pound paralegal worth his or her weight in gold would fetch $1,627,112.80.  Heavier paralegals would cost even more, and it is no wonder the law firms cannot afford to pay these salaries.  I think the “weight in gold” contention must be somewhat overstated.  It also does not make sense to me that a heavier (and probably slower) paralegal should be compensated more than a lighter, more nimble paralegal.  I urge all my colleages to reject this system of compensation.  Until some basic sense is restored to compensation models, this economic crisis will just go on and on.

Flag this comment

8.

Houston Lawyer
Mar 3, 2009 9:00 AM CST

B. McLeod, that is the first time that one of your comments has really made me laugh out loud.  Thanks for the laugh.

As in-house counsel, if I start seeing associates billing for work formerly done by paralegals and assistants, I will refuse to pay the full associate rate for that work.  If law firms think getting rid of lower billing rate timekeepers is the way to save money, they haven’t factored in whether clients will be willing to pay associates to do that work.

From the article, it sounds more like they are outsourcing services like copying, etc.  Law firms shouldn’t be charging clients separately for those services, anyway (it’s called overhead, which should be factored into billing rates).  I think what law firms should be doing is lowering salaries, looking at ways to lower their costs, and learning to live with lower profits if they want to keep their businesses.

Flag this comment

9.

jose
Mar 3, 2009 1:16 PM CST

Houston Lawyer,

You will never see the paralegal work in the bill.  It is going to say X hours to draft a contract.  That will include the time to proof, copy etc. that a secretary would have done. 

They aren’t going to break it down for you.  You will pay for secretarial and paralegal work.

Flag this comment

10.

JJ
Mar 3, 2009 2:00 PM CST

I used to be a partner in a mid-sized, midwestern insurance defense firm.  At that time, I shared my legal assistant with one other lawyer, the managing partner of our firm.  I am now doing contract work with a public defender’s office, where the staff to attorney ratios are more like 1:8 or 9.  Is it efficient?  No.  Not even close.  These legal assistants are some of the best in the state in their practice areas, but the attorney to staff ratios are such that I make all of my own copies and all of my own changes to documents.  It’s inefficient and a drain on state resources.  But I’ve got no sympathy for private law firms that have chosen this type of arrangement because they know full well what they are doing, which is attempting to charge clients for attorney time on projects that are essentially administrative.  Here’s a tip to private clients:  every dime that you pay toward any of this work is subsidizing the income partners’ incomes. 
That’s why they did it.  They hoped that you would not notice…

Flag this comment

11.

LLAGNY Law Librarian
Mar 4, 2009 4:34 PM CST

MLS librarian to fee earner ratios are more like 1:50

Flag this comment

12.

Chip
Mar 6, 2009 8:04 AM CST

Some of us attorneys try to include ‘overhead’ into our billing rate but many insurance clients refuse to pay a reasonable billing rate.  Certainly some charges are eaten, but many times the file requires a rush because the client has failed to timely respond to requests, etc, and we are expected to simply eat the courier costs and the copying work that we need to do to cover for issues caused in large part by the client.
Also we use paralegal’s very sparingly.  Many firms are using them too much for work that a lawyer really needs to be doing.

Flag this comment

13.

Pete Clarke
Mar 6, 2009 8:10 AM CST

I am amused by the debate on whether the “protected class” in law firms is the secretaries, or associates, or librarians, or paralegals.  If there really is a “protected class” in all of this turmoil, look a little higher.

Flag this comment

14.

JME
Mar 6, 2009 10:21 AM CST

as a solo, I am not about to fire myself.  So, I am my protected class.  There will always be divorces and bankruptcies, folks always need wills, so there will always be work for a guy like me, so long as I keep my costs and hourly rate reasonable.  I truly do not care what the big law firms do.

Flag this comment

15.

Older Guy
Mar 6, 2009 10:22 AM CST

response to tim (post #2): so true.

When asked what they specialize in, many lawyers will now answer, “Makin’ copies!”

Flag this comment

16.

starrynightfish
Mar 6, 2009 6:47 PM CST

Am I reading this right?  Who would delegate legal research to paralegals?!  (Law students, yes of course if you then review it;  paralegals, no.  I certainly don’t expect my doctor to delegate the task of diagnosis to a medical assistant and no more than that would I ever have a paralegal do my research.)  I’m completely not sorry for lawyers who now have to do their own research—they should have been doing it in the first place!

Flag this comment

17.

Nick
Mar 11, 2009 5:21 PM CST

To # 10, JJ, I have been “making my own changes” for years now.  It is not inefficient, but rather, more efficient, for a lawyer to use a computer to put together documents, if one knows what one is doing.

And I agree with both #6 and #16.  Paralegals, if kept busy with real work, ARE more valuable than associates, because the firm keeps more of what is billed for their time.  But there are certain things that require a lawyer’s thought and training and experience, and those things cannot be given to a paralegal.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.