Say what you will about Big Law (and I say plenty of unflattering things about them), at least when they hire a junior lawyer, they give them a generous salary and benefits, and more often than not, appropriate training and mentoring.
What has caught my ire today is at the opposite extreme of the spectrum. New lawyers looking for their first job, who are offered positions based on a split of billed and collected fees, with no guaranteed salary. With this arrangement, they can expect that they:
1. will have no control over their income, which depends upon work delegated to them by the law firm owner, write-offs controlled by the owner, and collection policies dictated by the owner;
2. will be under pressure to do whatever work is given to them, even if they are not competent to do it; and
3. will feel the need to bring in business, long before they develop the skills to do so.
I am aware of cases where the owner provides proper mentoring and training, and for the right junior person this arrangement can work, especially if they are entrepreneurial by nature and are not a sole breadwinner.
However, I am also aware of firms that compensate young lawyers this way, while offering minimal training and mentoring.
It is one thing for an established lawyer with a client base, or the ability to generate one, to enter into an arrangement with a firm on an “eat what you kill” basis, and to be responsible for their own success, using the law firm’s platform. It is quite another thing for first year lawyers to feel that this type of arrangement is their only choice. And for some reason, it seems like it is the internationally trained lawyers who are often new to Canada, and do not have a network, who feel that taking this type of position is their only choice.
In my medium sized firm, our newly called lawyers received a fair salary, although perhaps not generous by Big Law standards. We did not expect to make much money from them as they learned their craft. That was our investment.
After a few years, when they knew what they were doing, they were offered the opportunity to receive a formulaic bonus based on billings and client origination credits. At that stage we wanted them to strive to excel by being more productive and bringing in clients.
Later still, they were told that if they wanted to be considered for partnership, they had to give up the guaranteed salary and be prepared to win or lose based on the formula. They had to be comfortable with risk if they wanted to be an owner.
Our system might not have been perfect, but at least we did not take advantage of those struggling to find their footing in the profession.
This article was originally published by Law360 Canada, part of LexisNexis Canada Inc.