How do billable hours work?

[sarcasticlemon]

If someone can do what takes another person 2 hours in 1.5 hours let's say, and therefore bill less and look worse to my employer, doesn't it incentivize working at the same pace as everyone else (aka slower)? 

Like if the time it takes a project is a bell curve, won't the people on the edges either look bad or really good, billable hour-wise (within reason)?

[BlockedQuebecois]

The error you are making is thinking that  an associate who is able to complete work more quickly will not be given more work. In practice, they’ll be working towards a target, and so once they are done a task they will take on another one. 

[OzLaw16]

In addition to BQ's point, there's also the fact that your billable hours aren't the only factor that's considered when your firm is assessing your performance. In many practice areas, efficiency is very highly valued. If Associate A bills 1700 hours in a year but consistently stays on budget and has very little of their time written off, while Associate B bills 1850 hours in a year but is always getting feedback from partners that they take too long to do tasks, the firm will likely be happier with Associate A overall than with Associate B.

[Mal]

25 minutes ago, sarcasticlemon said:

If someone can do what takes another person 2 hours in 1.5 hours let's say, and therefore bill less and look worse to my employer, doesn't it incentivize working at the same pace as everyone else (aka slower)? 

Like if the time it takes a project is a bell curve, won't the people on the edges either look bad or really good, billable hour-wise (within reason)?

No:

(a) as a junior lawyer, billables matter less than giving the impression that you are available and giving good work; and

(b) clients won't pay for you to be slow. 

[LMP]

If you wanted to artificially deflate your hours I guess you could. But as others have said, there's no point being the judge of your own hours as a junior. 

In fact one of the things I (and other students) struggle with, is not cutting down the amount we bill! Simply because it feels a little silly to bill 3 hours for a motion that should have taken .5 to draft. 

But the advice I've always been given is to simply bill accurately. Let the partner decide what gets written down and what doesn't. 

[Rashabon]

1 hour ago, LMP said:

If you wanted to artificially deflate your hours I guess you could. But as others have said, there's no point being the judge of your own hours as a junior. 

In fact one of the things I (and other students) struggle with, is not cutting down the amount we bill! Simply because it feels a little silly to bill 3 hours for a motion that should have taken .5 to draft. 

But the advice I've always been given is to simply bill accurately. Let the partner decide what gets written down and what doesn't. 

Part of that is that if you continually take too long to do things it is better for you to know that, and if you underbill you'll never get that feedback.

[Psychometronic]

4 hours ago, LMP said:

In fact one of the things I (and other students) struggle with, is not cutting down the amount we bill! [emphasis added]

As a junior, I'm glad to see this is more universal than I thought. 

[PzabbytheLawyer]

There's also the inverse - you turn things around quickly, and they want you to spend more time on it (so you don't burn out, not for quality reasons).

That was a really refreshing change.

[BlockedQuebecois]

6 hours ago, PzabbytheLawyer said:

There's also the inverse - you turn things around quickly, and they want you to spend more time on it (so you don't burn out, not for quality reasons).

That was a really refreshing change.

That strikes me as an unethical billing practice. If the work has been done properly in a certain amount of time, then the client shouldn’t be getting billed for more than that amount of time.

If the firm isn’t billing for that time but it’s being used towards target for some reason, I would prefer they just set a lower target.