LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Know new taxes! (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=819)

Adder 11-11-2008 01:25 PM

Re: Palin's 2012 Running Mate?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 370790)
I wish these idiots would stop conflating Marxism with fascism. It makes the educational system seem poorer than it already is.

Yeah, but at least he knows that the military won't "answer" to our commander in chief.

sebastian_dangerfield 11-11-2008 01:49 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 370793)
I didn't say they were hired or retained.

The problem with government jobs is what Sebby says--there are too many unqualified and/or lazy people who can't be fired. That's the problem, not that there aren't energetic qualified people to fill those slots (of course, they too might become lazy).

They ought to shift to a merit system. We can fire a whole lot of govt employees if we start giving out bonuses to performers and pink slips to laggards.

Why not? Having governmental ideals and capitalist ideals in a 50/50 mix on Wall Street would have allowed enough regulation to have averted this crisis in advance. Well, govt wastes a tremendous amount of money. Why not inject some capitalist thinking into its hierachies?

You can't get talent without money and you can't get money to pay talent with a pack of no-value-added bureaucrats on the dole. We could easily fire 10% of the govt and give the money to productive employees.

Whether I'd want that in places like the IRS is another question...

Cletus Miller 11-11-2008 01:51 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 370795)
We could easily fire 10% of the govt and give the money to productive employees.

10% of Federal, 50% of state and local, at least in Illinois (and I assume Penna).

sebastian_dangerfield 11-11-2008 02:04 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 370762)
I know quite a few law firm associates who are interested in jobs, despite the pay cut. Personally, I am holding out for ambassador to Lichtenstein.

Law firms need to reconfigure their model alltogether. Lockstep pay is insanity and the goofy premium paid for Ivy School credentials is unwarranted. Law's a trade, and the degree should be treated as the moderately valuable license it is. The Big 4 and consulting outfits don't pay such close attention to silly nonsense like "prestige" and neither do clients, who are shopping by value. If partners had any brains they'd stop with the lockstep silliness and fixation on finding the next Clarence Darrow or Lipton and go out and hire blended classes of associates from various schools at bargains. Make them compete against one another at whatever salary the kid was able to negotiate coming in the door. Why paid $160k to untested people? Smash lockstep, pay them all between $90-120k and make all other bonuses contingent on performance or business production. If they don't work out, fire them quick and pick up new bodies to fill the slot. And make the sky the limit. If you bring in X in business, you get X percent, no matter how huge that number might be, and no matter how angry it might make other associates. That'll incentivize people.

Hell, I've worked in five different areas, with and against some pretty impressive lawyers. Law isn't brain surgery. That's a bunch of bullshit we sell to people as a barrier to entry and fee justification. Managers can commoditize this work (well, at least litigation) a lot better than they have, and lower the employee costs radically.

I know... "They're already doing this, Sebby, you clueless bastard."

Adder 11-11-2008 02:12 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 370798)
Lockstep pay is insanity

I disagree, at least to the extent that the firm is both sufficiently profitable and capable of paying at premium levels. I don't see many associates leaving lockstep firms because they are so outraged over not getting paid more than their colleagues (in part because leaving often means getting paid less).

Quote:

and the goofy premium paid for Ivy School credentials is unwarranted.
Agreed. Although to some degree it helps justify the premium rates.

Quote:

The Big 4 and consulting outfits don't pay such close attention to silly nonsense like "prestige" and neither do clients, who are shopping by value.
Huh? There are only 4 of them. That fact alone is entirely a function of "prestige." People don't go to number 5 because they want a name that investors know and trust.

ETA: Sometimes the value is the prestige, btw.

Hank Chinaski 11-11-2008 02:14 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 370798)
the goofy premium paid for Ivy School credentials is unwarranted.

If you mean to say "fuck you hank", say it,

Quote:

Law's a trade, and the degree should be treated as the moderately valuable license it is. The Big 4 and consulting outfits don't pay such close attention to silly nonsense like "prestige" and neither do clients, who are shopping by value. If partners had any brains they'd stop with the lockstep silliness and fixation on finding the next Clarence Darrow of Flom and go out and hire blended classes of associates from various schools at bargains. Make them compete against one another at whatever salary the kid was able to negotiate coming in the door. Why paid $160k to untested people? Smash lockstep, pay them all between $90-120k and make all other bonuses contingent on performance or business production. If they don't work out, fire them quick and pick up new bodies to fill the slot. And make the sky the limit. If you bring in X in business, you get X percent, no matter how huge that number might be, and no matter how angry it might make other associates.
my last biglaw grew rapidly just before i got there. it grew from a single office in a backwater town to several offices with lots more lawyers. we kicked ass. we were paid on merit. the people who built the firm and really drove the growth were from shit law schools. we had practice group leaders who went to Cooley for goodness sakes. they all had a chip on their shoulders from being looked down on and busted their asses day after day. in short, we were what you say firms should be.

once we got big? we stopped hiring from shit schools and started looking at U of M grads, or some out of state places. turned out to be a bad idea.

sebastian_dangerfield 11-11-2008 02:15 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller (Post 370796)
10% of Federal, 50% of state and local, at least in Illinois (and I assume Penna).

I've always been a fan of doing away with most local govt. Have a mayor, police and fire department. School boards should not exist. They're cesspools for local political hacks to wield influence and get themselves wired to get rich in the favors machine.

In PA, every town agency has it's own "Solicitor." Can you fucking believe that? A pile of locally-wired assholes with law degrees each get a couple grand a month just to advise the head of each little agency on code, or replying to subpoenas or other similar tasks it would take you or me fifteen minutes to complete. I've dealt with a bunch and it's appalling. Nine out of ten don't do shit. I had to contract with municipalities through a few and they have to be the laziest, most useless bags of plasma I've ever worked with.

Each county in PA spends hundreds of thousands on these people every year. Can you imagine that? Is this common or something unique to this shithole?

sebastian_dangerfield 11-11-2008 02:22 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 370799)
I disagree, at least to the extent that the firm is both sufficiently profitable and capable of paying at premium levels. I don't see many associates leaving lockstep firms because they are so outraged over not getting paid more than their colleagues (in part because leaving often means getting paid less).



Agreed. Although to some degree it helps justify the premium rates.



Huh? There are only 4 of them. That fact alone is entirely a function of "prestige." People don't go to number 5 because they want a name that investors know and trust.

We're in a long term "productivity" cycle. It's worsening and it's only going to lay into law with an increasing vengeance down the road.

The concept of "prestige" will hold in places like NY and for super-well heeled clients who can afford the premium. But in places like PA, NJ, etc... I see a lot more concern with short term cash flow in buyers. I just talked to a buddy of mine who's an assistant GC. Does a lot of hiring for litigation purposes. For everything but those "could be a monstrous verdict" cases, he's being pressed by the bean-counters to seek bargains. I doubt he's alone.

I don't see associates leaving lockstep either. I see management abandoning it.

Adder 11-11-2008 02:50 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 370802)
The concept of "prestige" will hold in places like NY and for super-well heeled clients who can afford the premium. But in places like PA, NJ, etc... I see a lot more concern with short term cash flow in buyers.

Agreed. Not everyone can command the kind of premium rates that are necessary for lockstep to work. Which is why almost no one does real lockstep anymore.

Gattigap 11-11-2008 03:01 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 370801)

In PA, every town agency has it's own "Solicitor." Can you fucking believe that? A pile of locally-wired assholes with law degrees each get a couple grand a month just to advise the head of each little agency on code, or replying to subpoenas or other similar tasks it would take you or me fifteen minutes to complete. I've dealt with a bunch and it's appalling. Nine out of ten don't do shit. I had to contract with municipalities through a few and they have to be the laziest, most useless bags of plasma I've ever worked with.

Each county in PA spends hundreds of thousands on these people every year. Can you imagine that? Is this common or something unique to this shithole?

Huh.

I'm going to put a pin in this one, just to see if someone wishes to respond.

LessinSF 11-11-2008 04:33 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gattigap (Post 370804)
Huh.

I'm going to put a pin in this one, just to see if someone wishes to respond.

Is "putting a pin in it" the same as "killing the board"?

Sparklehorse 11-11-2008 04:54 PM

Re: Election Eve Fire
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 370787)
I think it was TM who posted an article about a black church that was burned down in Western Mass. on election eve.

They've concluded it was arson.

To be clear though they have not yet determined whether it was a hate crime.

Link

Quote:

But federal and state investigators have not been able to determine from the evidence whether it was a hate crime, State Fire Marshal Stephen D. Coan said at a news conference attended by federal, state, and local law enforcement officials. All potential motives are being investigated, he said.

“We know it’s arson. We know it’s a very serious crime and we’re going to do everything we can to identify the perpetrator and to prosecute that person or persons responsible,” said Hampden District Attorney William M. Bennett. He said whoever set the fire could face federal charges, depending on what the investigation uncovers.
I can't find a link at the moment but I'd read earlier that there had been tension with the neighborhood because the church was being built in a residential area.

Gattigap 11-11-2008 04:56 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 370809)
Is "putting a pin in it" the same as "killing the board"?

Apparently so. I haven't smushed the board like that since admitting Flinty's and my forbidden love.

Sorry, y'all. Carry on.

Atticus Grinch 11-11-2008 05:07 PM

Re: Lost Generation
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gattigap (Post 370804)
Huh.

I'm going to put a pin in this one, just to see if someone wishes to respond.

Can't. Office holiday today, and I don't post on the Boards during Me Time.

Adder 11-11-2008 05:19 PM

Re: Election Eve Fire
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparklehorse (Post 370810)

I can't find a link at the moment but I'd read earlier that there had been tension with the neighborhood because the church was being built in a residential area.

The original article Thurgreed posted said that.

Although even if that was the motivation, I'm not sure it equates to not being a hate crime. Aren't churches generally in residential areas?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:32 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com