Comments on: The Canary in Our Coal Mine http://www.slaw.ca/2009/06/07/the-canary-in-our-coal-mine/ Canada's online legal magazine Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:12:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Lawnix Law http://www.slaw.ca/2009/06/07/the-canary-in-our-coal-mine/comment-page-1/#comment-705217 Lawnix Law Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:18:28 +0000 http://www.slaw.ca/?p=9207#comment-705217 It isn't entirely clear to me whether these clients will get the associates' work for free or if they will still have to pay something to the firm. If these clients are really getting the associates for free, then this means that the firm is not only paying associates not to work for them - it is also robbing itself of the legal services that the client no longer has to pay for. The firm is paying associates to do nothing, and is getting less work from the client in the bargain. If this were true, wouldn't the firm be far better off to simply pay the associates $60,000 to do absolutely nothing? It isn't entirely clear to me whether these clients will get the associates' work for free or if they will still have to pay something to the firm.

If these clients are really getting the associates for free, then this means that the firm is not only paying associates not to work for them – it is also robbing itself of the legal services that the client no longer has to pay for. The firm is paying associates to do nothing, and is getting less work from the client in the bargain.

If this were true, wouldn't the firm be far better off to simply pay the associates $60,000 to do absolutely nothing?

]]> By: John G http://www.slaw.ca/2009/06/07/the-canary-in-our-coal-mine/comment-page-1/#comment-705209 John G Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:58:39 +0000 http://www.slaw.ca/?p=9207#comment-705209 Any trace of Canadian firms doing the same kind of thing, i.e. pushing new associates out the door (to clients or otherwise), etc? One of the reasons that US law students are looking for the corporate clientele is their debt load. The ABA Journal asked its readers if they would go to law school if they were starting out today. <a href="http://www.abajournal.com/news/if_you_had_a_do-over_would_you_choose_law_school" rel="nofollow">Most said no.</a> It is appalling how much debt so many of them have. I suspect the Canadian canary has a bit of life left in it for the moment ... but would not bet large amounts against the general practice going the same way over time. The 'push-out-the-associates' evidence may not be as obvious, but some of Jordan's other challenges are certainly present in the Canadian market too. Any trace of Canadian firms doing the same kind of thing, i.e. pushing new associates out the door (to clients or otherwise), etc? One of the reasons that US law students are looking for the corporate clientele is their debt load.

The ABA Journal asked its readers if they would go to law school if they were starting out today. Most said no. It is appalling how much debt so many of them have.

I suspect the Canadian canary has a bit of life left in it for the moment … but would not bet large amounts against the general practice going the same way over time. The 'push-out-the-associates' evidence may not be as obvious, but some of Jordan's other challenges are certainly present in the Canadian market too.

]]> By: Noel Semple http://www.slaw.ca/2009/06/07/the-canary-in-our-coal-mine/comment-page-1/#comment-705201 Noel Semple Sun, 07 Jun 2009 20:12:55 +0000 http://www.slaw.ca/?p=9207#comment-705201 Jordan states that there will be a "growing buildup of law school graduates who can’t find work." I think this claim is true only if limiting clause is added: "... can't find work with a corporate clientele." Individual clients, by contrast to corporations, have a large, legitimate, and unmet demand for legal services. This is most dramatic in family law. The extreme rate of self-representation (40%+) is a consequence of unaffordable prices, which is in turn a consequence of a shortage of supply. Law schools need to train lawyers to join the segment of the marketplace which is starved for supply (individual clients), not that which is experiencing a glut (corporate clients). Jordan states that there will be a "growing buildup of law school graduates who can’t find work." I think this claim is true only if limiting clause is added: "… can't find work with a corporate clientele."

Individual clients, by contrast to corporations, have a large, legitimate, and unmet demand for legal services. This is most dramatic in family law. The extreme rate of self-representation (40%+) is a consequence of unaffordable prices, which is in turn a consequence of a shortage of supply. Law schools need to train lawyers to join the segment of the marketplace which is starved for supply (individual clients), not that which is experiencing a glut (corporate clients).

]]>