You would think that with a system of supply and demand, having more lawyers than needed would make them cheaper to employ. Yet, just looking at a lawyer costs more than a week's wages for most people. What gives?
As Antone Johnson, former eHarmony VP/global head of Legal, explains in this article on Forbes magazine, the reason is because of sticky wages (nobody, including lawyers, likes pay cuts), limited discounting (lawyers don't want to lose their perks and bonuses) and an obsession with prestige and rankings usually judged through money.
This may be about to change, however; Antone points to an article on LAW.COM on the rise of new legal providers who base their business model on not charging insanely expensive fees:
The legal industry is in the midst of a once-in-a-generation disruption. From the perspective of one who has served as a general counsel in recent years, paying $3 million a year in outside law firm bills, we (or "they" now that I've switched teams) are fed up with large firms' endlessly escalating billing rates and cost insensitivity. With many talented, experienced lawyers having left big firms (voluntarily or involuntarily), and technology making it easier than ever to set up shop as a new solo practice or small firm, Craig's point is compelling. I started my own firm, Bottom Line Law Group, with a similar philosophy of low overhead and an awareness of clients' cost sensitivity, in large part because I want to serve early stage startups and other clients who couldn't afford me if my billing rate were $650/hour. (See http://bll.la/55 for a manifesto of sorts.) Firms like mine, and those founded by many of my colleagues in the last couple years, are the wave of the future. It's such an obvious win-win -- or slam dunk, as Craig said -- that I think it's inevitable. In much the same way that startups seize opportunities that large corporations aren't nimble enough to pursue, "startup" law firms will rush to meet the market need that's currently unmet. The only way I see that not happening is if the megafirms move to slash overhead (meaning compensation, not layoffs) and billing rates. With all of the incentives and institutional traits that I've described above, I think the probability of that happening in the near future is near zero.
|US man charged $23 quadrillion for cigarettes|
|"Instead of building hospitals, why don't we just give poor people money?"|
|Student Loans Passed Credit Cards as America's Largest Source of Debt|
|Growthism: Capitalism for the Poor, Socialism for the Rich|
|Study: Money Makes People Act Less Human|
|Everything We've Learnt About the Surveillance State|
|How to Avoid Jury Duty|
|Go the Fuck to Sleep: A Children's Bedtime Book|
|“Put words between buns.”|
|“He portrays these abandoned malls as apocalyptic ruins.”|
|“Rejuvenation is Finally an Industry.”|
|“The cost could be so near to zero it will effectively be free.”|
|Japanese Robot Serves Ice Cream From Inside a Vending Machine|
|Cure for Gayness? There's an App for That|
|Good Fucking Design Advice|
|The BROpener: Any Surface Becomes a Bottle Opener|
|Sensually Retro Illustrations by Simone Massoni|