Industry FocusAttorneys

 

The legal industry, like law itself, faces complex challenges. From advanced technology affecting legal issues and the way attorneys conduct business to a complete culture shift in the industry itself, the legal industry is navigating difficult waters. Recently, a group of attorneys met at a roundtable sponsored by City National Bank and held in Las Vegas to discuss their industry, the challenges they face and their reputation in Nevada.

Connie Brennan, publisher and CEO of Nevada Business Magazine, served as moderator for the event. These monthly roundtables bring together different industries to discuss issues and solutions.

What Workforce Challenges Is the Legal Industry Facing?

Alex De Castroverde: Our biggest challenge right now is attracting good people and keeping good people. I have never seen demand this high since I have been practicing.

Stephanie Glantz: The biggest challenge for attorneys in Nevada right now is the same issue that a lot of industries are facing in terms of the labor market. It seems like every firm in town has been trying to attract talent for years now, and that makes it really challenging when you do not want to sacrifice the standard you [have] and you know your clients deserve, just for the sake of getting someone in the door.

John Tennert: The competition for the top talent is fierce, especially here in Nevada, with similar law firms going at the same talent pool for associates, law students, and lateral partners.
Mark Ricciardi: We have seen a very odd circumstance where California firms are coming after paralegals here in Las Vegas and telling them that they can work from home at a California salary. That is very scary.

George Ogilvie: [Headhunters] are encouraging people who may not necessarily be dissatisfied with their work environment to search for “better positions.” That is a problem.

Duane Frizell: [When] I lose an attorney and I feel like I had invested time, energy and money into training that attorney [it is hard]. And when you are a one-man show, it becomes a lot more painful when they leave. I am a little more flexible than most because I can be. I am more flexible on the work arrangements, but I am finding that it is really hard to find qualified candidates who are willing to work.

Ogilvie: If [an associate] is tempted to leave, then there is something intrinsically wrong with the relationship between us and the attorney. I do not have a problem with people leaving because it is evidence of the fact that it was not working out for whatever reason. And I say to people as I am interviewing them that it has got to work both ways. [They] need to understand who we are, and we need to understand who [they] are. Because if either one of us has a false impression going into the relationship, it is not going to work. Sometimes things are masked for a couple of years and then people leave, and it was not meant to be.

How Does the New Generation of Attorneys Differ From Those That Came Before Them?

Ellen Schulhofer: They do not want to work as hard. They do not want their lives to be defined by a 20 hour day and phone calls at 10:00 at night from clients. They want to have a life. That is a struggle for those of us who grew up in an industry where there is no such thing as work/life balance. It is hard to then mentor and guide them and figure out how to reward them in ways where they feel valued, other than by throwing money at them.

Michael Feder: Their definition of work/life balance is more life than work, whereas ours was working and finding time for family.

John Steffen: I have five kids and, at one point, they sat down with me before going to college and [we discussed if] they should consider the law. And each one of them weighed out that work/life balance and felt like there was less stressful ways to make more money and pursued other careers.

Schulhofer: The disconnect is [that the new generation of attorneys] want to make as much money or more [while working less]. But you cannot do both unless you raise rates, which everybody is doing, but you can only do that so much.

Feder: The biggest challenge I see with mentoring and trying to give guidance to our younger attorneys [is the lack of] professionalism. I am dealing with a situation right now where I do not think the person realizes, on the other side, that what goes around comes around. We are a small community. Be professional.

Ricciardi: Recruiting is hard and motivating is hard. It is particularly hard when the younger lawyers seem to have a different vision of what success is, what the definition of a partner is and whether they are even interested in becoming an owner of a law firm. These are all complex things. Then you throw remote work into that and you have made it all that much more complicated.

Feder: When I moved here 23 and a half years ago we, as practitioners, especially litigators, would see each other and ask how our families are doing. We would get to know each other even though we were adversaries. [Now] people are not interacting as much. I do not see them as often. Asking for an extension, is like pulling teeth at times. The younger generation coming in have different expectations and different thoughts and processes.

Steffen: The post-COVID expectation toward flexibility in the hours of when they are working [and] where they are working [has been a challenge]. And, it is not just attorneys. We have secretaries and paralegals that want to work from home. It makes it very difficult when you have employees whose very job definition requires them to be in the office and, yet, they want to work from home. It is difficult when they are good employees because it really impacts their efficiency and it impacts the environment at the office.

Schulhofer: Maintaining culture in a post-COVID world has become really difficult. We can get people into the office, but they only want to be in the office a few days a week and so mentoring and training suffers.

Does the Legal Community Value Pro Bono Work?

Sarah Ferguson: [In Nevada] there is not an expectation that attorneys do pro bono work. It is not mandated by firms and, while it is commendable that firms incentivize pro bono, I think we have a lot of work to do. It would be great if we had more pro bono and it was more encouraged by the private bar.

Ricciardi: It is the newer and the younger lawyers who have really pushed our pro bono program forward. If an associate bills 50 hours of pro bono work in a year, we will donate $2,500 to an approved charity of that associate’s choice. That is really motivating some people.

Schulhofer: [We give] hundred hours of billable credit to all of our associates towards their bonuses for pro bono. It is not required, but it is embraced.

Tennert: We encourage our newer associates to take pro bono matters [as well]. In the Supreme Court, if you take some of the pro bono cases, you can get guaranteed oral argument for younger attorneys. So, we certainly encourage it. The more emphasis that private firms [can place on pro bono work] by [considering] it important will encourage the younger lawyers to do it.

Glantz: A point with pro bono work that is oftentimes overlooked, is the experience that it provides to younger attorneys. Communicating with clients is a skill that comes over time, and being able to understand your client’s expectations is crucial to being able to implement them. But you have to be able to communicate complex legal ideas and theories to your clients to get there. That is a function that is typically reserved for more senior attorneys. When you are a younger associate and you take on a pro bono case, you can start to build that skill.

Ferguson: It is a great way to get experience. It [provides] interactions with clients and things that younger attorneys are not necessarily getting until they are a little bit older. It is a great way to learn and it allows folks to feel like they are doing something meaningful.

How Do Attorneys Determine What They Will Charge?

Ricciardi: More clients are asking for budgets so even if you are billing hourly, clients are asking for [a ballpark estimate]. And that is reasonable because a sophisticated client knows it is not ironclad.

Feder: Clients have become more sophisticated with respect to rate structures and a lot of them are requesting those budgets. They try to forecast what their legal budget is going to be on an annual basis so they have a better understanding. But there is never any guarantee, especially in litigation.

Ricciardi: If legal talent is scarce that puts pressure on the salary market. So as salaries go up, there is no choice but to try to recoup some of those costs.

Schulhofer: Many of us have participated in various organizations that do salary surveys, so we get a sense of where we are compared to the firms that are a similar size and [in similar] markets. [The survey allows you to see] whether you are low or high. If I am working on a deal with national firms, which is much of what I do, my rates are a bargain. It is crazy. I never thought I would bill what I bill now for an hour, but they are billing their fifth and six-year associates at the national firms at higher rates than we are.

How is This Industry Affected by Artificial Intelligence?

Frizell: Artificial intelligence (AI) is not only revolutionizing and challenging the way that we practice law, but also how the law is setting societal rules. It is huge. And, as with any technological advance, it brings with it the good and the bad. The good is, we can be more efficient. But the downside is that AI [has been known to] make up its own facts. That is huge.

Castroverde: AI technology is going to be very exciting for us. It has improved efficiency, organization, and everything our office does, systems and processes wise. In the next three years, we are all going to be stunned at how different it is from today because of the advancement of technology. If you look back 20 years ago, we all ran our practices and never expected we would be here today. I think in the next three years [technology] is going to move as fast as it did in the last 20 years. We have to be ready to adapt because there are going to be a lot of opportunities to do what we do better. And if we do not adapt and take advantage of those opportunities, we are going to be left behind.

Frizell: The top experts in the AI field are saying that, in a few years, we are not going to be able to distinguish fact and fiction. How are we, as lawyers and as the legal profession, going to be able to deal with that? When there is video, audio and documents that have all been fabricated, how are we going to authenticate that in court? This is a huge area of concern.

Steffen: We do not know yet where [AI] is going to go. We have a committee of four attorneys and a paralegal that are looking at it carefully and all the programs that are available. We have had a couple of informal meetings at the firm with the attorneys and we are trying to get our arms around it and see where it is going. For the time being, we have an official policy at the firm that we cannot use AI in any of our pleadings or correspondence with clients. We are waiting to make sure that it is accurate and useful. From a malpractice [perspective] too, we need to be careful before we employ AI in our general practices.

Frizell: Another concern is client confidentiality. If you want to generate a brief and you put in the facts of your case, those facts, depending on the platform, can get pulled out to the World Wide Web. Client-specific [information] can now be out there somewhere that another AI might pick up or someone might find searching the internet. Authentication of evidence and having the real law, not having a fake universe, is a huge challenge and I am already beginning to see it.

Feder: AI can help with efficiency, but I do not know, at this, point whether I have complete faith in something being drafted [by it].

Frizell: I hope that, as technology develops, we are going to have counter technology that is going to be able to figure out what is real and what is not. As of right now, I am concerned. On the efficiency side, it is definitely better, [but] in terms of being able to pin down what the facts are, it is going to get more and more difficult.

Ricciardi: We have had some clients that, in their operations, their employees fear becoming obsolete from artificial intelligence. We assume that might be true as well within our firm. We were very specific and careful about training paralegals on how to use it, showing them that they are not out of a job. They are now more efficient. They are going to get higher level tasks. And I think we have tamped down any potential fear there. But it is still out there. Many of our clients are dealing with it.

Schulhofer: As far as taking jobs, AI is more likely [to replace] paralegal functions. I suppose as AI gets smarter and can come up with the arguments, [that it] can replace us in a number of years, but maybe not in our generation. The more immediate risk is to paralegal functions and, maybe, we will need fewer assistants.

Frizell: I want to embrace [AI] more because it would make me more efficient and I could pass on the savings to my clients, but by the same token, it is scary.
How do client expectations affect attorneys?

Steffen: I read a recent poll in Florida from attorneys, and it said that number one [biggest challenge for attorneys personally] is high stress. Number two is dealing with client expectations [which] is something we live with all the time. I give most of my clients my cell phone [number] and, around the clock, I take calls from clients. It is much different than it was 10 or 15 years ago.

Ricciardi: Some of our clients do not necessarily need an answer immediately [when they text or call us]. They want to know [we heard their] question and are thinking about it. Ninety-nine percent of the time, if you immediately [respond and request] a couple of hours, they almost always say that is fine.

Schulhofer: There is a premium on responsiveness, though. You have to respond or they will go somewhere else.

What is the Outside Perception of Attorneys?

Steffen: Generally, we are seen as sharks out for ourselves. We are called counselors of the law, and we need to do more counseling and more advising and less litigating. If we did more of that, we would have a better reputation.

Ogilvie: If we are doing our job properly, we have been laying the risks out throughout the course of the litigation and when you get down to resolving it by not going to trial or arbitration, that is a business decision. And [clients] understand it and are usually pleased with the outcome. And if they are not, they know what is involved in going to trial. They know that it is going to be expensive, and they know that there is a large risk involved. [In general] clients have an understanding of the law and what we do and have a very high respect for what we do.

Feder: The expectation at the end of the day [is that we] are the widgets. We are the billable hour time. When we are done, we have nothing of value left. Whereas a lot of our clients who have businesses in a building [or] something of value, they have something that is more marketable. That is one of the things I say to people thinking of going to law school [about] what it entails and what it means. At the end of the day when I am done, I’m just done and no one says to me, “I will buy your business.” There is nothing there that is sellable, and that is the one thing I think sometimes gets misunderstood. That is why attorneys try to make as much as they can now while they are still working.

Ogilvie: [The reputation of our industry] increases with the sophistication of the client and what the practice area is. They have an understanding of what is involved in a transaction and the give and take of negotiations. They are not going to get everything they want out of a deal and, at the end of the day, if it pencils, they do the deal. If it does not, they walk away. But they are not focusing their ire at the attorney that was negotiating it or documenting it. As far as litigation, all of our clients have an understanding of what the risks of litigation are.

Ferguson: [Business being personal is] especially true with smaller and mid-sized businesses. These are oftentimes family businesses. They are deeply rooted in Nevada. They are very committed to the state and to their business, and they view their employees as extensions of their families. When something happens, whether it’s litigation or employment or a combination of the two, they get very emotionally invested in it. The bigger businesses are usually used to litigation as part of their budget and part of how they operate, so they are much more easy to manage on that front.

Castorverde: We have a license to do good every day. License to choose who we want to surround ourselves with and create a culture to help the community. And we are blessed to live in Nevada, where it continues to grow and provides more opportunities for businesses and families, and we are on the right path. It is amazing what Las Vegas and Reno have come to. I feel very privileged to be an attorney, and I would not trade it for anything.