Login
10 things I hate about the legal profession
Yesterday, I woke up on the wrong side of the bed and made a short list of the things that the legal profession needs to get rid of immediately, writes Nick Mann.
Nick Mann
They range from petty gripes to major problems, but legal practitioners and the profession will remain out of touch with modern professions until all of this goes directly into the bin:
- Letters addressed to: “Dear Sirs”, or “Sir or Madam”
I may be wrong about this, but a “madam” is not someone I associate with in the legal profession.
“Dear Sirs” is anachronistic and sexist, assuming that the people who are in charge must be men.
The other options aren’t lightyears better, but I prefer “Dear Colleague” where you are unsure of the addressee’s preferred title, or, for less formal correspondence such as emails, I don’t see anything unprofessional about using a person’s first name.
- Six-minute units and time recording
The court scales are problematic. But to address those problems, the courts have proposed a medicine that is worse than the disease: sending practitioners back to billing based on time.
Not only does time billing reward inefficiency and hand a disadvantage to working parents, but it also does not pass the pub test.
Non-lawyers see right through time billing and the padding of costs, noting that most other modern professions charge based on value or outcomes rather than how long the service provider spends on the task.
Not sure? Ask a non-lawyer about a negative association they have with the legal profession.
Still not sure? Ask legal costs experts John Chisholm or Liz Harris.
- Junk “pro bono” work
Free and low-cost legal representation is critical to accessing justice for people who otherwise could not access or receive representation under the legal system.
With that said, I’ve seen countless examples of lawyers attending social and other functions and counting it as CPD, which is then used as a marketing tool by the firm that employs them.
Given that “pro bono” means “for the public good”, it’s worth asking what public good is derived from large law firms sending junior lawyers to functions to network and eat canapes.
To quote Roman Judge Cassius: “Cui Bono?” Who benefits?
- The “notwithstandings”, the “heretofores”, the “clever” Latin maxims
When I was first admitted to practice, I was given this terrible advice: “No one engages a lawyer who speaks like their electrician.”
We see the skill in turning complex ideas into simple, plain English advice. We read court decisions and delight in succinct points and short, simple sentences.
And yet lawyers all seem to have a hard time ditching arcane language.
Perhaps we’ve all been too permissive in allowing these linguistic boondoggles, so I’m going to be direct: No one is impressed when you speak or write like this. It’s not “more professional”, “more courteous” or “legal writing”. It’s junk. And everyone is wondering what you’re trying to hide behind nonsense words and expressions.
- Letters that say: “I refer to letter of even date” (aka “today”), or “With Respect”
I’ve never read or heard the words “with respect” before something that was genuinely respectful. In fact, usually, it’s a proxy for what you really want to say, which can’t be printed here.
- The corner offices (and probably the people who occupy them)
Large corner offices are generally an antiquated token of ego.
People will say that they need the corner office because they need a quiet place to work and concentrate. And as long as you’re offering that same space to all of your hard-working colleagues, then that’s a fair point. Until then, all you’ve got is a museum showcasing antiquated partner-level flexing.
- The fax machine, the printer and the dictaphone
As a result of COVID-19, we have finally realised that as a profession, we can and should kick our addiction to paper. Electronic service, e-briefs, digital signatures and online document portals should all see off the huge printers in our offices before the end of the decade.
Just last week, a colleague of mine was asked for the Polaris fax number. The answer, we don’t have one. Why not? Because it’s 2022.
I understand that for some people, particularly those with sight impairments or conditions such as dyslexia, a dictaphone can be a helpful or important tool. For everyone else, type the letter yourself.
- Grandstanding and aggressive communication
If you are simply channelling the worst impulses of your client or acting out in the interests of your own ego or anger, are you really representing your client well?
I’m not faultless on this either. We can and should commit to doing better.
A while ago, a potential client told me they had gone with another lawyer because they wanted “a more aggressive lawyer”. They made the right choice.
Family law seems particularly rife with nasty and unprofessional correspondence, so I look with inspiration and optimism at people such as Balance Family Law Director Perpetua Kish who are helping to turn the tide.
It’s refreshing to be in litigation with opponents who commit to being polite and making appropriate allowances and concessions. The results they get for their clients are generally better because of the rapport that they build with them.
- The partnership model
As SmartCompany wrote almost a decade ago, the partnership model is broken, and large law firms are waking up to the nature and extent of the problem that they have in front of them.
- The pay gap, harassment and bullying and the law firms that allow it
So much has been said about the impact of harassment and bullying in the legal industry and how the profession needs to change both structurally and behaviourally to root it out.
There are people with better lived and direct experience than me to speak to the extent of these problems and how we eradicate them from the profession. We should hear those voices and act on the investigations and reports that tell us that sexual harassment and bullying remain rife in the profession.
Small steps have been made in each of these areas, but the pace of change needs to increase if the profession is to ward off the threat of irrelevance and further diminution of trust and respect among the broader community.
Generally, we can see that the legal profession is starting to change in ways that give us hope that it can become a modern and relevant profession in the next century.
COVID-19 and the lockdowns have given us an opportunity to make fundamental shifts in the way that we practice. We should not waste the opportunities to modernise and reform the profession.
Nick Mann is the founder and principal of Polaris Lawyers.
