It’s not a crime here (England). Plenty of people hold themselves out as legal experts, without a qualification to their name. They can’t say they are solicitors, sure, but they purport to give advice as if they are. Many are bad. None, I suspect, does any pro bono work.
Maybe 20 years ago the point would’ve been good. But since, in about a year, supermarkets are going to be selling legal services, I don’t see it now. Indeed, I wonder whether Tescos will ask their lawyers to do “x” hours pro bono.
I’d say that requiring pro bono work is a more favorable option than allowing people to pretend to have credentials when they don’t.
Also, my sister, as a tech at psychological clinic is required to do pro bono work, just like the therapists and psychologists. She’s the lucky one-unlike the others, she gets paid by the hour either way, but the clients themselves don’t pay unless they have medicaid. I also know a lot of construction workers who will do things for cost–I would call that pro bono as well.
I’m also of the belief that, if you make more than a certain amount of money, you have a requirement to give some of that back to the community. My tolerance for ego-centrism only goes as far as getting what you need, and I allow a pretty lenient definition of need: I could see $100,000 a year, easy. The only way I would accept a lack of pro bono work is if taxes were raised on people who have more money than they need.
There can’t be that many firms with over 1,000 lawyers, and I work at one of them (I’m not a lawyer). Now every time I pass a lawyer in the hallway I’m going to be wondering. . .
Most offices have lots of glass, windows, office doors, picture frames. Plenty of opportunity for a discreet glance to check if they have a reflection.
Shouldn’t be too hard to make sure : just cruise the lawyer floor(s) using a picture of Mother Theresa or any other prominent humanitarian I’m too lazy to look up as a dousing rod. It should spontaneously burst into flames in the vicinity of Rand’s vortex of self-centeredness.
As a licensed professional Engineer, I can’t even realistically do pro bono work. My firm does not allow it to be done on their behalf, and there is no way I could do it without someone footing the bill for at least a few tens of millions of $$$ in professional liability insurance. My conscience is clear.
Try being a writer/editor. People frequently assume that “Because you’re good at all that writing stuff” you can edit their Thesis or provide thorough guidance on how to word a multi-page job application or write a Business Letter for them etc, all out of the goodness of your heart. Ditto being “Good with computers”- everyone (even people you’ve just met) will automatically assume you can fix whatever complicated technical problem has befallen them, all for a warm fuzzy feeling and the knowledge of a job well done.
As for the Pro Bono thing: I studied Law for a number of years, and it was made abundantly clear to us that, as Lawyers, we were expected to do a lot of Pro Bono work once we graduated. A lawyer being surprised they have to do Pro Bono work seems like a Journalist being surprised they have to cover “community events” stories. It’s part of the job, at least in this part of the world.
Incidentally, I’ve met a number of lawyers who help community groups by sorting out their leases or providing basic tax or employment legal advice Pro Bono. You don’t have to do much of that (less than an hour a week every other month, or about four half-days over the course of a year) and there’s your 20 hours.
Look bro. I don’t know how it works in Australia, but in the US, pro bono work by lawyers is not required, but it is expected by a certain element (i.e., liberal douches). And that’s what I’m pitting, the expectation some people have that because I am a lawyer I owe free labor to people.
So, you saying “it’s expected so you shouldn’t be surprised” misses the point–I’ve never been surprised by it, and I’m pitting the expectation.
Somewhere in the bathroom of Kirkland and Ellis on a Friday night, or in some fabulous mansion while his family sleeps, a tax partner is posting on his blackberry about liberal douches instead of doing his pro bono hours. A stereotype is gloriously fulfilled, ala that Chapelle show bit.
I’m curious about one thing though. Why is the tax department behind the average?
You know that “expectation” stretches back to the Middle Ages, right? Lawyers orignally weren’t supposed to get paid; working entirely pro bono as “Officers Of The Court”.
The gowns lawyers traditionally wore in English (and some Commonwealth) courts until relatively recently traditionally had a pocket in the right shoulder for where the lawyer could slip a few coins of the payment they weren’t supposed to be getting, human nature and the laws of supply and demand being what they are.
Also, jokes aside, lawyers and the legal system are essential to the functioning of modern society. The reality is that most people simply can’t afford lawyers- especially when it comes to something as incomprehensible as tax legislation or zoning regulations or setting up a trust or custody disputes or any of the other things that “The Man On The Street” could find themselves in need of legal assistance with.
The point I’m making is that because the stakes for not having legal representation are so high in some cases (Someone accused of murder, for example, could find themselves in prison for the rest of the natural life), making sure that everyone has access to some sort of legal representation is kind of an important fundamental part of civilised society in Western countries.
I realise you don’t care, though, and that’s fine (well, actually, it’s not arguably, but anyway)- but surely you can understand why Other People might take the view that lawyers should be strongly encouraged (if not legally required) to donate some of their time/services to those who could not otherwise afford it etc.?
That would be a valid OP if it hadn’t been worded in such a way that suggested you’d only found out about the Pro Bono requirement of your firm at 4:30pm on the Friday before the Monday filing date of the Big Annual Report & Public Statement of Community Involvement By Each Of The Individually Named Lawyers Working At The Firm.
Of course, if you wanted to write an OP about why people shouldn’t expect lawyers to work for free- bonus points if you can do it without sounding like Andrew Ryan from Bioshock- then I think that would be a fascinating Great Debate (albeit one you’d probably be in the minority on). But as you must surely know by know, the SDMB is probably right down at the bottom end of places on the internet for being accepting of the “Lawyers shouldn’t have to help people who can’t afford to pay lots of money” school of thought.
It’d be like me posting an OP on “Why I Think The World Was Better With The British Empire”- no-one is going to agree with me and the resulting flame war would lead to a noticeable increase in Global Warming.
RP: Tax lawyers are smarter than the average bear. Ergo, we are more libertarian. Ergo, we aren’t down with giving away free labor just cuz some numbnuts says we should. Also, close but no see-gar on the firm. Keep googling.
ME: Criminal defendants do get free legal representation. I’d say that the fact that lawyers are not required to perform free services in civil matters reflects a societal judgment that the old way of doing things you referenced doesn’t work all that well. So, the liberal douches, as ever, are in the minority.
I don’t think in-firm pro bono suggestions really chafe the hide of most libertarians. But it’s an interesting explanation anyway. Thanks.
FWIW, I’m not googling you, ya narcissist. You said in this thread that your firm is 1000+ lawyers, so I figured K&E was a suitable symbolic placeholder for my lame humor. Indeed, I would hope you’re smarter than to have posted enough true facts about yourself for some deranged poster to research and out you. Given your posts here, that could be damaging.
I’m aware of the fact that Legal Aid exists. I was merely using it as an example of the sort of Serious Situation With Terrible Consequences a person could find themselves in and for which they probably couldn’t afford to pay a lawyer if something like Legal Aid wasn’t available.
Also, lawyers here- as I’ve said- do provide a lot of civil services Pro Bono.
I find it amusing that you think the opinions I’ve expressed here would damage me if people knew my true identity. It shows how much of an insular SDMB liberal douche you are. My opinions are fairly mainstream among people I work and hang out with (well, except for my buddy Liberal Douche Rob).