Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

Doc Review Recruiter Blues

Staffing agencies are having a difficult time turning profit nighthawk02/16/17
Yes, these evil doc review companies took advantage of the u hous02/17/17
Job creators!!! Monkeys should be greatful that benovalent a triplesix02/17/17
I dont think most people went to law school with the intenti mtbislife02/17/17
Similarly, I do not believe anyone went to law school with t mtobeinf02/17/17
isnt that a euphemism for doc review? mtbislife02/17/17
Indeed it is. Though Everyone thinks we're the same person s mtobeinf02/17/17
haha got it. mtbislife02/17/17
The Law Schools and endless supply of student loans are to b hous02/18/17
When the firms and clients start having problems staffing re wolfman02/17/17
Idiots should stop doing OT and firms would start missing de triplesix02/17/17
Just like the 80s classic hit. Shock the monkey. mtobeinf02/17/17
Pay's actually been creeping up in my mid-sized market, at l boxchequer04/03/17
The agencies deserve what they get. They didn't advocate for orgdonor04/03/17
Totally. The agencies have no loyalty to reviewers. I was on petunia04/08/17
I can't find it within to feel sorry for them. How many time zodd04/10/17
Recently I've gotten emails from 2 different staffing agenci shuntiii04/12/17
Let me post a side-thought here. The managing attorney of qdllc04/12/17
nighthawk (Feb 16, 2017 - 11:10 pm)

Staffing agencies are having a difficult time turning profits on doc reviews. Law firms and their clients are paying these agencies less and less, which, in part, compelled the agencies to pay less. It seems, for now, that staffing agencies cannot push down pay rates any lower. At the same time, their margins are lower because their clients are paying them less. This is compounded by an increase in doc reviews over the last few months, which requires agencies to pay higher rates so they can staff the reviews.

As Paul Crump famously mentioned, "what goes around comes around." These agencies took advantage of a depressed market by paying reviewers low wages. While agencies never had high margins for doc reviews, they made substantial money through high volume of medium margins. Now, however, their margins are lower. Plus, with lower pay rates to reviewers, these agencies have to work harder to staff reviews. Agencies took advantage of a large swath of lawyers who could not find jobs; I do not feel bad for them now that these agencies are feeling the pinch.

Reply
hous (Feb 17, 2017 - 12:20 am)

Yes, these evil doc review companies took advantage of the unemployed JDs by giving them an opportunity to have a job. *rolls eyes*

Reply
triplesix (Feb 17, 2017 - 8:11 am)

Job creators!!! Monkeys should be greatful that benovalent agencies are sheltering them and feeding their litter.

Reply
mtbislife (Feb 17, 2017 - 9:45 am)

I dont think most people went to law school with the intention of doing doc review.

Reply
mtobeinf (Feb 17, 2017 - 10:00 am)

Similarly, I do not believe anyone went to law school with the intent of being an E-Discovery attorney.

Reply
mtbislife (Feb 17, 2017 - 10:01 am)

isnt that a euphemism for doc review?

Reply
mtobeinf (Feb 17, 2017 - 10:03 am)

Indeed it is. Though Everyone thinks we're the same person so I was just screwing with them. I agree in full with ur statement.

Reply
mtbislife (Feb 17, 2017 - 11:35 am)

haha got it.

Reply
hous (Feb 18, 2017 - 8:20 am)

The Law Schools and endless supply of student loans are to blame for this. The doc review companies are just being efficient participants in the free market.

Reply
wolfman (Feb 17, 2017 - 4:39 am)

When the firms and clients start having problems staffing reviews, resulting in missing production deadlines or having to use their own associates, they'll pay the agencies more, ultimately translating into higher rates and better conditions for reviewers (although agencies will make every effort to board the $). That's how the market works. Hopefully more lol scholls will close after Charlotte too.

What would be good is to have a major predictive coding disaster, like a firm trying to get away with not using humans at all and having them/the client get hit with crippling sanctions or better yet a loss in a bet-the-company litigation. Filthy swine. What goes around comes around indeed.

I quit doc review after finding a (low-paying and without prospects for advancement, at least for now) state government job because of the low pay, lack of benefits and pervasive instability involved in doing doc review, especially as an admitted JD, but I still sympathize with folks who continue doing it. The worse things get for the biglaw pigs, the better (ultimately) for reviewers.

Reply
triplesix (Feb 17, 2017 - 8:17 am)

Idiots should stop doing OT and firms would start missing deadlines today. The market has tightened substantially since the lows with some finding jobs, less graduating and dinos calling I quits. That's the thing about market capitalism, it goes in cycles and so does monkey work. Agencies are get so butthurt when people jump for the higher rate but they can do nothing about it besides "blackball" as if that means anything. Employment at will can go both ways but it mostly fuks the monkeys.

Reply
mtobeinf (Feb 17, 2017 - 10:01 am)

Just like the 80s classic hit. Shock the monkey.

Reply
boxchequer (Apr 3, 2017 - 1:33 pm)

Pay's actually been creeping up in my mid-sized market, at least with some of the agencies. Over the last three years it's gradually gone up from $21 to $25. And the premium for being a team lead increased from $2 above the others to $5 above the others.

I mean, I'm still broke as hell but at least the trajectory seems better here than in some other places.

Reply
orgdonor (Apr 3, 2017 - 1:59 pm)

The agencies deserve what they get. They didn't advocate for their reviewers when it meant the chance to get a big contract. They can't be heard to complain that biglaw is treating those same reviewers like trash. If the agencies had shown an iota of respect for their reviewers - then they could make an argument now.

But they have acted like greedy scum - and will - and should - be treated accordingly.

Reply
petunia (Apr 8, 2017 - 9:00 am)

Totally. The agencies have no loyalty to reviewers. I was on a project for a long time and when we had major cuts one day. That same day, another project with that agency was looking to expand. They easily could have moved over the reviewers from the first project to the second and keep those people working. But they weren't willing to do that. And these were reviewers were as good as doc reviewers get - smart with a good work ethic, just bad luck. But the agency (and the firms) look at all the reviewers like they are completely fungible.

i look forward to the day when the agencies are out of business and the firms have to hire people full time and keep them "on the bench" like the IT industry operates. that won't happen til work increases, boomers retire/die off, and stupid kids like me stop going to law school.

Reply
zodd (Apr 10, 2017 - 7:14 pm)

I can't find it within to feel sorry for them. How many times have they lied or exaggerated to me on the phone or email to keep me at the ready for projects that get cancelled. I spent much of March in such a state with two cancelled projects and no money to show for it. I'm lucky I got on an older, ongoing project.

Do they give two caps about how they treat us? Nope so I feel the same way about them.

Reply
shuntiii (Apr 12, 2017 - 1:51 pm)

Recently I've gotten emails from 2 different staffing agencies advertising doc reviews. I had not gotten any kind of email from them for almost 7 years, so I thought it was super bizarre.

Reply
qdllc (Apr 12, 2017 - 2:25 pm)

Let me post a side-thought here.

The managing attorney of my office recently went to a "symposium" hosted by an insurance carrier who is a sizable portion of our caseload. It was all about "cost saving measures" being instituted on the side of the carrier.

In simple terms, they want attorneys doing more for less. Don't like it, they'll go with another firm with their business.

This "lowballing" practice by insurance carriers is harming several industries where an insurance carrier is footing the bill. We can understand wanting to remove waste and fraudulent billing, but now they simply want to avoid paying for services rendered. As such, what can you expect to be the eventual outcome? We aren't billing Cadillac rates here, and I've seen more than a few attorneys change practice because they can't afford to work for clients who will balk at paying the actual cost of getting a case processed.

Reply
Post a message in this thread