I spent part of Thursday morning at the Suffolk County Courthouse in Boston. Like all courthouses, it's a place where important work is done, but where a staggering amount of time is spent waiting. And that's what I did, for the most part: waited.
You see, I had to go to the courthouse to file an emergency motion to compel, something I rarely do. My task was mainly to get my papers in the hands of the courtroom clerk and get a hearing scheduled on the docket. I didn't want to send someone else — a messenger, a paralegal, even another lawyer — because there was a minute chance that the judge would offer to hear from me on the spot. In the end, she didn't, and the clerk scheduled my hearing for Monday. I accomplished what I needed to do, so it wasn't at all a waste of time.
But if I had been like 99.99% of other American litigators representing companies, I would have billed my client for that hour spent (mostly) waiting. And my client would be lucky that it hadn't been more time, since my office is less than a hundred yards from the courthouse. If I billed hourly, my client would have spent — based on my firm's size, my location, and my personal level of experience — at least $600. That's six hundred dollars for the two minutes it took to have a piece of paper filed in court, plus 58 minutes of leaning against a wall in the corridor.
Someone explain to me how my time — anyone's time — would have been worth $600 to stand around and do nothing for 58 minutes. And don't tell me about the opportunity cost — that my time cooling my heels for one client kept me from doing other work. No client cares about that.
Yes, I delivered value to my client by going to the courthouse, but not $600 worth. Fortunately, my client is paying a fixed price, and doesn't need to worry about how I spend my time.
What do you think? Should clients pay for waiting? How does that benefit them? Where is the value in that? Share your thoughts in the comments below.