We are pleased to announce that we have teamed with Marvin Soskil of Brett Harrison Jewelry Brokers, Inc. to produce luxury timepieces and fine jewelry featuring the patent-pending Billable Hour® dial. Watches in our Luxury Line will feature 14k gold cases and swiss movements; our cufflinks will initially be offered in silver and gold. We will also be introducing other fine jewelry items in 2007.

A limited number of Luxury Line timepieces will be available before Christmas. Look for a special issue of The Advance Sheet later this month announcing the official Luxury Line launch. In the meantime, for more information or to reserve a Luxury Line timepiece from the inaugural production run, e-mail us at info@TheBillableHour.com.

We talk about balance as if it's a concrete object or a well-defined state of being. People ask, "Am I in balance," much as a woman might wonder whether she's pregnant. Yes or no. I think that view is limited, limiting, and essentially unhelpful.

Balance is better understood as flow, in my opinion. For instance, I'm building my business right now. It's been my full-time occupation for about six months, and I've spent a disproportionate amount of time during that six months on my business. Since I've made the choice to pass up a variety of recreational activities—everything from going to the movies to taking a spa vacation with a friend—it would be easy to conclude that I'm "out of balance."

As I look at it, though, I'm working to create something. That takes a lot of time, effort, and energy. But once it's created and sustainable, I'll be able to refocus some of my energy elsewhere. There's a tipping point (to take the phrase out of Gladwell's original context) that divides creation from existence; Newton's First Law tells us that objects in motion tend to stay in motion; and so once I am satisfied that my business is ticking along on its own, I'll be able to shift the creative energy from that endeavor to something else—probably R&R for a while. I've identified that point, so I know what I'm looking for, and when I get there chances are good that my work time will decrease somewhat, to a maintenance/slow growth level as opposed to creation.

The same is true for a lawyer who's in trial, who's preparing SEC filings, who's working to get a big deal closed. It isn't reasonable to say that we'll work only X number of hours a day, no matter what—at least, not if we seek to be responsible professionals. At times, we need a period of (relatively) short-term extreme productivity, sustained by adequate self-care and followed by a period of replenishment.

I advocate using an Absolute Yes list to ensure balance. List your top 3-5 priorities for whatever amount of time you choose. I like to copy the list and put in places where I'll see it frequently: in my calendar, taped to my visor in my car, in a desk drawer, etc. The list serves two functions. First, when a decision comes up, if the activity I'm considering doesn't serve one of my Absolute Yes items, that means it's almost certainly a NO, and I'll pass. And second, the list reminds me to pay some attention to each priority. If I've gone too long—a few days, a week—without touching on one of my listed priorities, I make a special effort to include something related to that priority in my schedule.

With this system, balance is measured over the space of days and weeks, not in 24-hour blocks. It's also a recognition that if a particular work-related item is the top priority, it's ok for that item to take the lion's share of time for a while. Although I'd love to suggest that we should all balance our work/family/self-care responsibilities each and every day, that's just a recipe for frustration for most professionals. Take the long-term view instead.

This Month's feature article is by special guest writer Julie Fleming Brown. Julie provides professional and personal coaching for lawyers on topics such as client and professional development, job searches, career transitions, and work/life balance. She is also certified to provide the DISC® assessment. Please visit http://www.LifeAtTheBar.com/ for more information and to arrange a complimentary coaching exploration session. For more insights from Julie, read The Advance Sheet—an occasional supplement to The Timesheet—where Julie is our regular work/life balance columnist.

What, you don't subscribe to The Timesheet? Simply complete the subscription form in the upper right-hand corner of this page, and both The Timesheet and The Advance Sheet will be delivered directly to your e-mail inbox.

©Stu Rees. All rights reserved.

Like this cartoon? Send it to friends, clients or colleagues on greeting cards. To order, visit The Billable Hour Card Store.

(Yes, we know we featured this card in the September issue of The Timesheet, but let's be honest, folks: who was thinking of Christmas before the summer was even over?)

"What is tipperism?", you ask. Tipperism is the combination of coercive tactics designed to force consumers to give unearned tips to people working in service industries. These tactics range from subtle mind-control devices like "tip jars" to the heavy-handed "mandatory gratuity." As a result, most of us have been conditioned to just hand out money to complete strangers as if we were Oprah Winfrey during sweeps week.

For example, I'm willing to bet that your local Starbucks has a tip jar on the counter. Furthermore, I'm willing to bet that this tip jar has money in it. This means that someone is actually tipping a Starbucks employee to hand them a $6 cup of coffee across the counter. Of course, this makes me wonder what happens if you don't tip. Do they make you hop behind the counter and drink the coffee directly from the machine?

Frequent business travelers are even greater victims of tipperism. Stepping into the lobby of even the most luxurious hotel is like stepping into the marketplace in a Third World country. At every turn, you are greeted by well-dressed beggars posing as hotel staff. However, instead of trying to sell you Chiclets or hand-sewn scarves, each of these "helpful employees" is willing to provide you with superior customer service under the unspoken condition that you hand over a fist-full of dollar bills at some point in the process. "May I help you with your bags . . . for the standard fee of $2 per bag . . . sir?" "Would you like turn-down service . . . for the standard fee of $5 placed on your pillow . . . ma'am?" "Don't hesitate to call us for anything . . . just so long as you have cash on-hand . . . sir."

And at least, these hotel employees are subtle. The room service people are brazen enough to demand a "mandatory gratuity," which is, in my view, a contradiction in terms. After all, by definition, a gratuity is something given without claim or demand. If it's mandatory, then it's no longer a gratuity. In fact, to call these fees "gratuities" is like the IRS calling taxes "donations." Even worse, the room service bill comes with a blank line to fill in an additional gratuity—the voluntary gratuity—just in case you thought the 18% mandatory gratuity was too stingy.

The really insidious thing about tipperism is that it is spreading. At one time, we only tipped waitresses, bell hops and young women named after luxury automobiles (e.g., "Lexus," "Mercedes," "Porsche"); and only then because we felt sorry for them as they "worked their way through college." Now, we tip everyone from hair stylists to cab drivers to dental hygienists ("You really worked hard to remove that tartar. Do you have change for a twenty?").

This is particularly true during the holiday season when we feel compelled to tip every person we've come into contact with over the last 12 months. We give "Christmas Bonuses" to the mailman, the UPS guy, the butcher, the baker and even the candlestick maker. As a result, during December, most of us turn into our grandfathers whenever we meet someone in the service industry. "What's that behind your ear, young person? Oh, it's a five dollar bill! I wonder where that came from."

Now, I know what you're thinking, "This man is too funny! I must convince my firm to hire him and pay his ridiculous fee!" You might also be thinking, "What does tipperism have to do with the practice of law?" At present, the answer is "nothing." Yet, we can change that. Remember, lawyers are in the service industry too.

To wind up on the receiving end of tipperism, all we need to do is make a simple change to our monthly bills by adding a tip entry, as shown below:

Legal fees in connection with XYZ matter
$3,425.00

Copies
132.50

Reimbursable expenses
$277.98

Subtotal
$3,834.48

TIP
$________

TOTAL
$________

The best part is that our clients will probably never notice the change. Like us, they are continually bombarded with requests for unearned tips. As a result, they do just what we do—they mentally calculate the 15% and add it to the bill without thinking. In fact, to help some of our clients in this effort, we should probably insert a fictional 7.5% legal tax on the line below the "subtotal." That way, the client will only have the double the tax in order to correctly compute the tip. My mother swore by this method whenever we went out to dinner.

Now, you may be concerned that what I'm suggesting is unethical; if not illegal. However, I want to remind you that the rules have changed. We are now fighting a new enemy—tipperism. Just like 9/11, mandatory gratuities changed everything. We have to be willing to take our tips over here so that we don't have to give them over there. We have to be willing to do everything in our power to fight radical gratuitism. I'm willing to do my part! Are you?

Sean Carter, Humorist at Law, is a syndicated columnist and popular speaker who presents Comedic Legal Education programs for law firms, in-house legal departments and bar associations across the country. Sean is also the author of If It Does Not Fit, Must You Acquit? Your Humorous Guide to the Law.

A greeting card featuring a zenlike image and a law-related haiku? That's Poetic Justice^TM.

©The Billable Hour Company. All rights reserved.

View the complete Poetic Justice^TM. line atThe Billable Hour Card Store.

Are you a poet trapped in a lawyer's body? Submit your law-related haiku to us at info@TheBillableHour.com. If we use your poem on a Poetic Justice^TM card, we'll send you a Sign & Seal as our gift.

New Jersey Lawyer seldom gets the opportunity to "break" a story in the traditional, Bob Woodward/Carl Bernstein sense of the word. And we've yet to turn one into a book/movie deal.

So it was with satisfaction our editorial staff could point to this headline in the Oct. 16 edition:

Women in Law Schools: Touting of gender parity belies reality as female ratios have been fizzling for years
The MYTH: A Special Report

That ran in large font, mind you, and was the longest headline we may ever have run. Long enough, in fact, reading the rest of the article seems sort of redundant, or like reading a T.S. Eliot "Wasteland" footnote. (I guarantee reporter Kris W. Sciborski—author of the piece—would like the comparison even though I meant it as a slight. What a good guy.) I personally enjoyed creating a mental image of "Fizzling female ratios."

Our editor-in-chief applied his magic touch to the opening sentence, teasing us all with the thought that this development "could profoundly impact the profession for years." Of course, he didn't elaborate. So I will.

If you are now (or have ever been) male, in the process of undergraduate matriculation and considering law school as a viable option to continue your education and avoid real work another three years, you might want to reconsider. With fewer females attending, there are fewer opportunities meeting smart, talented women with the work ethic you sorely lack.

The reason for this femme fugghedaboudit is unclear; Rutgers Law School-Newark's Frances V. Bouchoux, associate dean for admissions, speculates the number was unnaturally high in the 80s and 90s due to an influx of women returning to professional careers from long child-caring absences. Limited data appears to support at least part of her theory. But I think the trend reflects something more basic: women are finding other ways to business success.

If you look at the number of female law school graduates actually practicing law, you'll find a considerable gap between their figures and those of male law school graduates. [Study omitted for lack of research time.] Most men—having chosen the profession and unable to think themselves out of it—remain lawyers. Many women book it as a skillset and move on (and out).

This bodes poorly for the practice overall. Fewer women lawyers mean fewer women judges, fewer female judicial opinions. The politically correct among you may not want to admit this matters, but it does. Boys and girls think and make decisions quite differently.

There are many well-regarded studies pointing out key, "global" differences between behaviors, recognizing that individuals may vary. (For example, I'm personally warm, intuitive, caring, charming and incredibly intelligent. Therefore you, a victim of statistics, are not.) With so many judicial decisions coming down to "equity," male/female drivers can profoundly influence results.

With credit to Men, Women and Relationships: Making Peace with the Opposite Sex by John Gray and He and She—60 Significant Differences Between Men and Women by Chris Evatt, here's a list of male-female differences.

For the women: cares, understands, respected, feeling, intuitive, open, expansive, graceful, positive, good, nurturing, idealistic, centered, receptive, supportive, relaxed, joyful, enthusiastic, gentle, empowering to others, people-related, relationship-related, less independent, attention-giver, discusses problems, seeks help readily, makes suggestions, givers and avoids conflict.

For the men: accepts, analytical, logical, rational, focused, precise, strategic, practical, aggressive, assertive, autonomous, willful, confident, bold, empowered by serving, thing related, goal related, contracting, more independent, attention-getter, direct language, less willing to seek help, gives orders, likes to be adored, less-trusting, likes group encounters, receivers and seeks conflict.

You are welcome to overlay these characteristics to your own case facts. I believe you'll agree having a male-female judge can be as critical as having a good-bad one.

In a profession continually trying to be liked—or at least respected—in the public it generally serves so well, a decreasing percentage of much more likeable folks can only hurt the overall image. Plus, men tend to mumble more.

And as I know from firsthand experience spending several days with them on an isolated island cabin in Maine, they often smell not-so-good.

Bob Pladek is Special Sections Editor for New Jersey Lawyer. This article is reprinted with their permission, which wasn't overly begrudgingly given. Bob's views, thankfully, are entirely his own. You can reach him at Robert.pladek@njlnews.com.

To view Juris Comic, click here

(If you need a "fix," check out the books; studies and reports; newspaper and magazine articles; blog entries; and podcasts discussing the billable hour and related subjects such as client service, value billing and work/life balance on our Billable Hour Resources Page.)