Paralegal Compensation: A Primer to Permissible and Impermissible Pay Structures
By ParalegalGateway.com
ADVERTISEMENTS
by Peter G. Golden
Last
month, we highlighted the federal overtime law as it applies to
paralegals, concluding that in most cases, paralegals are not exempt
from the Fair Labor Standards Act?s overtime laws and must be
appropriately compensated for any hours work in excess of 40 in a given
week (1).
This month, we?ll tackle the ethical boundaries of creatively
compensating paralegals for something other than the mere quality and
quantity of the work performed.
Has
your firm ever proposed to give you a cut of a contingency fee recovery
on a case you?ve been assigned to? Ever been on a job interview where
the lawyer promised you a referral fee for any case you brought to the
firm as part of the overall compensation package? Well, these
compensation arrangements can sure seem enticing, but do your state?s
rules of professional responsibility allow for them? Probably not.
While the rules of professional conduct are not identical in every
state, in virtually all states, general ?fee splitting? or specific
sharing of fees received from a particular matter is not allowed. Thus,
lawyers may not, by advance agreement, make contingency payments to
paralegals based on the outcome of a case. For example, your boss
likely cannot, within the bounds of professional responsibility,
promise to pay you a bonus equivalent to 5% of the amount of attorneys?
fees recovered in a particular matter. This, and similar fee splitting
arrangements have been near universally rejected by state bar
associations and boards of ethics. The rationale for prohibiting this
conduct is to ?protect the lawyer?s professional independence and
judgment.? (2)
But
to the contrary, attorneys may compensate paralegals based on the
quantity and quality of their work and the value of that work to the
law practice. (3)
Thus, in addition to regular compensation, paralegals generally may
also be paid discretionary merit based bonuses or bonuses based on the
overall success of the firm or practice area. (4)
Thus, a lawyer or law firm that has a profitable year may award a
paralegal a bonus based on the overall success of the firm, or the
paralegal?s contribution or extraordinary work on a particular case.
Separate
from the fee splitting issue, is the issue of referral fee payments. In
a nutshell, lawyers are prohibited from paying paralegals for referring
legal work to the firm. The rationale for prohibiting an attorney from
sharing a percentage of attorney?s fees with a paralegal is that it may
lead to improper interference in a case by the paralegal. (5)
In fact, it was referral fee payments to non-lawyers and charges of
fee splitting that ultimately resulted in disciplinary action against
attorneys in one highly successful New Jersey law firm. In 2000, Tomar
Simonoff, a well known personal injury firm in New Jersey dissolved
after allegations surfaced that it paid referral fees to paralegals,
secretaries and other non-lawyers and that it conditioned the bonus of
an office administrator on office revenue. During proceedings to
determine whether the attorneys involved acted improperly, numerous
firm employees came forward to claim that paralegals and secretary
referral fees were a standard part of the compensation package.
Ultimately, the New Jersey Disciplinary Review Board recommended that
two attorneys in the firm have their license suspended for one year.
Thus, for attorneys, the punishment for providing non-lawyers with
improper forms of compensation can be significant. (more>>>)