diner dusk
her twenty-something hips
winding minds counter clockwise
a y
w
a
s
w
o
l
b
birthday balloons the one that doesn’t burst
pea soup fog
the sound of a map
unfolding beside me
Ed
Markwoski,
“pea soup fog” * “diner dusk” from
Haiku Sun (Issue X, Jan. 2004)
and, an encore:
shifting
as
he shouts
the
faith healer’s
toupee
from dagosan
April 1 —
no one here
to make a fool of me
first scull of the year
arms ache
just waving
last day of March
her pink slip’s
no prank
[April 1, 2005]
potluck
The usual savvy suspects are taking part in Adam Smith Esq‘s
“The Future of the Billable Hour.” As usual, almost everyone
blames the method of billing rather than the motives of the biller.
It is an awful lot like blaming the automobile for injury done from
collisions, rather than blaming the reckless ness or negligence (or
intent) of the driver (or the driver’s employer).
As I’ve discussd in my piece on chronomentrophobia
(where you can find citations and links), and have probably mentioned
elsewhere:
[1] From the client’s perspective, there is nothing wrong
with the billable hour fee system that cannot be cured by
the lawyer merely doing what is required of him or her ethically
and as a fiduciary: (a) following the standards embodied in
Rule 1.5(a) of the Model Code — e.g., basing the fee on the
experience and capabilities of the lawyer, complexity of the matter,
etc.; (b) performing in an efficient and competent manner; and
(c) keeping the client well-informed.
[2] From the perspective of the overworked associate or partner,
there is nothing wrong with the billable hour fee system that is not
very likely to be carried over to any alternative billing arrangements,
if the firm expects the shift to be made without reducing its income
or profits.
[3] Clients expect “alternative fee arrangements” and “value billing”
to result in lower overall fees, not higher ones.