Barclays puts hourly billing under spotlight as bank completes final formal panel review
Bank pushes advisers to reduce hourly billing to just 15% of all work as firms including Ashurst, Norton Rose Fulbright and magic circle heavyweights win spots on new roster
July 02, 2018 at 07:01 AM
3 minute read
Barclays has completed its final formal legal panel review, as the bank shifts to a new system it describes as "active relationship management".
The new line-up will run for three years, although advisers will now be subject to an ongoing assessment process, giving the bank more flexibility to manage the size and composition of the panel, with firms added and removed on an ad hoc basis.
The process has seen the panel trimmed from about 140 firms to 100, while the bank has also cut its 'core specialist firm' tier from the panel, which will now consist of two tiers of panel firms and specialist firms – with a roughly 20/80 split.
Firms understood to have won places on the panel include Allen & Overy, Clifford Chance, Linklaters, Dentons, Simmons & Simmons, Norton Rose Fulbright, Baker McKenzie, Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft, Taylor Wessing and Ashurst.
One of the key priorities set out by the bank in the panel review was the reduction of the proportion of work carried out on hourly rates, as well as an increase in the use of what the bank describes as "effective fee arrangements".
Barclays head of external engagement Stephanie Hamon told Legal Week that its panel firms currently bill an average of about 40% of work on an hourly basis, which she hopes to see drop to 15%.
Hamon said: "Part of our reasoning is internal – we need to better manage our business function, including more accurate budgeting and forecasting. When you're being billed on an hourly rate, it's harder to tell your CFO your firms are being efficient."
The 15% figure is aspirational but the bank will continue to assess, on a quarterly basis, how much firms are billing hourly.
Barclays also prioritised collaboration and innovation as key expectations, with Hamon explaining the bank wants to see firms work together more.
"We are not willing to pay a lot of money for firms just to throw bodies at a piece of work. We want firms to think about how they can deliver differently – could they partner with a third party, use AI, use lawyers in a lower-cost location? Value and price are two different things.
"We want to see collaboration every single time a firm is given a piece of work – if a firm knows another firm would be better at it and could help them with something, then we want them to tell us that and see those firms work together."
All firms declined to comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGermany’s Wirecard Case Moves to Airport Hangar to Accommodate 100 Lawyers
5 minute readCan Labour's New Budget Steady the Ship? Big Moves On UK Tax Reform and Fiscal Stability
5 minute readGreenberg Takes 7-Lawyer Project- and Structured-Finance Team From Dentons in Warsaw
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250