Why do Law firms work crazy hours?
Discussion
M511 said:
Is the client just demanding for the sake of it, could they not give the client a service level agreement? It's bonkers, I've worked in really high value projects and I still don't understand why they can't fix their hours?
We use lawyers to draft SPAs (sale and purchase agreements) to sell businesses in insolvency scenarios all the time. In most instances, it's incredibly time sensitive and goes to the wire. If our lawyer went home before the deal was done, because they were tired, had worked a long day, etc, the deal would potentially collapse and they would never be used again. It obviously depends on the area of law and as others have said, in some instances long hours are just about increasing billable hours or climbing up the ladder. But in others, it's simply a necessity and the idea that you can have an SLA or a fixed number of hours (actual, not billable) for M&A type work is not realisticDoubleTime said:
fido said:
I worked in a bank where they once asked the whole team to work EVERY DAY until the problem was sorted - so basically come in weekends at a slightly later start time. Not a problem - and didn't feel tired at all - until the second weekend that is. Then I started having hallucinations .. pillars on the office/trading floor would start appearing when I walked around outside work! .
That just sounds bizarre. We work 12 hour days 28 days straight. No one ever has any visuals. I once did 6 weeks straight, off for 1 week and back for 9 1/2 weeks. Again, no days off, 12 hour days. Tired at the end of it but it's doable. from what I have seen, it is about trying to cram 3 'normal' weeks work into 1 week (or less)
So if that is 10 people @ 40 hours = 1200 hours, so to get that done in a week needs some late nights
the compressed timeframe is a mixture of the volume of work / deadlines / client / court / people on the other side of the deal / things changing part way through the work etc.
as well as the other stuff mentioned earlier in the thread
So if that is 10 people @ 40 hours = 1200 hours, so to get that done in a week needs some late nights
the compressed timeframe is a mixture of the volume of work / deadlines / client / court / people on the other side of the deal / things changing part way through the work etc.
as well as the other stuff mentioned earlier in the thread
DoubleTime said:
fido said:
I worked in a bank where they once asked the whole team to work EVERY DAY until the problem was sorted - so basically come in weekends at a slightly later start time. Not a problem - and didn't feel tired at all - until the second weekend that is. Then I started having hallucinations .. pillars on the office/trading floor would start appearing when I walked around outside work! .
That just sounds bizarre. We work 12 hour days 28 days straight. No one ever has any visuals. I once did 6 weeks straight, off for 1 week and back for 9 1/2 weeks. Again, no days off, 12 hour days. Tired at the end of it but it's doable. Another time I had to sort out may projects pre merger and my only technical team member was f
king useless and I worked 3 months solid without a day off. Secret was to leave on time during the week.In both instances it was double time so that helped
When I contracted for one of the big four, I was assigned 3 grads to help with a project, in my first conversation with them, they said they were happy to work til 2am!, but any later made it difficult to get home.
There seems to be an attitude amongst Snr management of: We had it hard and made it, so can you, prove yourself.
The latest those grads were in the office was 7pm, really no need for daft hours with decent planning and mgt.
There seems to be an attitude amongst Snr management of: We had it hard and made it, so can you, prove yourself.
The latest those grads were in the office was 7pm, really no need for daft hours with decent planning and mgt.
K974 said:
DoubleTime said:
fido said:
I worked in a bank where they once asked the whole team to work EVERY DAY until the problem was sorted - so basically come in weekends at a slightly later start time. Not a problem - and didn't feel tired at all - until the second weekend that is. Then I started having hallucinations .. pillars on the office/trading floor would start appearing when I walked around outside work! .
That just sounds bizarre. We work 12 hour days 28 days straight. No one ever has any visuals. I once did 6 weeks straight, off for 1 week and back for 9 1/2 weeks. Again, no days off, 12 hour days. Tired at the end of it but it's doable. 
I agree with the previous poster who suggested you don’t want to be working mega-long hours regularly if mistakes could have a significant impact. OTOH if it’s basically manual labour then I guess tiredness doesn’t carry the same consequences.
No one has thus far posted from the litigation lawyer's perspective. so I shall do so. I spent thirty years self employed as a barrister in what became a large set of chambers. I have recently joined a large international law firm at a senior level, but am not a partner in the firm.
I should explain for those who do not know that a set of barristers' chambers is an "eat what you kill" business collective. The members of chambers do not form partnerships with one another, and there is no hierarchy of partners and associates . The barristers share expenses and conduct collective marketing, but are free to compete against one another too. Each barrister pays a percentage of gross receipts to chambers to cover expenses, and keeps the balance to pay tax on (lots of tax if the barrister does well).
No one owns the chambers and no barrister pays a buy in or generates saleable goodwill. Each barrister has a personal practice, albeit supported by the standing of the chambers if it is a large and well known set. In the best chambers, the junior lawyers are in effect subsidised by the senior lawyers (whose big payments into chambers enable a young lawyer to have an office and staff and support systems that he or she could not otherwise afford) in return for helping the senior lawyers and being mentored by them. The collective can be a very civilised place.
Law firms by contrast are owned by (according to firm size) a small to medium to large group of equity partners, who employ other lawyers (as salaried partners, associates, and so on - the titles vary from firm to firm) and support staff. Law firms have higher overheads than barristers 'chambers do, and thus barristers have higher profit margins than solicitors, but on average lower turnover than large law firms.
Commercial law firms tend to be led by corporate transactional work, which generates high fees, for reasons others have explained above. Litigation departments may be there as adjuncts to the corporate practice, or the firm may have a stand alone dispute resolution practice. Some firms are always litigation led, and others are pulled through recessions by the litigation teams, but go back to focus on corporate work when the good times roll again.
As noted by others above, client demands are a key factor in lawyer work patterns. Even work of a repetitive nature cannot be fully automated, as it requires human judgment, and at the most sophisticated level of business and governmental law a high level of technical knowledge and advanced strategic and tactical thinking are involved in the work.
Litigation is a fluid and organic process that cannot be predicted with certainty. Cases can blow up very suddenly, and because commercial litigation is a form of business warfare, it displays all the features of warfare such as ambush, surprise assault, encounter battle, set piece battle, trench warfare, siege, assault, surrender, and so on. When a case is active the hours can be long. When (rarely) a case goes to trial, sleep, eating, talking to your family, and son on, are cancelled until the trial is over. A trial is a good way to lose weight.
I mention again client needs. Yesterday one demanding client who sends huge litigation business to the firm that I work for demanded at short notice that a thing be done. It matters not whether the thing was a sensible thing to do. The client was advised, and made his decision. For about six hours there was various involvement by one equity partner, one salaried partner, me (senior counsel), a senior associate, two junior associates, and a trainee. The thing that was to be done was done. The cost to the client will be many thousands of US dollars, most of which reflects my time, as I was leading the work and directing the juniors, with light touch partner oversight. No time was wasted. Over-lawyering is a fault in some big firms, but on this occasion there was no over-lawyering.
Barristers work long hours but have more control over their hours, subject always to client pressure. Learning when to say no is part of the art. As a barrister I could be offered an urgent injunction on a Friday afternoon and say "No thanks, I am going skiing in Chamonix with my girlfriend". Lawyers working for law firms have to say "Sorry, darling, weekend cancelled". Sometimes the girl/boyfriend becomes an ex girl/boyfriend.
A note on management. Large barristers' chambers are no longer run by the clerks (barristers' clerks are in effect pimps - I do not say that as an insult) , and have instead hired professional practice managers and professional marketing directors. My old chambers led the way on this back in the 1990s. Law firms are usually managed by their owners. In my opinion, this is not always a good idea.
High Street law firms and small sets of general practice chambers, I should mention, are often inefficient, and are generally (not always) staffed by mediocre lawyers. The best lawyers tend to work in commercial law and the top end of public law, because the work is more interesting and better paid That is why non commercial users of legal services become frustrated, because they receive what seems to them (and often is) poor service and at what seem like high rates, although bear in mind that a charge out rate of X per hour is never anything like what the lawyer is taking home.
NOTE TO MODS: This thread might deserve a slightly larger audience in S,P&L, perhaps?
I should explain for those who do not know that a set of barristers' chambers is an "eat what you kill" business collective. The members of chambers do not form partnerships with one another, and there is no hierarchy of partners and associates . The barristers share expenses and conduct collective marketing, but are free to compete against one another too. Each barrister pays a percentage of gross receipts to chambers to cover expenses, and keeps the balance to pay tax on (lots of tax if the barrister does well).
No one owns the chambers and no barrister pays a buy in or generates saleable goodwill. Each barrister has a personal practice, albeit supported by the standing of the chambers if it is a large and well known set. In the best chambers, the junior lawyers are in effect subsidised by the senior lawyers (whose big payments into chambers enable a young lawyer to have an office and staff and support systems that he or she could not otherwise afford) in return for helping the senior lawyers and being mentored by them. The collective can be a very civilised place.
Law firms by contrast are owned by (according to firm size) a small to medium to large group of equity partners, who employ other lawyers (as salaried partners, associates, and so on - the titles vary from firm to firm) and support staff. Law firms have higher overheads than barristers 'chambers do, and thus barristers have higher profit margins than solicitors, but on average lower turnover than large law firms.
Commercial law firms tend to be led by corporate transactional work, which generates high fees, for reasons others have explained above. Litigation departments may be there as adjuncts to the corporate practice, or the firm may have a stand alone dispute resolution practice. Some firms are always litigation led, and others are pulled through recessions by the litigation teams, but go back to focus on corporate work when the good times roll again.
As noted by others above, client demands are a key factor in lawyer work patterns. Even work of a repetitive nature cannot be fully automated, as it requires human judgment, and at the most sophisticated level of business and governmental law a high level of technical knowledge and advanced strategic and tactical thinking are involved in the work.
Litigation is a fluid and organic process that cannot be predicted with certainty. Cases can blow up very suddenly, and because commercial litigation is a form of business warfare, it displays all the features of warfare such as ambush, surprise assault, encounter battle, set piece battle, trench warfare, siege, assault, surrender, and so on. When a case is active the hours can be long. When (rarely) a case goes to trial, sleep, eating, talking to your family, and son on, are cancelled until the trial is over. A trial is a good way to lose weight.
I mention again client needs. Yesterday one demanding client who sends huge litigation business to the firm that I work for demanded at short notice that a thing be done. It matters not whether the thing was a sensible thing to do. The client was advised, and made his decision. For about six hours there was various involvement by one equity partner, one salaried partner, me (senior counsel), a senior associate, two junior associates, and a trainee. The thing that was to be done was done. The cost to the client will be many thousands of US dollars, most of which reflects my time, as I was leading the work and directing the juniors, with light touch partner oversight. No time was wasted. Over-lawyering is a fault in some big firms, but on this occasion there was no over-lawyering.
Barristers work long hours but have more control over their hours, subject always to client pressure. Learning when to say no is part of the art. As a barrister I could be offered an urgent injunction on a Friday afternoon and say "No thanks, I am going skiing in Chamonix with my girlfriend". Lawyers working for law firms have to say "Sorry, darling, weekend cancelled". Sometimes the girl/boyfriend becomes an ex girl/boyfriend.
A note on management. Large barristers' chambers are no longer run by the clerks (barristers' clerks are in effect pimps - I do not say that as an insult) , and have instead hired professional practice managers and professional marketing directors. My old chambers led the way on this back in the 1990s. Law firms are usually managed by their owners. In my opinion, this is not always a good idea.
High Street law firms and small sets of general practice chambers, I should mention, are often inefficient, and are generally (not always) staffed by mediocre lawyers. The best lawyers tend to work in commercial law and the top end of public law, because the work is more interesting and better paid That is why non commercial users of legal services become frustrated, because they receive what seems to them (and often is) poor service and at what seem like high rates, although bear in mind that a charge out rate of X per hour is never anything like what the lawyer is taking home.
NOTE TO MODS: This thread might deserve a slightly larger audience in S,P&L, perhaps?
Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 23 June 16:06
As to fatigue, litigators thrive because of mistakes made by exhausted transactional lawyers in meeting rooms littered with coffee cups and half eaten pizza at 3AM, with Singapore on one line and New York on the other.
Joking apart, when I am in a trial I insist on getting good sleep, and on being away from the clients and the case for some time each day. I refuse if possible to have meetings with the clients before court, at the lunch break, and after court, and ask them to send me emails with their ideas instead.
ANECDOTE:
Mr Justice Lightman to Gordon Pollock QC at 4.15pm: "Mr Pollock , I would be assisted by a Schedule setting out the parties' adjusted positions on the share conversion issue, and on the second derivative claim. Please send it to my clerk by 9.30 tomorrow morning"
Gordon Pollock (standing to his full and considerable height) : "My Lord shall not be receiving a Schedule by 0930 tomorrow morning. It is my wife's birthday, and I am taking her to the opera. We shall see your Lordship at 1030, when I shall resume my cross-examination of Professor Hartstein".
You have to be Gordon Pollock QC to get away with that, and in fact he was shielding his exhausted juniors from yet another all nighter. Gordon only ever punched up, and treated his hard working juniors, down to the merest pupil or trainee, with humanity. "My dear chap, let me look at the draft, and while I do that sit and listen to this Monteverdi - it's a rare Nadia Boulanger recording, you know. Have a glass of this Montrachet while you do. It's not from the best vineyard, but it's serviceable enough."
On fatigue more generally, it is a huge factor in mistakes made by pilots, train drivers, doctors, lawyers, soldiers, you name it. Manual workers too - industrial accidents often occur when workers are over tired.
Joking apart, when I am in a trial I insist on getting good sleep, and on being away from the clients and the case for some time each day. I refuse if possible to have meetings with the clients before court, at the lunch break, and after court, and ask them to send me emails with their ideas instead.
ANECDOTE:
Mr Justice Lightman to Gordon Pollock QC at 4.15pm: "Mr Pollock , I would be assisted by a Schedule setting out the parties' adjusted positions on the share conversion issue, and on the second derivative claim. Please send it to my clerk by 9.30 tomorrow morning"
Gordon Pollock (standing to his full and considerable height) : "My Lord shall not be receiving a Schedule by 0930 tomorrow morning. It is my wife's birthday, and I am taking her to the opera. We shall see your Lordship at 1030, when I shall resume my cross-examination of Professor Hartstein".
You have to be Gordon Pollock QC to get away with that, and in fact he was shielding his exhausted juniors from yet another all nighter. Gordon only ever punched up, and treated his hard working juniors, down to the merest pupil or trainee, with humanity. "My dear chap, let me look at the draft, and while I do that sit and listen to this Monteverdi - it's a rare Nadia Boulanger recording, you know. Have a glass of this Montrachet while you do. It's not from the best vineyard, but it's serviceable enough."
On fatigue more generally, it is a huge factor in mistakes made by pilots, train drivers, doctors, lawyers, soldiers, you name it. Manual workers too - industrial accidents often occur when workers are over tired.
I know what you mean about clerks being a pimp.
I work for a national firm, I use Barristers every week for Hearings and Trials, call the clerk (generally use the same chambers) and ask who is free for a particular date. The clerks who know me by now, suggest names of Counsel that they know i use a lot and are experienced in my needs. A good clerk is priceless.
I work mainly 9 to 5, but have utmost respect of Barristers. One counsel i used the other week, i was talking to on the phone at 9.30 on a sunday morning and had then emailed the Court at 1am on the monday morning.
I work for a national firm, I use Barristers every week for Hearings and Trials, call the clerk (generally use the same chambers) and ask who is free for a particular date. The clerks who know me by now, suggest names of Counsel that they know i use a lot and are experienced in my needs. A good clerk is priceless.
I work mainly 9 to 5, but have utmost respect of Barristers. One counsel i used the other week, i was talking to on the phone at 9.30 on a sunday morning and had then emailed the Court at 1am on the monday morning.
I'm sure things like conveyancing and wills are a nice 9-5, but in litigation when the st hits the fan it can be all hands to the pumps.
I desperately tried to avoid it, being a lazy barsteward, but had to see the sun rise from the office on a few occasions.
No matter how hard you try to control it, work is fluid, things can happen all at once,and court deadlines are there for a reason
t hits the fan it can be all hands to the pumps.I desperately tried to avoid it, being a lazy barsteward, but had to see the sun rise from the office on a few occasions.
No matter how hard you try to control it, work is fluid, things can happen all at once,and court deadlines are there for a reason
I think it becomes a habit as well for a lot of people in that culture.
I worked with someone who had got out of corporate law due to the long hours and pressure. Within 6 months of starting the new job (same job as me) they were piling pressure on themselves, taking on anything and everything and working massive hours again.
Our office is a ghost-town by 4.30pm but this individual was still logged on at 10pm at night doing stuff. Proper stress bunny, they could have had a job emptying the office bins and turned it into a high pressure nightmare!
I worked with someone who had got out of corporate law due to the long hours and pressure. Within 6 months of starting the new job (same job as me) they were piling pressure on themselves, taking on anything and everything and working massive hours again.
Our office is a ghost-town by 4.30pm but this individual was still logged on at 10pm at night doing stuff. Proper stress bunny, they could have had a job emptying the office bins and turned it into a high pressure nightmare!
I frequently negotiated the deal during the day and handed the deal to the lawyer at 5pm to document, such is the client/lawyer relationship.
They earn their money, though...I clearly recall looking around a very large table at 2am and thinking the deal was costing £10k a hour.
Anyway, I have told my kids they can be anything in life they want, except a lawyer.
It’s a miserable existence, and mostly about to be replaced with AI.
Munter said:
Lanker22 said:
Surely using the billable hours system is just an incentive for law firms to be inefficient?
My grandmother had to use the services of a legal firm recently and the amount they charge to even send an email is frankly disgusting. How do the fkers sleep at night?
You'd think that. But I can't even get mine to respond. I'd pay £20 just to know they are still alive...assuming then things actually moved along afterwards.My grandmother had to use the services of a legal firm recently and the amount they charge to even send an email is frankly disgusting. How do the f
kers sleep at night? loafer123 said:
I frequently negotiated the deal during the day and handed the deal to the lawyer at 5pm to document, such is the client/lawyer relationship.
They earn their money, though...I clearly recall looking around a very large table at 2am and thinking the deal was costing £10k a hour.
Anyway, I have told my kids they can be anything in life they want, except a lawyer.
It’s a miserable existence, and mostly about to be replaced with AI.
1. Yes it is, and that is one of the reasons why we have to work stupid times and hours sometimes - because clients can be unreasonable pricks at times. On the other hand a good lawyer quickly has the measure of their Client and can influence them to become more reasonable. If the Client can't understand reason then the lawyer is a fool for allowing themselves to be abused in such a manner. Yes i have sacked Clients who have been unreasonable, unlike a barrister i have that ability.They earn their money, though...I clearly recall looking around a very large table at 2am and thinking the deal was costing £10k a hour.
Anyway, I have told my kids they can be anything in life they want, except a lawyer.
It’s a miserable existence, and mostly about to be replaced with AI.
2. Yep, one of the paybacks is that the more unreasonable the Client and their expectations, the higher you can bill them.
3. Good call. I have spent many years advising many people against the Law as a career.
4. it is only miserable if you chose to make your own life miserable. I am happy to put in the odd all nighter here and there when the circumstances demand but if i had to do it all the time i would find another job. Sure as hell this one doesn't pay enough. Given the figure you quote above though you have only been exposed to the upper corporate world and that is not representative of the profession as a whole. As for being replaced with AI. Never going to happen as a direct replacement. There will be some roles replaced and some adapted to allow AI to become effective but in the main it will be long after your children retire that AI will be even close to being able to do all but the simplest jobs.
Rude-boy said:
1. Yes it is, and that is one of the reasons why we have to work stupid times and hours sometimes - because clients can be unreasonable pricks at times. On the other hand a good lawyer quickly has the measure of their Client and can influence them to become more reasonable. If the Client can't understand reason then the lawyer is a fool for allowing themselves to be abused in such a manner. Yes i have sacked Clients who have been unreasonable, unlike a barrister i have that ability.
2. Yep, one of the paybacks is that the more unreasonable the Client and their expectations, the higher you can bill them.
3. Good call. I have spent many years advising many people against the Law as a career.
4. it is only miserable if you chose to make your own life miserable. I am happy to put in the odd all nighter here and there when the circumstances demand but if i had to do it all the time i would find another job. Sure as hell this one doesn't pay enough. Given the figure you quote above though you have only been exposed to the upper corporate world and that is not representative of the profession as a whole. As for being replaced with AI. Never going to happen as a direct replacement. There will be some roles replaced and some adapted to allow AI to become effective but in the main it will be long after your children retire that AI will be even close to being able to do all but the simplest jobs.
Just to be clear, I am a lovely client...many of the guys who used to advise me in my big corporate days are still friends and refer people to me all the time/help me out now I am a niche business.2. Yep, one of the paybacks is that the more unreasonable the Client and their expectations, the higher you can bill them.
3. Good call. I have spent many years advising many people against the Law as a career.
4. it is only miserable if you chose to make your own life miserable. I am happy to put in the odd all nighter here and there when the circumstances demand but if i had to do it all the time i would find another job. Sure as hell this one doesn't pay enough. Given the figure you quote above though you have only been exposed to the upper corporate world and that is not representative of the profession as a whole. As for being replaced with AI. Never going to happen as a direct replacement. There will be some roles replaced and some adapted to allow AI to become effective but in the main it will be long after your children retire that AI will be even close to being able to do all but the simplest jobs.
That night when it was costing me £10k an hour, I raided the whole meeting room floor of Linklaters for Jelly Beans (that's alot of Jelly Beans!), just to keep everyone's blood sugar levels up and keep them happy.
Rude-boy said:
1. Yes it is, and that is one of the reasons why we have to work stupid times and hours sometimes - because clients can be unreasonable pricks at times. On the other hand a good lawyer quickly has the measure of their Client and can influence them to become more reasonable. If the Client can't understand reason then the lawyer is a fool for allowing themselves to be abused in such a manner. Yes i have sacked Clients who have been unreasonable, unlike a barrister i have that ability.
2. Yep, one of the paybacks is that the more unreasonable the Client and their expectations, the higher you can bill them.
3. Good call. I have spent many years advising many people against the Law as a career.
4. it is only miserable if you chose to make your own life miserable. I am happy to put in the odd all nighter here and there when the circumstances demand but if i had to do it all the time i would find another job. Sure as hell this one doesn't pay enough. Given the figure you quote above though you have only been exposed to the upper corporate world and that is not representative of the profession as a whole. As for being replaced with AI. Never going to happen as a direct replacement. There will be some roles replaced and some adapted to allow AI to become effective but in the main it will be long after your children retire that AI will be even close to being able to do all but the simplest jobs.
Quite an aggressive post! By the way, you can’t sack someone who is paying you - it only works one way. You can refuse to carry out further work but only they can do any sacking! 2. Yep, one of the paybacks is that the more unreasonable the Client and their expectations, the higher you can bill them.
3. Good call. I have spent many years advising many people against the Law as a career.
4. it is only miserable if you chose to make your own life miserable. I am happy to put in the odd all nighter here and there when the circumstances demand but if i had to do it all the time i would find another job. Sure as hell this one doesn't pay enough. Given the figure you quote above though you have only been exposed to the upper corporate world and that is not representative of the profession as a whole. As for being replaced with AI. Never going to happen as a direct replacement. There will be some roles replaced and some adapted to allow AI to become effective but in the main it will be long after your children retire that AI will be even close to being able to do all but the simplest jobs.
Badda said:
Quite an aggressive post! By the way, you can’t sack someone who is paying you - it only works one way. You can refuse to carry out further work but only they can do any sacking!
Yeah, bad hair day. Didn't mean to be quite as stroppy as I sounded reading it back, but most of the points still stand, they could just perhaps be wrapped in more cotton wool. 
There is a buzz to staying late and putting in mega hours on the odd deal - especially if there are jelly beans on the table - but these should be the once in a blue moon deals, some seem to make a habit of spending months negotiating a deal (without even telling their lawyers that there is one in the offing) and then expecting the legal formalities to take a few days the second that they make that first call. Often the deal needs to be reshaped to reflect legal niceties and to tone down some of the more unrealistic warranties being given or demanded, etc. Often deals do not need to be like this, it is just a willy waving power trip. Get the advice day one and everyone can shape a workable deal and no one need do more than have the odd extra hour here or there if needed.
As for sacking, i accept the terminology used is perhaps too lose, but the ability to tell an unreasonable so and so that they are being so is one that I value highly. One Client was known as being particularly bad so i had a very full and frank discussion with them about what they could expect of us and we of them and if they didn't like it find another firm. These days they are one of my best Clients and dangerously close to being a mate.
This week the hours being billed by the team I am in are huge, and we are not getting out of the office early. Because clients. It happens. Hey, the work is actually fun. It is early (getting to mid) evening here, and not long shy of midnight in London, but at least one of the London counsel is still in his chambers and answering emails.
PS: or in bed with wife/mistress/high end rental/all three at once/in a bar/in a taxi/in a gym/ sleeping rough on the Embankment/on the way back from Glyndebourne, wherever, but answering emails.
PS: or in bed with wife/mistress/high end rental/all three at once/in a bar/in a taxi/in a gym/ sleeping rough on the Embankment/on the way back from Glyndebourne, wherever, but answering emails.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 28th June 23:45
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff