Apr 18, 2017 10:58:28 PM by Gregory L
Apr 27, 2019 12:41:25 PM by Tiffany S
Heather S wrote:
Thanks for this information. I don’t know what others are doing, but I am only using Upwork for legal writing type things... nothing that involves legal advice. It would be great if Upwork took steps to be in compliance with the requirements for “lawyer referral services” or something along those lines. Appreciate everyone’s input.
I think the only way Upwork could do that would be to spin off a separate platform for legal services with a different payment model. The problem isn't referrals--Upwork doesn't promote any particular attorney or match clients with attorneys. It's that in most states there is no legal way for an attorney to pay anyone other than another attorney a percentage of legal fees collected.
Apr 27, 2019 12:46:53 PM by Heather S
Apr 27, 2019 01:00:24 PM by Tiffany S
Heather S wrote:
but I am only using Upwork for legal writing type things... nothing that involves legal advice.
You made a very wise decision there. It appears that several Upwork freelancers who offer legal services through the platform have been included as defendants in the lawsuit. Regardless of the outcome of the case, it's likely that these attorneys will be referred to their state disciplinary bodies with regard to the fee splitting issue, and that in the course of that investigation regulators will look at other attorneys practicing law through Upwork.
Apr 9, 2019 07:44:56 PM by Gregory L
Apr 9, 2019 09:17:52 PM by Heather S
Apr 26, 2019 07:27:21 PM by Tiffany S
Jennifer D wrote:Why aren't you seeing this as a marketing fee versus "sharing funds"? How is it different that if you were placing an ad in a newspaper, etc. I see their fee arragment more as a marketing lens than I am sharing my proceeds from them.
If your interpretation so black and white, then there could never be head hunters/recruiters for attorneys. They get paid a % for placement at the end of the day. Those types of roles exist - how is this different?
Curious.
Jennifer, you're talking about hiring an attorney to work for a law firm--that attorney is receiving a salary, not fees from a client. The ethical restrictions relate to fees paid to a lawyer or law firm by a client.
Apr 27, 2019 06:16:49 AM Edited Apr 27, 2019 06:33:06 AM by Douglas Michael M
Jennifer D wrote:Why aren't you seeing this as a marketing fee versus "sharing funds"? How is it different that if you were placing an ad in a newspaper, etc. I see their fee arragment more as a marketing lens than I am sharing my proceeds from them.
If your interpretation so black and white, then there could never be head hunters/recruiters for attorneys. They get paid a % for placement at the end of the day. Those types of roles exist - how is this different?
Curious.
Jennifer,
The reason these attorneys, former attorneys, and paralegals are "seeing" this kind of work arrangement as fee-splitting is because that is what their legal training has taught them to do. When they consult with outside authorities—legal ethics experts and bar associations in multiple states—their initial assessment is confirmed. They are not just advancing their personal opinions or interpretations, or seeking creative ways to get around established strictures.
edited: Now that Upwork is being sued over this question (among other related matters), presumably they will implement an appropriate policy, though perhaps not till litigation is resolved.
Best,
Michael.
Jun 17, 2019 08:08:09 AM by Michele R
Apr 19, 2017 08:14:16 AM by Rene K
Gregory, this is interesting. Unfortunately I'm afraid that you may be right, you're the lawyer after all. But this means that Upwork is not a place for US lawyers to do business, which is too bad. On the other hand, I don't see Upwork changing their business model in order to accommodate US lawyers, so I guess we won't have access to your services on Upwork.
User | Count |
---|---|
8 | |
4 | |
2 | |
2 | |
2 |
User | Count |
---|---|
48 | |
43 | |
24 | |
17 | |
15 |
© 2015 - Upwork® Global Inc.