Blind copied on emails - why tho Forum

[Anonymous User]

NYC biglaw first-year corporate associate here. I've been staffed on a deal since I started where I'm not announced on calls or copied on emails.

With respect to the other side, I'm guessing this has to do with optics, because I guess you don't want to show them that you have an army of associates on a matter.

But why am I blind copied on emails to the client? I don't think it can be a cost sensitivity thing because I've seen myself show up on the bill. It's actually really inconvenient, because it's near impossible to keep updating checklists and other status documents without reading all the emails (the senior tries to forward everything to me but she inevitably forgets to do it for some emails).

I'm really not complaining about visibility and I really don't care whether the client knows who I am. But from a pure workflow efficiency standpoint, the system just ins't working. Should I bring it up, or just deal with it? Any recommendations on phrasing?

[tyroneslothrop1]

I probably would not bring it up. The senior likely has a good reason, or believes she has a good reason, which in this context is essentially the same, for not copying you on emails. She may view you asking to be included on emails as you simply being an uppity first year.

[SmokeytheBear]

It's not so much optics with the other side as optics with the client. While you are on the bill, they dont want to see you on the bill that much or on calls/emails that much.

This is the plight of a junior. Just do your best to keep up and stay on your toes.

[dixiecupdrinking]

It's a terrible practice for several reasons but it is due to perceived cost consciousness.

[Mullens]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

An email macro? Pretty smart. OP, as a junior I’ve seen clients straight up say “too many attorneys on this call invite”, they know we don’t *really* need to be on everything and billing.

[lolwat]

It's not so much optics with the other side as optics with the client. While you are on the bill, they dont want to see you on the bill that much or on calls/emails that much.

This is the plight of a junior. Just do your best to keep up and stay on your toes.

Yeah. If anything, I'd probably be appreciative of the people who at least take the effort to BCC you on e-mails or make sure you're on the calls. I get this in lit a lot... and I often end up getting asked to do stuff based on e-mails I was never copied on, and then the partners/seniors have to comb through their e-mails to find and send me the relevant details... but it looks better for the client on a day to day basis, I suppose.

We used to have a [PROJECT TEAM] e-mail for every case (so all that shows up is like "From: lolwat To: TLS Team"), but that got scrapped because no one maintained them.

[SmokeytheBear]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

My firm and several of the other NY firms we work across or with have moved to this model. I like it.

[Desert Fox]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

My firm and several of the other NY firms we work across or with have moved to this model. I like it.

its hell on your inbox since you get 4X as many CC's when you don't need to.

[SmokeytheBear]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

My firm and several of the other NY firms we work across or with have moved to this model. I like it.

its hell on your inbox since you get 4X as many CC's when you don't need to.

But hitting delete is so gratifying.

[albanach]

Is there a specific reason firms aren't sending matter related emails to the document management system?

[RaceJudicata]

Is there a specific reason firms aren't sending matter related emails to the document management system?

Yeah, this is my fail safe. Lit junior, so likely different for me; but I frequently look to the doc system if someone mentions an email I wasn’t on.

On larger cases we use the listserv method discussed above.

[Pokemon]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

My firm and several of the other NY firms we work across or with have moved to this model. I like it.

its hell on your inbox since you get 4X as many CC's when you don't need to.

Nah, you automatically folder that shit so it immediately goes to the right place. Outlook rules.

[Pokemon]

Is there a specific reason firms aren't sending matter related emails to the document management system?

I never do that. Like first it is time consuming and second I do not want someone to read my emails. I know when o leave the firm they just dump it there, but whatevsZ

[Traynor Brah]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

My firm and several of the other NY firms we work across or with have moved to this model. I like it.

its hell on your inbox since you get 4X as many CC's when you don't need to.

For such groups I make a rule in outlook to auto mark as read and move a copy to a folder for said matter, unless it's also sent directly to me or mentions my name, in which case it's just a normal email.

[Desert Fox]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

My firm and several of the other NY firms we work across or with have moved to this model. I like it.

its hell on your inbox since you get 4X as many CC's when you don't need to.

For such groups I make a rule in outlook to auto mark as read and move a copy to a folder for said matter, unless it's also sent directly to me or mentions my name, in which case it's just a normal email.

Then why have the group email in the first place? If someone uses it expecting you'll read the relevant email and you don't, isn't that a potentially big issue?

[Traynor Brah]

I worked on a deal across from S&C and thought they had a clever way of handling this. They had a Project [TLS] email that was cc’d on everything and presumably was accessible to everyone on the team. Leads to fewer addresses on emails and no one misses anything.

My firm and several of the other NY firms we work across or with have moved to this model. I like it.

its hell on your inbox since you get 4X as many CC's when you don't need to.

For such groups I make a rule in outlook to auto mark as read and move a copy to a folder for said matter, unless it's also sent directly to me or mentions my name, in which case it's just a normal email.

Then why have the group email in the first place? If someone uses it expecting you'll read the relevant email and you don't, isn't that a potentially big issue?

nah it's to combat "hell on your inbox" when you're on a group list on a huge matter. Everything still is in your inbox and you can quickly glance/review before deleting (plus you have the copies of everything saved in order for reference), but only things that are obviously directed to you will get a push notification/appear unread.