Big Law is a service-driven and client-driven business. I'm a partner, and my clients expect me to be available to them. So when I'm on vacation, I'll spend a few hours at the start and end of each day on email, even if just to hand off things to others, and on any urgent client matters. We are not in 9-to-5 jobs where we can expect to not be bothered by anything work-related while on vacation. That is just the reality (and why we are paid as much as we are).
"A 'use it or lose it' policy encourages folks to actually take vacation—which can be surprisingly hard at certain law firms with a machismo around overwork."
At my former firm, one workaholic associate had to be ORDERED by the partners to take some vacation. Lawyers took pride in how much they worked.
From the Employer perspective a downside to unlimited vacation is how it impacts your FMLA policy. Most companies allow, indeed require, employees to use their accrued paid time concurrent with their FMLA time, and when your paid time is exhausted, remaining FMLA is unpaid. But if paid time is unlimited? Then the annual allotment of 12 weeks of FMLA will always be Employer paid?
I think mandatory vacation is a really good option - it's the only way, in my opinion, that lawyers in a prestige, work, and advancement-obsessed profession can actually take time off without worrying that they're sacrificing their chances of making partner/having better exit opportunities than the next guy.
In our business, vacation is viewed as a “dirty word”. We are always expected to be available to our clients, and that is what they expect and want of us.
In a profession where ritual overwork is a cultural norm, vacation should be mandated for mental health reasons, with (limited) permissible carryover if circumstances made it *actually* impossible for leave to be taken. This should include a "back-up" system so that clients are serviced by another lawyer in the firm, so that the "I'll spend a few hours on email" thing mentioned by another commenter does not defeat the purpose of the vacation. Nobody is indispensable, especially not in an environment of equally competent professionals.
These issues are actually far trickier in "small law" practices or sole practitioner's offices where a vacation may leave no hands on deck, and the firm without income.
The best policy I heard about was the simplest: Do not ask whether leave is personal, sick leave, vacation, religiously inspired, etc. Just give people (say) four weeks of leave, plus federal holidays, and let them do their work. The cultural issues are trickier: The bragging about working on Thanksgiving; the raised eyebrows if someone leaves at 5; the fake urgent deadlines "for clients" when really it's just the partner who wants you to bill through the weekend. And my boss, a woman, who was known for returning to the office the DAY AFTER giving birth. Twice. This was pointed out to me, by several partners, separately and proudly.
Big Law is a service-driven and client-driven business. I'm a partner, and my clients expect me to be available to them. So when I'm on vacation, I'll spend a few hours at the start and end of each day on email, even if just to hand off things to others, and on any urgent client matters. We are not in 9-to-5 jobs where we can expect to not be bothered by anything work-related while on vacation. That is just the reality (and why we are paid as much as we are).
This is very true:
"A 'use it or lose it' policy encourages folks to actually take vacation—which can be surprisingly hard at certain law firms with a machismo around overwork."
At my former firm, one workaholic associate had to be ORDERED by the partners to take some vacation. Lawyers took pride in how much they worked.
From the Employer perspective a downside to unlimited vacation is how it impacts your FMLA policy. Most companies allow, indeed require, employees to use their accrued paid time concurrent with their FMLA time, and when your paid time is exhausted, remaining FMLA is unpaid. But if paid time is unlimited? Then the annual allotment of 12 weeks of FMLA will always be Employer paid?
I think mandatory vacation is a really good option - it's the only way, in my opinion, that lawyers in a prestige, work, and advancement-obsessed profession can actually take time off without worrying that they're sacrificing their chances of making partner/having better exit opportunities than the next guy.
In our business, vacation is viewed as a “dirty word”. We are always expected to be available to our clients, and that is what they expect and want of us.
In a profession where ritual overwork is a cultural norm, vacation should be mandated for mental health reasons, with (limited) permissible carryover if circumstances made it *actually* impossible for leave to be taken. This should include a "back-up" system so that clients are serviced by another lawyer in the firm, so that the "I'll spend a few hours on email" thing mentioned by another commenter does not defeat the purpose of the vacation. Nobody is indispensable, especially not in an environment of equally competent professionals.
These issues are actually far trickier in "small law" practices or sole practitioner's offices where a vacation may leave no hands on deck, and the firm without income.
The best policy I heard about was the simplest: Do not ask whether leave is personal, sick leave, vacation, religiously inspired, etc. Just give people (say) four weeks of leave, plus federal holidays, and let them do their work. The cultural issues are trickier: The bragging about working on Thanksgiving; the raised eyebrows if someone leaves at 5; the fake urgent deadlines "for clients" when really it's just the partner who wants you to bill through the weekend. And my boss, a woman, who was known for returning to the office the DAY AFTER giving birth. Twice. This was pointed out to me, by several partners, separately and proudly.
One of the first firms to move to "unlimited" vacation as Kirkland & Ellis, which should tell you something:
https://abovethelaw.com/2008/12/kirkland-ellis-new-vacation-policy-tastes-great-but-is-it-less-filling/