In terms of my own views on these questions, I'm a moderate (as I am on so many things these days). Of course, now that I'm back to full-time writing I work from home -- which is fine, since writing is a fairly solitary activity -- but I do have thoughts on office culture for lawyers, who often work in teams (at least when it comes to the large litigations or transactions that are the staple of Biglaw firms).
I do think that at least some in-office work is helpful for lawyers, given the collaboration that's often required, the training and mentorship that are so valuable to young (and not-so-young) lawyers, and the like. If I were still a practicing lawyer, I wouldn't want a 100 percent remote position. Instead, I'd like the option to go into an office (and get some time away from my three-year-old, as lovable as he is).
As for employer expectations, I like the approach being taken by Ropes & Gray, Lowenstein Sandler, and certain other firms: an expectation or recommendation that employees spend at least three days a week in the office, but no hard requirement, with employees enjoying the flexibility to pick when they go into the office, without having to clear it with any supervisor or central authority.
Some firms, such as Jones Day, Paul Hastings, and Sullivan & Cromwell, seem to be trying to return to five days a week in the office, or something close to that, as the default. I think that will be tough to sell to associates (and partners) who have now seen how productive (and profitable) lawyers can be while working remotely.
Firms that take a hard line on five days a week from the office could lose out on talent. I don't know that many lawyers who are already at a firm and otherwise happy would actually quit over this. But if I'm a law student choosing where to summer (and therefore probably work post-graduation) or a lateral associate choosing between multiple firms, and Firm A expects five days a week in the office while Firm B is more flexible, I would favor Firm B, all things being equal.
This is a tough one. I think the best training happens organically, often times while working with someone in the same room. Being on conference calls with your team in the same room is very valuable and difficult to replicate virtually - it is just not the same. I think some time in the office is necessary and a warranted ask by firms. Firms that take a more flexible and middle of the road approach will probably fare the best in terms of associate and partner satisfaction, retention, and hiring. Mandating a required 5 days per week in person seems extreme and not a particularly thoughtful approach. If I were a big law associate, I don't think I'd personally leave over that alone, but I would take issue with the approach and am sure many others who rely more on the flexibility would look elsewhere.
I work in government. Our office likely will return to 5-days-a-week attendance later this summer. I wouldn't up and quit if and when that happens. But that's partially because both the substance and the pace of the work are already things that are attractive to me. I can understand those who work in private firms feeling like a rigid in-person requirement -- in addition to a sometimes-impossible-seeming billable hour requirement -- is just too inflexible or too stressful to put up with. A final straw, of sorts. But I don't have those other added stressors.
This is tough one for me as well and, as someone who works from home full-time. I think the requirement that people must be in the office five days a week (although, let's be honest, we all know lawyers who work seven days a week) post-pandemic seems antiquated. That being said, WFH is not for everyone and some people prefer to be in an office for whatever reason (better demarcation between home and work, enjoy working around people, likes their office environment more for work than their home, etc. needs face-to-face interaction, etc.). A hybrid approach seems to be the best compromise and letting people decide for themselves what they prefer. I personally would not quit over that issue alone.
In terms of my own views on these questions, I'm a moderate (as I am on so many things these days). Of course, now that I'm back to full-time writing I work from home -- which is fine, since writing is a fairly solitary activity -- but I do have thoughts on office culture for lawyers, who often work in teams (at least when it comes to the large litigations or transactions that are the staple of Biglaw firms).
I do think that at least some in-office work is helpful for lawyers, given the collaboration that's often required, the training and mentorship that are so valuable to young (and not-so-young) lawyers, and the like. If I were still a practicing lawyer, I wouldn't want a 100 percent remote position. Instead, I'd like the option to go into an office (and get some time away from my three-year-old, as lovable as he is).
As for employer expectations, I like the approach being taken by Ropes & Gray, Lowenstein Sandler, and certain other firms: an expectation or recommendation that employees spend at least three days a week in the office, but no hard requirement, with employees enjoying the flexibility to pick when they go into the office, without having to clear it with any supervisor or central authority.
Some firms, such as Jones Day, Paul Hastings, and Sullivan & Cromwell, seem to be trying to return to five days a week in the office, or something close to that, as the default. I think that will be tough to sell to associates (and partners) who have now seen how productive (and profitable) lawyers can be while working remotely.
Firms that take a hard line on five days a week from the office could lose out on talent. I don't know that many lawyers who are already at a firm and otherwise happy would actually quit over this. But if I'm a law student choosing where to summer (and therefore probably work post-graduation) or a lateral associate choosing between multiple firms, and Firm A expects five days a week in the office while Firm B is more flexible, I would favor Firm B, all things being equal.
This is a tough one. I think the best training happens organically, often times while working with someone in the same room. Being on conference calls with your team in the same room is very valuable and difficult to replicate virtually - it is just not the same. I think some time in the office is necessary and a warranted ask by firms. Firms that take a more flexible and middle of the road approach will probably fare the best in terms of associate and partner satisfaction, retention, and hiring. Mandating a required 5 days per week in person seems extreme and not a particularly thoughtful approach. If I were a big law associate, I don't think I'd personally leave over that alone, but I would take issue with the approach and am sure many others who rely more on the flexibility would look elsewhere.
I work in government. Our office likely will return to 5-days-a-week attendance later this summer. I wouldn't up and quit if and when that happens. But that's partially because both the substance and the pace of the work are already things that are attractive to me. I can understand those who work in private firms feeling like a rigid in-person requirement -- in addition to a sometimes-impossible-seeming billable hour requirement -- is just too inflexible or too stressful to put up with. A final straw, of sorts. But I don't have those other added stressors.
This is tough one for me as well and, as someone who works from home full-time. I think the requirement that people must be in the office five days a week (although, let's be honest, we all know lawyers who work seven days a week) post-pandemic seems antiquated. That being said, WFH is not for everyone and some people prefer to be in an office for whatever reason (better demarcation between home and work, enjoy working around people, likes their office environment more for work than their home, etc. needs face-to-face interaction, etc.). A hybrid approach seems to be the best compromise and letting people decide for themselves what they prefer. I personally would not quit over that issue alone.