Working Remotely Is on the Rise, But It Comes With Its Share of Downsides
While new technology and changing attitudes have allowed many lawyers to work remotely, such telecommuting can lead to overwork and stunted career growth.
December 05, 2018 at 12:30 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Legal Tech News
Lawyers working remotely is on the rise as technology becomes more accessible and law firms become more flexible with how their attorneys operate. But working remotely also brings possible risks and stresses.
Philadelphia attorney Carole Sheffield, for instance, described the “double-edged” sword that lawyers working remotely may face. After a day of counseling clients and interacting with colleagues, a possible error may pop into your mind, awaking you from a once peaceful slumber.
“I've woken in the middle of the night saying, 'Oh my God, did I do that right,'” said Sheffield, an Anderson Kill shareholder and co-chair of the Philadelphia Bar Association's wellness committee.
Sheffield said a lawyer can alleviate that late-night bolt of panic by quickly logging into the firm's network from home and double-checking the possible issue. On the other hand, a client can demand their counsel work during the weekend, and lawyers' ability to readily work from home adds to the stress, she explained.
Still, more lawyers are working remotely than potentially ever before.
AbacusNext's Tomas Suros, who consults law firms on their software, said in 2014, he noticed a shift in Big Law adopting their corporate clients' flexible and remote work schedules.
“I've seen the firms go from a very risk-averse profession specifically with technology; they were stuck with faxing,” Suros said. In the past, he explained, large firms allowed only lawyers with certain years of experience and responsibilities and in certain practices to telecommute.
But as technology's reliability and security improved, law firms began to see the benefits of allowing lawyers to slash their commute time and do more work and bill for more hours, Suros said.
“You can often get more done when you are at home,” added Cynthia Thomas Calvert, a lawyer and president of Workforce 21C, which works to destigmatize flexible work programs. “You have less constant interruptions and you can get work done.”
But Calvert cautioned that working alone comes with a caveat.
“Lawyers are often workaholics, no surprise there, and it can be hard to know when to turn off the lights. … When you work from home, the desk is always there.”
In addition to leading to overwork, predominantly working outside of the office may also impede a lawyer's career development.
“We forget that we do need to have the small talk and conversations that will lead to deeper relationships in the firm,” Calvert said.
Calvert suggested lawyers who work remotely prioritize making and developing relationships with current and possible clients and colleagues. She also advised lawyers to use video conferencing instead of relying heavily on texting and emailing clients and colleagues.
“When people work remotely 100 percent of the time, it can impact their advancement at a firm.” If a lawyer isn't front and center, a partner or rainmaker may not be aware of a lawyer's work. They may also assume a lawyer constantly working remotely is slacking off.
Still, law firms are using remote work as a feature to entice possible hires. Suros of AbacusNext said law firms are promoting their technology and openness to lawyers working remotely to attract lawyers.
“Firms now present their forward-thinking technology to attract individuals that have used technology previously.” That attraction is essential in pulling in millennial lawyers too, Suros said.
Calvert agreed, but warned that associates fresh out of law school or clerkships should ease into working remotely.
“It's a very valid concern that new lawyers need to learn office politics, office culture and office structure.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Rejects Meta’s Plea to Send FTC Antitrust Suit to Trash Heap
How Dana Rao Built a 'Yes' Culture at Adobe and Why He Walked Away
Keker Secures Defense Win for EDA Software Company Real Intent in Synopsys Copyright Infringement Case
Old Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Trending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome', DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250