The Real Reason Some Firms Are Being Vague About Office Returns | In-House Struggling to Lure Talent From Law Firms—and Might Be Better Off | Latham, Hughes Hubbard and Others Advise on $1.5B SPAC Merger: The Morning Minute
The news and analysis you need to start your day.
June 10, 2021 at 06:00 AM
6 minute read
Law Firm ManagementWant to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.
|
WHAT WE'RE WATCHING
CAN'T GO BACK - As we've noted in this space recently, many law firms have been less-than-straightforward in laying out their post-pandemic office return policies, often outwardly projected a posture of flexibility and understanding while appearing to subliminally signal to lawyers and staff that returning in-person sooner rather than later is not actually optional. Let's call it the "mom guilt" approach: as in, when your mom says that you certainly don't have to come home for Thanksgiving but she will be cooking and your siblings and extended family will all be flying in and, well, you should just do whatever you think is right. But, as Law.com's Andrew Maloney reports, the vague messaging by some firms may have a less nefarious explanation than veiled coercion. Instead, maybe just chalk it up to good old fashioned risk aversion. George Wolf Jr., a law firm consultant for Aon, told Maloney that firms have a general disinclination toward backtracking, which may explain why so many policies thus far have neglected to set a hard return date or fixed number of days that folks must show up to the office. "Most firms don't want to get out in front of the issue like that for fear of having to reverse course," he said. "Law firms pay very, very close attention to where their clients come out on these issues, and I don't think that is known or understood right now."
HIRE AWARENESS - It's becoming increasingly difficult for corporate legal departments to lure talented attorneys away from their lucrative positions in Big Law. As a result, many in-house counsel have begun focusing more on recruiting from other law departments. But that may be for the best, because lawyers who ditch law firm life for what they perceive to be a more leisurely pace in-house are likely in for a rude awakening at a time when remote work and budget constraints have combined to make corporate counsel positions at many companies incredibly stressful and demanding. As we examine in this week's Law.com Trendspotter column, the talent pool for in-house positions may be a bit smaller, but it's also likely stocked with more potential recruits who are better prepared for the realities of an in-house career. I'm interested to hear what you think: has corporate counsel life gotten more difficult during the pandemic? If so, do you think the perception of in-house work among job-seekers has shifted? Let me know at [email protected] and be sure to check out Corporate Counsel Advance, our new premium offering that brings you practical guidance content highlighting the evolving role and global nature of a GC, including leadership, business navigation, career development, and legal department management. CLICK HERE to subscribe.
NEGOTIATING POWER - Wall Box Chargers SL, a provider of electric vehicle charging stations, is going public via SPAC merger with Kensington Capital Acquisition Corp. II in a deal worth approximately $1.5 billion. As a result of the merger and related PIPE financing, Wall Box will be listed on the NYSE. The transaction, announced June 9, is expected to close in the third quarter of 2021. Wall Box, which is based in Barcelona, Spain, is represented by a Latham & Watkins team including partners Ignacio Gómez-Sancha, Ryan Maierson, Jose Sánchez-Dafos and Ian Schuman. The SPAC is advised by Hughes Hubbard & Reed; Houthoff Buruma; and Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira S.L.P. Chuck Samuelson led the Hughes Hubbard team, which also included partners Ken Lefkowitz, Andy Braiterman, Alan Kravitz, Gary Simon, Charles Wachsstock and Robert Bell. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.
|
EDITOR'S PICKS
|- Anger. Anxiety. Depression. Unprecedented Law School Admissions Cycle Is Taking a Mental Toll on Applicants By Karen Sloan
- Third Trial Over 3M Combat Earplugs Will Be a 'Tiebreaker'. Plus: Appeals Court Upholds Most of Equifax Settlement. By Ellen Bardash
- Former Dentons Partner Claims He Was Fired After Reporting an Attempt to Divert Millions in Client Funds By Alaina Lancaster
|
WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING
CASH STASH - The U.K.'s largest 50 law firms rapidly increased their cash reserves by nearly 60% at the outset of the pandemic last year, according to an analysis of their 2019-20 limited liability accounts by auditor Smith & Williamson. At the end of April 2020, Law.com International's Hannah Roberts reports, the firms improved their cash position by an average of 57.2% as the U.K. went into lockdown and law firms shifted to remote working. In the previous three years, the biggest cash increase had been just 12.4% in the 2018-19 financial year. Giles Murphy, head of professional services at Smith & Williamson, told Roberts that the 57.2% rise was "a surprisingly positive statistic", but added that "it demonstrates just how uncertain and frightening the world was 12 months ago." "We can forget all too quickly the fear that was going around the whole business community at that time as to what this unprecedented event meant," he said. "Back then, anyone who was in a management position pulled every lever they could find to get money into the business."
|
WHAT YOU SAID
"In the past year, we've clipped approximately 10,000 news articles related to the court and the justices, roughly half of them tweets, just one indication of the growth in variety and breadth of coverage."
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 AllWill Trump Be a Boost to Quinn Emanuel's Fortunes in China?
How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'Think About Why You Want the Role, Because It Is Not an Easy Job,' Says Aaron Rubin of Morrison Foerster
Morgan & Morgan Looks to Grow Into Complex Litigation While Still Keeping its Billboards Up
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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