Hours are getting longer for corporate counsel but Legal Week research finds that bluechip lawyers still think they are getting a better deal on lifestyle than their private practice counterparts. Michelle Madsen examines the findings of the latest Verdict survey

The lifestyle benefits of a move in-house are still greatly valued by corporate counsel, but those hoping for a nine-to-five working day are likely to be disappointed, according to new research.

This month's The Verdict survey, conducted in association with Davies Arnold Cooper, has found that almost a fifth (19%) of senior corporate counsel are clocking up more than 60 hours in a typical week.

A further two-thirds of respondents said that on average they worked more than 40 hours a week, including 20% who worked 50-59 hours a week. The research on work-life balance for in-house lawyers finds that working hours are also getting longer at many employers.

Nearly a quarter (22%) of all in-house counsel feel their working hours have increased by 'a lot' over the past three years, with one in four saying their hours have increased 'a little' over the same period. Thirty-nine percent said hours had stayed the same, while just 13% had seen a reduction in hours.

Work-life balance

Aon legal director Jane Owen told Legal Week: "I personally fall into the 60-plus hours a week category, but generally the number of hours you work depends on seniority nowadays.

"I have always worked relatively long hours and although I came in-house to find more of a work-life balance, it has never really worked out like that. Effectively, you are on the same team as your client and share the same drivers: you will work as hard as they do."

Other senior lawyers said working hours are increasingly dependent on the sector, with lawyers working at major banks arguing that there is often little difference between working hours in private practice.

ABN Amro general counsel John Collins commented: "Working 50-60 hours a week is not unusual. When you are supporting a transactional environment you experience similar peaks and troughs to those you would in private practice."

Despite evidence that hours are increasing, company lawyers still believe that moving in-house delivers on the lifestyle promise when judged against the long-hours culture of private practice. Nearly four out of five respondents (79%) said in-house had a better work-life balance than working for a law firm, including 45% who said it was 'much better'.

In-house benefits

While lawyers thinking of making the move in-house cannot necessarily expect sociable hours, respondents agreed that the nature of the work was enough of a draw in itself.

Asked to identify up to two key benefits of working in-house, the majority (59%) cited 'greater job satisfaction'. Other key advantages were a 'better social life' (cited by 26%), 'more annual holiday' (20%) and 'better bonuses' (19%).

The lure of potentially negotiating flexible working is often cited as a benefit. However, only 49% of corporate counsel said that members of their team took the option to do so. Likewise, only 7% of respondents said that they generally worked less than 30 hours a week.

Set against that, more than half (53%) of all corporate counsel said they had the flexibility to work from home and 47% said they could negotiate time off at short notice, something that can be difficult at major corporate law firms.

However, 11% of respondents said they did not have any flexibility in their working hours, suggesting that benefits and working environments vary widely across different institutions and companies.

Merlie Calvert, general counsel at De Beers, said the sort of packages on offer for many in-house positions had changed dramatically in the last 10 years to reflect increasing demand for specialist corporate counsel.

"The sort of work-life balance you have depends very much on who you work for and the field you operate in," she said.

"In the past, in-house lawyers were often generalists, whereas now people tend to specialise in the same way that they do at law firms."

Aon's Owen stressed that feeling integrated in the business is essential for ambitious lawyers who want to feel the benefit of an in-house move.

"The work that you get in-house is much more interesting," she said. "You are at the coalface and able to make much more of a difference. An in-house position also holds more options for less senior people as you do not have target hours, but you do have career development and talent management."

HBOS general counsel Harry Baines commented: "Hours in private practice are out of control. There is no amount of money that can compensate for the lack of work-life balance."

Calvert added: "When you are in private practice you are used to everything being about your own legal career. When you move in-house it stops being all about you and becomes more about what you can do for the business."