Eighty percent of senior lawyers say their health is being damaged by long-hours culture
More than a third of Legal Week survey respondents say they work 60 hours or more and 22% work every weekend
April 15, 2015 at 07:03 PM
4 minute read
The majority of lawyers in private practice have grown to expect long working hours, but more than 80% of senior professionals believe their health is being negatively affected by the time demands, according to new research by Legal Week.
The survey of 267 partners and senior lawyers at leading UK and US law firms found that almost 11% believe their mental/physical health is damaged 'a great deal' by long working hours, with an additional 41% thinking they suffer 'a little damage' and 30% saying there is 'quite a lot' of damage.
While many firms now offer services such as gyms and telephone support lines in an attempt to provide a more rounded working environment, only 21% of respondents think their firm is taking sufficient active steps to help lawyers deal with the impact of long hours. Fifty-seven percent report that their firm is taking no active steps at all.
"We monitor working hours very closely and are aware of the associated health risks," says John Lucy, HR director at Berwin Leighton Paisner. "In instances where individuals are working long hours, we provide the support and guidance required to mitigate against any potential damage to health."
The survey demonstrates the extent to which long hours have become the norm at leading law firms, with 95% saying they work some weekends and 22% working every weekend. More than 10% of respondents report an average working week of 70 hours or more, while just over a third (34%) work 60 hours or more and three quarters (75%) work 50 hours plus.
With workloads picking up as the economy makes a slow recovery, this pattern is not expected to change anytime soon; instead the trend is upwards. While most respondents (61%) anticipate that their working hours will remain the same over the next 12 months, 31% expect them to increase against only 8% who believe they will decrease.
"The legal profession is demanding and there is no denying that lawyers tend to work long hours," comments David Patient, managing partner of Travers Smith.
"Achieving a balance between your work life and personal life is key to being both happy and healthy," adds Mishcon de Reya managing partner Kevin Gold. "We do not believe that the number of hours spent in the office are a measure of success."
Nonetheless, career development is considerably affected by the need to be seen to be willing to work long hours, according to 68.7% of survey respondents.
Expert opinion is unambiguous. "If you work consistently over 48 hours, it definitely damages you," says organisational psychologist Sir Cary Cooper. "There have been innumerable international studies showing that working consistently long hours will damage your health.
"Law firms continue to do this because clients demand it. The hours are penal. In commercial law, it's not just long hours, it's unsocial hours – ie weekends – damaging in all sorts of ways.
"Rates of stress, depression and burnout are very high. It's hidden because people are frightened of letting partners and colleagues know that they're not coping."
Consultant psychiatrist Dr Paul Keedwell treats many City professionals at London's Nightingale Hospital. "There is a macho culture in law firms – a denial of problems. The biggest danger is depression," he cautions.
"The culture needs to change – there is no justification for the hours commercial lawyers do. The main thing is the health of their employees: it is unethical to put them at risk through excessively long hours and excessive stress on a continuous basis."
The full findings of the survey will be published in next week's (24 April) issue of Legal Week.
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
© 2025 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 AllKPMG's Bid To Practice Law in US On Hold As Arizona Court Exercises Caution
Combative Arguments at EU's Highest Court Over Google's €4.13B Antitrust Fine Emphasize High Stakes and Invoke Trump
4 minute readLaw Firms 'Struggling' With Partner Pay Segmentation, as Top Rainmakers Bring In More Revenue
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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