As Coronavirus Spreads, Some Firms May Struggle to Pivot to Remote Work
As more law firms leverage remote work access to weather the latest coronavirus threats, some can find that going remote isn't all that easy, or safe.
March 04, 2020 at 10:00 AM
4 minute read
As the coronavirus spreads into the U.S., many firms are bracing for a potential outbreak by relying on prearranged business continuity plans. But for some, this can mean rushing to provide remote access for their lawyers and staffers.
While various firms have shut down offices after coronavirus scares, many are weighing remote access options in the event of an outbreak or if an employee or family member becomes sick, said Keno Kozie Associates managing director Eli Nussbaum.
"People are trying to be more cautious about the transmission of potential illnesses, generally a good practice but now it's more relevant," he said.
For the law firms that already leverage cloud-based services and have staff and lawyers that work remotely routinely, heightened usage of remote access shouldn't be an issue, Nussbaum said. Although an increase in ISP traffic on a firm's network would likely require more cloud resources, he said that's easy to solve.
But the firms that are scrambling to put together a plan to work remotely could be in for a steep challenge.
"For organizations that follow the traditional legal model, getting licensing, getting hardware, getting users into this remote working model on the fly does present some issues," Nussbaum explained.
Those issues include ensuring software is accessible via remote networks, retraining staff on remote work protocol and ensuring adequate cybersecurity when leveraging a remote access service.
While it's more likely lawyers will have law firm-provided laptops, that may not be the case for secretarial, paralegal and other staff.
"Most firms don't have an option for them to work from home," said Gulam Zade, CEO of legal IT consultancy Logicforce. "We have not seen firms take that extra step and buy laptops. It does sound like firms will take it on a case-by-case basis."
Still, law firms may not want to set an unintended precedent when offering remote access to staffers. "The organization wants to get the value from their staff, but investing in all that hardware has a cost. And the user comes to expect those services and they may not decide to come back to not working remotely," Nussbaum said.
Eric Levine, executive vice president of Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, said generally only the firm's attorneys are given a laptop to log access to sensitive client data. Still, his firm has considered providing staffers with laptops equipped with limited access credentials if the coronavirus spreads to any of its New Jersey, Philadelphia or New York offices.
However, Levine said the firm is proactively reminding the firm's lawyers and staff to remain vigilant against coronavirus-related phishing emails.
"From a cybersecurity and data privacy standpoint, people must be aware that the virus itself presents an opportunity for hackers and wrongdoers to gain access to resources," he said. "I sent an email to our staff and attorneys with an article saying to be careful for these types of email scams, they're more potent because they're tied to a health scare."
While law firms may work from the comforts of their home during a coronavirus panic, it's likely a different situation for alternative legal service providers.
For law company Elevate, working remotely for its clients, including legal departments, isn't always an option. Elevate chief information officer Howard "Bud" Phillips said some workflows include accessing extremely sensitive information that requires transferring the work to secure physical environment instead of accessing it remotely.
"You can't control someone taking a picture on their screen at home, but you can control it in a physical room," he noted.
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 AllLaw 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