Can Firm Tech Help Corporate Legal Bring Employees Back to the Office?
Corporate legal may be more comfortable dealing with flesh and blood attorneys than technology, but as COVID-19 restrictions ease, the rush to prepare for employees' return to the office may favor the speed and cost-effectiveness of a tech assist.
May 15, 2020 at 03:07 PM
4 minute read
As states across the country begin easing COVID-19 social distancing restrictions, companies are faced with the challenge of engineering a safe and legally defensible framework for transitioning employees back into the office environment. But due to the extraordinary nature of the pandemic, corporate legal departments may find themselves pivoting further in the direction of technology instead of outside attorneys as they look for rapid-fire guidance through uncharted territory.
At least that's what the folks over at SixFifty—law firm Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati's tech subsidiary—were banking on this week as they rolled out a Return to Work Toolset, an automated platform that helps companies determine which employees can safely reenter the workplace. The solution also solicits employer responses to a series of questions around items such as the existence of corporate COVID-19 screening and testing plans to help businesses. The answers are then used to automatically generate relevant policies and guidelines.
Kimball Parker, CEO of SixFifty, believes that products such as the Return to Work Toolset will be in high demand, pointing to a feeling among companies that are "lost" at how to begin guiding workers back into offices. "If an employer doesn't take reasonable steps to prevent COVID-19 from spreading through a workplace, they can be subject to serious liability, company-ending liability," he said.
To be sure, Wilson Sonsini isn't the only law firm attempting to address that need through tech. Earlier this week, McDermott Will & Emery launched an ongoing webinar series navigating various return-to-work topics that will be continually updated Tuesdays and Thursdays. Meanwhile, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart added a Return to Work Guide to its online COVID-19 Resource Center, which includes analysis on various state employer guidelines as the emerge from state to state.
But with flesh and blood attorneys only a phone call away, will corporate legal departments feel comfortable relying on technology—automated or otherwise—to help them chart a legally defensible path forward? Zach Abramowitz, a consultant in the legal technology space, admitted that legal departments are generally nervous about using "something that's not people."
In evaluating a product like SixFifty's Return to Work Toolset, companies would have to weigh the potential time and cost savings against the potential for legal risk should something go wrong. "I definitely think the [chief financial officer] of any organization would look at a tool like this as a win but the legal department is there to be cautious," Abramowitz said.
But there may be some factors unique to COVID-19 that could ultimately tip the scales in favor of SixFifty and other legal tech providers looking to craft return to work solutions. Parker at SixFifty argued that while lawyers have legal advice or policy templates in place for dealing with longstanding workplace issues such as sexual harassment, responding to a pandemic could necessitate a more ground-up approach—which likely translates to higher legal bills.
Given the fluidity of the COVID-19 crisis thus far, sudden changes—such as an update in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines, for example—could render some very expensive legal advice suddenly obsolete. But a tech platform can be updated constantly.
"This is a situation where I don't see how you could do it without a technology assist," Parker said.
Still, will that be enough to sway corporate legal departments? Abramowitz pointed out that both law firm tech subsidiaries and stand-alone tech startups alike all struggle to walk clients past the fear of legal risk. But in the case of return-to-work solutions, he thinks that law firm-associated products may have an edge given the standing reputations for legal expertise those institutions typically enjoy.
In the case of corporate legal departments, Abramowitz posited that tech is already being successfully deployed to deal with a variety of COVID-19 related problems. "I think that there have been some huge wins for companies that have already made investments in technology and I think over the course of the next year we'll probably start hearing some of those trickle out," he said.
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 AllLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
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