COVID-19 Proved Associates Can Work Remotely, but Will Partners Ignore the Success?
Associates say COVID-19 shows they can maintain productively and quality when working remotely. But the traditional mindset and setup of law firms may curtail any flexibility gained during the pandemic.
June 22, 2020 at 10:00 AM
4 minute read
If COVID-19 has shown anything, it's that law firms can work remotely for a significant length of time. And at least one group of attorneys is looking to keep that momentum going post-coronavirus.
Associates hoping to leverage remote working arrangements in the future say the fact that productivity and work product quality were maintained during the pandemic's shelter-in-place mandates is evidence against arguments that in-person work is superior.
"It's funny because I would consider myself someone that hates working from home. Before this [COVID-19], I would never choose to work remotely," said Ahmad Zaffarese labor and employment associate Aleena Sorathia. "This has shown me I can be productive in my own space and perhaps take advantage of that flexibility."
The sustained productivity hasn't been missed by associates' superiors either, including those previously skeptical of remote working.
"I think people have realized we can be as productive working from home and still meet our billables and communicate with our clients as we are fully remote," said Reed Smith associate Leidy Gutierrez.
Indeed, Loeb Leadership's recent "The Legal Industry's Handling of the Disruption Caused by COVID-19″ report found support for remote working is growing. More than half (66%) of the 25 firms contacted wanted to continue working remotely, if only for a few days a week, post-coronavirus. Of associate respondents, 100% said they wanted to continue working remotely, if only partially.
Some associates even want to leverage remote working arrangements in lieu of using vacation, family leave and other scheduled days off to balance the firm's need to bill hours and the associate's personal demands.
"For certain employees in certain positions, deciding to take time off or whatever the matter is, employers may have a little more room to accommodate a work from home plan with them," said Keefe Law Firm associate and Camden County, New Jersey, Bar Association Young Lawyers Committee chair Christopher Keating. "Everything is on the table for some employers."
Still, some associates say remote working arrangements can lead to missing out on casual, but important, moments to impress partners.
Donovan Bonner, who started at Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass as an associate during COVID-19, noted that making introductions and building rapport is difficult when working remotely and can negatively impact an associate's path to partnership. "I think that physical interaction and casualness helps, and you get more work from that," he said.
Despite the industry's sudden shift to remotely working, some lawyers will still view in-person work more favorably, which younger attorneys should take into consideration, said Critton Luttier Coleman associate Santo DiGangi. "I do think it is beneficial for young attorneys to be in the office, especially when they work with older lawyers that don't understand technology as well," DiGangi noted.
"There's a culture established in them [firms] and it's harder to break," he added. "It will take pioneers to bring that change. It's possible, but I don't see it happening in the near future."
Others, however, are more optimistic. Los Angeles-based Harris Ginsberg associate Jack McMorrow sees lawyers' rigidness toward remote working softening after lawyers maintained productivity during a pandemic.
"Formality is an inescapable part of the initial character of an attorney, and over time the formality is decreasing," he said.
He added that reopening "will present the opportunity for law firms to see it [remote working] is not as bad as they think it it is. … Once the firms give up on that they might not force it back into existence after. I do think younger attorneys will want to take advantage of that."
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
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
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