From White-Shoe to Blue-Jean, Dechert's the Latest Firm to Go Casual
Dechert joins a number of other Big Law firms who loosened their dress codes in the name of making lawyers more comfortable—and more like their clients.
March 12, 2019 at 05:37 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
Who says Fridays get all the fun? Whether its entrepreneurial clients or millennial lawyers driving the change, law firms are increasingly putting the casual in business casual.
Dechert is the latest firm to expand its definition of acceptable workplace attire. Management at the firm announced Tuesday a new business casual dress code that means lawyers and staff can now wear jeans any day of the week, if they so choose.
“My suspicion is there are a lot of firms that are much more relaxed than they used to be,” Susan Saltonstall Duncan, founder of Rainmaking Oasis, said.
Dechert's chief talent officer, Alison Bernard, said the firm already had a business casual policy, but that has now been slightly relaxed to include jeans. Some offices within the firm had already allowed lawyers and staff to wear jeans on certain days or parts of the year, Bernard said, but there was a desire for a more uniform policy.
“This is just trying to make life easier for people, make people more comfortable, more innovative and letting our talent do their best work,” Bernard said.
Still, she noted, lawyers will be expected to wear business attire for court appearances, arbitration, deposition and other specific events or meetings that call for a more formal appearance.
“Our guidance was always adapt to your clients' norms,” Bernard said.
The corporations that many law firms count as clients have largely loosened their own views on professional attire. Goldman Sachs recently made headlines with its switch to a more flexible dress code.
It's a movement that started about two decades ago, as technology companies became more dominant and some law firms started imitating the entrepreneurs they serve, Duncan said. Around then, many firms began implementing casual Fridays, and those that serve startup clients may have been quicker to adopt a more casual policy throughout the week.
“There were a number of firms that relaxed the dress code because the client base felt uncomfortable,” she said. With regard to that reasoning, cutting back on the dress code expectations makes sense.
“As a consultant … I always say mirror the client,” she said.
But a lot of firms are making changes to their dress codes based on the lawyers rather than the clients, Duncan noted. Young lawyers tend to favor informality in the workplace generally, and that includes their clothing, she said, but that may not fit at a firm that serves more traditionally minded clients. It will be interesting to track the longer-term effects on firms' reputations, she said.
Loosening dress codes is an appeal to the millennial generation, said Darin Morgan, managing partner of Major, Lindsey & Africa's Philadelphia office, who related the move to an increase in flexible work schedules, remote work arrangements and other perks.
Law firms were under-hiring for years, but now that they're busier and need more lawyers, there is a shortage of midlevel associates with strong skillsets, Morgan said. So they're making fierce efforts at recruitment and retention.
“They're listening to their associates much better than before,” he said. “What they care about the most is that the work gets done … to keep the firm as profitable as possible.”
Morgan said he's inclined to agree with that philosophy. The only potential downside, he said, is if someone “takes it too far and happens to be seen by a very conservative client who happens to be at the firm that day.”
Bernard noted the same, which is why Dechert rolled out an added perk with its new jeans policy—a garment bag for storing a suit or other business attire within the office for unexpected meetings or visits.
At Dechert, Bernard said, client policies and young lawyers' expectations were among the drivers in the change. The firm has made several enhancements for attorneys and staff in recent years, including improved parental leave and a wellness initiative.
“Compensation is always important, prestige is important, but the culture of a firm is one of the biggest drivers of career choice,” Bernard said. “I think these are major, major drivers of how people are choosing where they want to work.”
|Read More
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 AllPhiladelphia Bar Association Executive Director Announces Retirement
3 minute readPhila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Waterbury Jury Awards $2 Million Verdict Against Eversource
- 2Walter Taggart, Villanova Law Professor, Dies at 81
- 3$2.7M Verdict for Whistleblower Exposes Employer to $300M Claim
- 4Phila. Med Mal Lawyers In for Busy Year as Court Adjusts for Filing Boom
- 5Bonus Parade Continues, With Additional Firms Matching Milbank
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