When to Bring Up Alternative Work Schedules in the Interview Process
I'm interviewing for a job and want to telecommute one to two days a week, but I don't want to give the impression that I don't want to work hard or it's all I care about. Should I raise the issue immediately or wait?
October 02, 2019 at 09:50 AM
4 minute read
Q: I'm interviewing for a job and want to telecommute one to two days a week, but I don't want to give the impression that I don't want to work hard or it's all I care about. Should I raise the issue immediately or wait?
A: In today's legal market, alternative work schedules are becoming increasingly more common. From flexible hours to telecommuting, employers are demonstrating more flexibility when it comes to "office face time." This evolving dynamic is primarily the result of a few factors: technology that keeps professionals connected remotely, changing cultures … and values, and an employer's desire to gain a competitive advantage in the hiring market. This market development is good news for lawyers who have multiple work/life responsibilities and seek career schedules that can enable greater flexibility to juggle more.
But not every employer is on board with the flexible schedule model. For some, being in the office is paramount to learning, being connected, available, engaged and efficient. And it's a culture must that facilitates better service to internal clients and collaboration with colleagues.
For candidates moving through an interview process, determining which end of the spectrum an employer falls—without being perceived negatively, can be challenging. So some candidates wait until love is in the air before raising the issue. But is this timing wise? Or should all cards be on the table from the beginning?
It depends.
If telecommuting is an absolute requirement for your interest in a particular opportunity, then transparency about your need from the beginning is the wisest path. Why? Because hiring managers are busy (as are you). And time is precious. Hiring a new lawyer takes time and effort—so wasted time is to be avoided. Consequently, honesty up front can either clear the path forward or allow both of you to move on. For those in this category, a thoughtful message is important when raising the question. Below is an example:
Employer: "Do you have any questions?"
Candidate: "Yes, the role as you've described it sounds terrific and I think my skillset aligns well with what you are seeking. I'm attracted to the diversity of the position and the culture seems great. Overall, I'm very excited about the opportunity. One thing I was curious about was your thoughts on flexible schedules—and whether there would be the opportunity to work remotely one to two days a week once you felt comfortable with my work. Given my current responsibilities, some schedule flexibility would be important factor for me in my decision. I have a dedicated work ethic and believe that being connected and available is an imperative part of success. So a remote day would be equally productive. I know employers differ on the issue. But do you envision some flexibility for the right person?"
If telecommuting is a "nice to have," but not a hard requirement in your decision-making process, then it's acceptable to discuss the topic further down the interviewing road and after you've developed greater interest in the position. Below is a messaging example:
Employer: "Do you have any questions?"
Candidate: "Sure, everything you've said about the role is really appealing to me and I think I'd be a great fit. Can you give me a sense of how the department functions? For example, how closely does the team work together? Do you require everyone to come to the office each day from 9 to 6 p.m. or is there flexibility on hours/telecommuting? I know that managers have different philosophies on this so it'd be great to know how you approach it."
Despite the increasing attraction among candidates, employers have varying appetites for workplace flexibility. So when approaching the topic, applicants should use good judgment on the when and how of their messaging. A must-have alternative work schedule merits immediate transparency while a nice-to-have discussion can wait just a tad longer. So determine which situation applies to you and proceed accordingly.
Julie Q. Brush is the founder and author of The Lawyer Whisperer (www.thelawyerwhisperer.com), a career advice column for legal professionals, also found on LinkedIn. She is co-founder of Solutus Legal Search, a legal search/consulting boutique firm, serving as a strategic adviser to lawyers, law firms and corporations.
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 AllBuild It and They Will Come: Tips to Market Your Practice as a Junior Attorney
6 minute readYelp Sues Google for Alleged Antitrust Violations, Citing Previous 'Watershed' Government Ruling
There's Something in the Water: San Diego Is Once Again a Hot Market for National Law Firms
6 minute readWhat Happens When You Go Viral? How a Law Firm Associate Manages Her Social Media Success
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Prior Inconsistent Statements and Medical Malpractice Defense
- 2Public Interest Calendar of Events
- 3Why Law Firms Should Focus on IA for Improved Gen AI
- 4Post-Pandemic Increase in Live Events Prompts Need for Premise Liability Action
- 5Companies' Dirty Little Secret: Those Privacy Opt-Out Requests Usually Aren't Honored
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