Biglaw Telecommuting

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 282745
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Mar 09, 2017 7:28 pm

What do you guys think about this?

http://abovethelaw.com/2017/03/another- ... bandwagon/

Will it actually work? Work better for certain practices than others? Should other big law firms follow?

Anonymous User
Posts: 282745
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Mar 09, 2017 7:49 pm

Kirkland, at least in Chicago, allows you to work from home as much as you want. Wouldn't be a good idea to do 100% of the time, but people do it all the time.

I dont really think this is a radical thing.

User avatar
twenty
Posts: 3167
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby twenty » Thu Mar 09, 2017 7:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Wouldn't be a good idea to do 100% of the time


Just wondering, why not?

Anonymous User
Posts: 282745
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:03 pm

twenty wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Wouldn't be a good idea to do 100% of the time


Just wondering, why not?


It's easier to discuss things face to face: you don't have to scan comments to an associate, partners will put a conference call on mute to have a sidebar, etc. It's also just easier to build relationships with people in person. If you aren't planning to be there longer than a few years, then who cares I guess but those are the reasons.

RaceJudicata
Posts: 1222
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby RaceJudicata » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:17 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
twenty wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Wouldn't be a good idea to do 100% of the time


Just wondering, why not?


It's easier to discuss things face to face: you don't have to scan comments to an associate, partners will put a conference call on mute to have a sidebar, etc. It's also just easier to build relationships with people in person. If you aren't planning to be there longer than a few years, then who cares I guess but those are the reasons.


Also, productivity. Maybe that is a personal thing, but I am WAY more focused and productive in an office than I ever would be at home. Also, your typical associate - particularly in NYC - probably doesn't have an awesome space to work at home, let alone a reliable printer/scanner/etc.

Sure, the firm can pay for these things, but idk, just doesn't seem conducive to productivity / good work product.

One or two days fine, but every day? Count me out.

EDIT: Of course, there is an element of self-interest in these programs. Lets the firm lease shittier office space (read: smaller) cause the associates won't be in them as frequently.

User avatar
jkpolk
Posts: 984
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:44 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby jkpolk » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:23 pm

To management: just raise my goddamn salary, fuck your stupid made up "perks."

User avatar
Johann
Posts: 15766
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:25 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Johann » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:47 pm

jkpolk wrote:To management: just raise my goddamn salary, fuck your stupid made up "perks."


Disagree. This is the most important benefit one can have in this job. I'd pay 50k of my salary for a policy that let me work from home whenever I wanted if it never impacted anyone's opinion of me. Having a firm that blesses this as part of its policy is huge.

User avatar
Desert Fox
Progressively loosing literacy
Posts: 16294
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Desert Fox » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:56 pm

JohannDeMann wrote:
jkpolk wrote:To management: just raise my goddamn salary, fuck your stupid made up "perks."


Disagree. This is the most important benefit one can have in this job. I'd pay 50k of my salary for a policy that let me work from home whenever I wanted if it never impacted anyone's opinion of me. Having a firm that blesses this as part of its policy is huge.


definitely, but 2x a month is shit.

RaceJudicata
Posts: 1222
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby RaceJudicata » Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:15 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
JohannDeMann wrote:
jkpolk wrote:To management: just raise my goddamn salary, fuck your stupid made up "perks."


Disagree. This is the most important benefit one can have in this job. I'd pay 50k of my salary for a policy that let me work from home whenever I wanted if it never impacted anyone's opinion of me. Having a firm that blesses this as part of its policy is huge.


definitely, but 2x a month is shit.


The Morgan Lewis policy is 2x per week. 2x per month (Shearman) is a joke. Better off having no policy, because you can probably get away with 2x per month with no policy in place.

edit: autocorrect.
Last edited by RaceJudicata on Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3281
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:55 pm

I would guess you could work from home twice a month at almost any biglaw firm without anyone even noticing, let alone giving a shit.

Twice a week is a lot. I'd still worry that it would count against you for signing up for this program. Whatever they say, when shit hits the fan it will be a way to distinguish those who seem more committed to work than others. Only relevant if you intend to stick around anyway.

User avatar
jkpolk
Posts: 984
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:44 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby jkpolk » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:54 am

JohannDeMann wrote:
jkpolk wrote:To management: just raise my goddamn salary, fuck your stupid made up "perks."


Disagree. This is the most important benefit one can have in this job. I'd pay 50k of my salary for a policy that let me work from home whenever I wanted if it never impacted anyone's opinion of me. Having a firm that blesses this as part of its policy is huge.


What we're talking about here (a couple days a month?) shouldn't be called a "perk" - people work remotely, here and there, all the time. It's just employee relations marketing bullshit to call that amount of "telecommute" a perk. (scooped) It feels a lot like the sales pitch on "unlimited vacation" to me.

But I agree never having to go into the office would be dope (but still wouldn't give up comp for it).

User avatar
kellyfrost
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 3:58 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby kellyfrost » Fri Mar 10, 2017 7:08 am

Not in big law, but working from home sucks. It is miserable, boring, unproductive, and depressing. I have hated the few times I have done it. The only positive I see in it is that you can drink alcohol during the day to help combat the things I listed above.

Working from home is certainly very common or the wave of the future. I know a lot of non-lawyers who work from home full time. Most don't like it at all.

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 25586
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Nebby » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:03 am

kellyfrost wrote:Not in big law, but working from home sucks. It is miserable, boring, unproductive, and depressing. I have hated the few times I have done it. The only positive I see in it is that you can drink alcohol during the day to help combat the things I listed above.

Working from home is certainly very common or the wave of the future. I know a lot of non-lawyers who work from home full time. Most don't like it at all.

My experiences are different. Some of my most productive days where I'm knee deep in brief writing have been during work from home days.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3281
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:16 am

Nebby wrote:
kellyfrost wrote:Not in big law, but working from home sucks. It is miserable, boring, unproductive, and depressing. I have hated the few times I have done it. The only positive I see in it is that you can drink alcohol during the day to help combat the things I listed above.

Working from home is certainly very common or the wave of the future. I know a lot of non-lawyers who work from home full time. Most don't like it at all.

My experiences are different. Some of my most productive days where I'm knee deep in brief writing have been during work from home days.

I agree it can be very productive. On the other hand, part of the advantage is that it's harder for people to reach me so I don't have to stop what I'm doing to answer the phone and talk about other matters all day. With better technology that benefit disappears. And yeah, I can't even imagine telecommuting full time. Sounds horrible. That's why people use these cowork spaces, or camp out at coffee shops all day, it sucks to never see another person all day.

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 25586
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Nebby » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:39 am

Yeah. I prefer working in an office, but think two to three days of telecommute could really break up the monotony

Anonymous User
Posts: 282745
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:07 am

I think it would be amazing to be able to do something like M-W in the office and Thurs-Friday and home. Make every Wednesday sort of feel like a Friday, think it would be a total mindset shit for me if I had that ability. Just being able to go to the gym in the middle of the day without "sneaking out" and then showering and coming back to the office would be worth it. Makes it way easier to get into an actual rhythm in life.

User avatar
Easterbork
Posts: 179
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 4:43 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Easterbork » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:25 am

Those two days are called Saturday and Sunday

User avatar
FSK
Posts: 7018
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:47 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby FSK » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:34 am

I'd prefer to be treated like a fucking professional adult and determine when I need to be in the office to do my job.

Anonymous User
Posts: 282745
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 10, 2017 6:00 pm

RaceJudicata wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
JohannDeMann wrote:
jkpolk wrote:To management: just raise my goddamn salary, fuck your stupid made up "perks."


Disagree. This is the most important benefit one can have in this job. I'd pay 50k of my salary for a policy that let me work from home whenever I wanted if it never impacted anyone's opinion of me. Having a firm that blesses this as part of its policy is huge.


definitely, but 2x a month is shit.


The Morgan Lewis policy is 2x per week. 2x per month (Shearman) is a joke. Better off having no policy, because you can probably get away with 2x per month with no policy in place.

edit: autocorrect.


Gonna have to go ahead and disagree with this here. Number 1, 2x a month is 24 business days a year - that's actually not an insignificant amount, when you think about it in addition to 4 weeks vacation, unlimited sick days, holidays, etc. Number 2, I work at Shearman and in my group no one makes any reference whatsoever to this policy. Everyone works remotely when it makes sense for them to do so; therefore, it is my experience that having this policy formally in place acts as more of a floor than a ceiling, for those who wish to take advantage of it, because you are "officially" blessed to take 2 days a month, and then no one really cares about the rest (i.e., there is no one keeping track of this and no necessity to report that you are doing so), so it acts in more of a cover-your-ass type of way, if anything.

Anonymous User
Posts: 282745
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 10, 2017 6:23 pm

Obvious problem:


User avatar
jchiles
Posts: 698
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby jchiles » Fri Mar 10, 2017 7:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
RaceJudicata wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
JohannDeMann wrote:
jkpolk wrote:To management: just raise my goddamn salary, fuck your stupid made up "perks."


Disagree. This is the most important benefit one can have in this job. I'd pay 50k of my salary for a policy that let me work from home whenever I wanted if it never impacted anyone's opinion of me. Having a firm that blesses this as part of its policy is huge.


definitely, but 2x a month is shit.


The Morgan Lewis policy is 2x per week. 2x per month (Shearman) is a joke. Better off having no policy, because you can probably get away with 2x per month with no policy in place.

edit: autocorrect.


Gonna have to go ahead and disagree with this here. Number 1, 2x a month is 24 business days a year - that's actually not an insignificant amount, when you think about it in addition to 4 weeks vacation, unlimited sick days, holidays, etc. Number 2, I work at Shearman and in my group no one makes any reference whatsoever to this policy. Everyone works remotely when it makes sense for them to do so; therefore, it is my experience that having this policy formally in place acts as more of a floor than a ceiling, for those who wish to take advantage of it, because you are "officially" blessed to take 2 days a month, and then no one really cares about the rest (i.e., there is no one keeping track of this and no necessity to report that you are doing so), so it acts in more of a cover-your-ass type of way, if anything.


Dang between 4 weeks vacation, holidays, unlimited sick days, and 24 telecommuting days its like you hardly have to go in at all!

User avatar
Rahviveh
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Rahviveh » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:43 pm

I'm much more productive at home. The only thing I'm really missing I guess is a scanner or copier, which I've never had to use. Otherwise, my hardware at home is better than whats at the office. You can make lunch/dinner at home instead of eating in the cafeteria/shitty street food takeout/seamless.

I agree the main downside is that it can be isolating, so I sometimes go to a coffee shop if I feel like I've been in my apartment too long. Otherwise, most of the other productivity "downsides" are simply a product of how boomers do things.

I wouldn't want to work from home full-time, but having the choice to telecommute whenever I want would be invaluable.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11883
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby kalvano » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:36 am

I work from home once a week and it's awesome. No commute, extra sleep, and I get to randomly see my kid throughout the day.

Genius
Posts: 866
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:19 am

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby Genius » Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:40 am

Anonymous User wrote:Kirkland, at least in Chicago, allows you to work from home as much as you want. Wouldn't be a good idea to do 100% of the time, but people do it all the time.

I dont really think this is a radical thing.


On balance

sms18
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 9:04 pm

Re: Biglaw Telecommuting

Postby sms18 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:20 am

Anonymous User wrote:
RaceJudicata wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
JohannDeMann wrote:
jkpolk wrote:To management: just raise my goddamn salary, fuck your stupid made up "perks."


Disagree. This is the most important benefit one can have in this job. I'd pay 50k of my salary for a policy that let me work from home whenever I wanted if it never impacted anyone's opinion of me. Having a firm that blesses this as part of its policy is huge.


definitely, but 2x a month is shit.


The Morgan Lewis policy is 2x per week. 2x per month (Shearman) is a joke. Better off having no policy, because you can probably get away with 2x per month with no policy in place.

edit: autocorrect.


Gonna have to go ahead and disagree with this here. Number 1, 2x a month is 24 business days a year - that's actually not an insignificant amount, when you think about it in addition to 4 weeks vacation, unlimited sick days, holidays, etc. Number 2, I work at Shearman and in my group no one makes any reference whatsoever to this policy. Everyone works remotely when it makes sense for them to do so; therefore, it is my experience that having this policy formally in place acts as more of a floor than a ceiling, for those who wish to take advantage of it, because you are "officially" blessed to take 2 days a month, and then no one really cares about the rest (i.e., there is no one keeping track of this and no necessity to report that you are doing so), so it acts in more of a cover-your-ass type of way, if anything.


You're missing the point here. It's not that 24 business days a year is an insignificant amount of days/year - pretty much any biglaw associate can get away with working remotely twice per month, and there is no need to formalize this kind of employee "benefit." Like jkpolk said above, this is just another example of a weak-sauce attempt at employee relations marketing.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.