Firms Offering Permanent WFH or Similar Forum

[Anonymous User]

To the PP -- it was Fenwick's lateral recruiting team itself.

[Anonymous User]

So we can cross fenwick off the list. Who else is there?

[sixers2020]

I saw on fishbowl that Goodwin is setting expectations of 3 days per week in the office as of September 13. However, it seems they are also hyping up full remote positions to grab laterals?

[Anonymous User]

I received offers as a permanent wfh associate from Kirkland, Goodwin, and Willlkie. These firms do not have an office in my state.

[Anonymous User]

Chiming in here to say I'm an incoming first year at one of the firms listed at the beginning of this thread. I asked if I could do a 3-weeks-in, 1-week-out (unique circumstances where this is my ideal setup for the time being). I was basically told I didn't even really have to ask, I can just do it and no one will care. But was also told to "err on the side of being in more than out".

[Anonymous User]

Law360 says Nixon is offering permanent wfh. Any associates that can confirm what the actual policy will look like?

[Anonymous User]

Bump on this? Anyone have any more info? (Also am very interested in what the bar requirements are for remote work in a different state).

[Anonymous User]

Please only add to this list if you know of a firm. Lets not make it a run-on thread of comments. A significant portion of us want WFH to be permanent. The only way to effect the market is to shun those who don't offer it. As associates we have power in where we choose to lateral and bring our talent. So far, having reviewed the various threads, these firms are offering permanent WFH or something similar:

(1) Cooley
(2) Goodwin
(3) Wilson Sonsini
(4) Kirkland (?)

Please update accordingly.

Quinn Emanuel has a "work from anywhere" policy

[Anonymous User]

How is Kirkland considered offering permanent WFH? They just sent out a memo last week about a mandatory 2-3 days in the office email, no?

[Anonymous User]

How is Kirkland considered offering permanent WFH? They just sent out a memo last week about a mandatory 2-3 days in the office email, no?

At the risk of stating the obvious, the easy way to reconcile firms saying both “recruiting ppl to work from anywhere” and “associated expected in 3 days a week” is the firms need bodies for the moment and the remote people will be first to be shown the door when the market gets less crazy. Meanwhile the partners will still want as many people in as possible

[Anonymous User]

How is Kirkland considered offering permanent WFH? They just sent out a memo last week about a mandatory 2-3 days in the office email, no?

Kirkland currently has a legion of fully remote associates in states without offices

[MarcusH]

How is Kirkland considered offering permanent WFH? They just sent out a memo last week about a mandatory 2-3 days in the office email, no?

As others have said, KE and plenty of other firms (those in this thread and many more) will hire an experienced lateral on a remote basis and make exceptions for certain existing associates (and partners). YMMV with these positions, particularly in a down market, but it's not a death knell even in a down economy necessarily. Even pre-COVID, there are numerous examples of remote associates making partner at their respective firms.

[Anonymous User]

Gibson Dunn's policy is: "You are free to work remotely whenever it is appropriate, taking into account the needs of our clients and your teams, and you should feel comfortable doing so." This has widely been interpreted as allowing permanent WFH. There is even talk about moving to a hoteling or shared office model for associates who elect to WFH permanently (which I think is lame, but is way preferable to forced office presence.)

[Anonymous User]

(1) Cooley
(2) Goodwin
(3) Wilson Sonsini
(4) Quinn Emanuel
(5) Gibson Dunn

[Anonymous User]

Perkins Coie has several permanent remote associates, but it’s done on a case-by-case basis.

[Anonymous User]

How is Kirkland considered offering permanent WFH? They just sent out a memo last week about a mandatory 2-3 days in the office email, no?

Kirkland currently has a legion of fully remote associates in states without offices

And Kirkland is (quietly) considering requests to go fully remote from its current associates. My colleague that I saw in the office every day until Covid moved out of state during the pandemic and has asked the firm to remain fully remote when the “return to office” thing finally happens; the firm granted the request. If you are liked and you can offer a good enough reason (in this case, the associate bought a home in the new state and is close to family) the firm may grant permanent WFH. But they want most people back in the office and I don’t think they want associates to be aware of this.

[Anonymous User]

Chiming in here to say I'm an incoming first year at one of the firms listed at the beginning of this thread. I asked if I could do a 3-weeks-in, 1-week-out (unique circumstances where this is my ideal setup for the time being). I was basically told I didn't even really have to ask, I can just do it and no one will care. But was also told to "err on the side of being in more than out".

This is just recruiting speak to get you in the door. Your WFH will be entirely dependent on your personal partner relationships and with who is giving you work. If most of your work is coming from a partner who wants you to be in the office a lot, you'll be in the office a lot. Some partners are chill and won't care, others care a lot about facetime.

[SFSpartan]

I saw on fishbowl that Goodwin is setting expectations of 3 days per week in the office as of September 13. However, it seems they are also hyping up full remote positions to grab laterals?

So, two different messages the firm is putting out are getting mixed here. The gist is:

1. If you're not full remote AND want to keep your own personal office in the office where you work, you need to come into the office an average of 3 days per week once Goodwin re-opens. If you don't come in 3 days per week on average it shouldn't be a big deal (at least not in the EC/VC group) but you're stuck booking a visiting attorney office on our reservation system. Reason for this is that the firm now has way more associates than offices and is betting (probably accurately) that most people don't want to come into office every day.

2. You can work permanent remote as long as you live in one of the 30 states that are approved for remote work, or DC. The folks that are permanent remote are supposed to travel to an actual Goodwin office for at least a couple days every quarter and have an annual travel budget ($10k) to cover the cost of flights, hotels, food, etc. when they do travel to the office.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

I'm seeing several of these "approved states" lists for remote work and they don't seem to correlate to where firms have offices or to taxes on employees from there. Is there some unauthorized practice of law thing? Something else?

[jjdude14]

I saw on fishbowl that Goodwin is setting expectations of 3 days per week in the office as of September 13. However, it seems they are also hyping up full remote positions to grab laterals?

So, two different messages the firm is putting out are getting mixed here. The gist is:

1. If you're not full remote AND want to keep your own personal office in the office where you work, you need to come into the office an average of 3 days per week once Goodwin re-opens. If you don't come in 3 days per week on average it shouldn't be a big deal (at least not in the EC/VC group) but you're stuck booking a visiting attorney office on our reservation system. Reason for this is that the firm now has way more associates than offices and is betting (probably accurately) that most people don't want to come into office every day.

2. You can work permanent remote as long as you live in one of the 30 states that are approved for remote work, or DC. The folks that are permanent remote are supposed to travel to an actual Goodwin office for at least a couple days every quarter and have an annual travel budget ($10k) to cover the cost of flights, hotels, food, etc. when they do travel to the office.

This policy would be an absolute dream and I hope more firms are considering it.

[Anonymous User]

I saw on fishbowl that Goodwin is setting expectations of 3 days per week in the office as of September 13. However, it seems they are also hyping up full remote positions to grab laterals?

So, two different messages the firm is putting out are getting mixed here. The gist is:

1. If you're not full remote AND want to keep your own personal office in the office where you work, you need to come into the office an average of 3 days per week once Goodwin re-opens. If you don't come in 3 days per week on average it shouldn't be a big deal (at least not in the EC/VC group) but you're stuck booking a visiting attorney office on our reservation system. Reason for this is that the firm now has way more associates than offices and is betting (probably accurately) that most people don't want to come into office every day.

2. You can work permanent remote as long as you live in one of the 30 states that are approved for remote work, or DC. The folks that are permanent remote are supposed to travel to an actual Goodwin office for at least a couple days every quarter and have an annual travel budget ($10k) to cover the cost of flights, hotels, food, etc. when they do travel to the office.

Also at Goodwin and this is correct. Zero push to get fully remote folks to an office and it wouldn't make sense at this point -- there's like 100+ fully remote associates.

[Anonymous User]

Law360 says Nixon is offering permanent wfh. Any associates that can confirm what the actual policy will look like?

I can speak to this. If you live within 2 hours of your assigned office you can wfh and continue to operate as though you’re based out of that office (Nixon pays different amount in Metro, Long Island and Non-metro locations). There is also an option to work from anywhere where you have to engage with the firm to determine salary, etc.

[Anonymous User]

I'm seeing several of these "approved states" lists for remote work and they don't seem to correlate to where firms have offices or to taxes on employees from there. Is there some unauthorized practice of law thing? Something else?

I'm at one of the SV firms and they required me to take the bar in the state I'm working, no office here. No tax issues as far as I know

[Anonymous User]

I'm seeing several of these "approved states" lists for remote work and they don't seem to correlate to where firms have offices or to taxes on employees from there. Is there some unauthorized practice of law thing? Something else?

I'm the Goodwin anon from above. It's apparently a tax issue, not a UPL one. Whether that means they have some partner who has an extra house in [insert state] or it's easier to set up a tax reporting structure in such state or whatever, I don't know but that's the stated reason.

[Anonymous User]

I can speak to this. If you live within 2 hours of your assigned office you can wfh and continue to operate as though you’re based out of that office (Nixon pays different amount in Metro, Long Island and Non-metro locations). There is also an option to work from anywhere where you have to engage with the firm to determine salary, etc.

Is this full wfh for Nixon as long as you’re within 2 hours of the office? Permanently?