Name specific policies that promote work-life balance at your firm Forum

[Anonymous User]

There's a lot of generic talk in these parts about law firms that have reputations for better QOL etc. But I'm curious to know what specific rules, policies, and enforceable guidelines any firms out there use to actually maintain quality of life. I know of one firm in my city, just as an example, that has created a QOL task force that monitors the billable hours output of associates to flag those who are billing HIGH amounts. Excessive billing is discouraged, not encouraged, and questions are actively asked about the reasons why the associate is billing at that level: do partners need to manage the associate's work flow better? Etc.

No task force with no authority = QOL is just an illusion that could vanish any given day at any given firm. That's how all institutions work. What else are firms doing out there these days?

[Anonymous User]

My firm’s billable hour average for associates ranges between about 1625 and 1700 in any given year. Setting an expectation that those numbers are acceptable means no task force necessary.

But to your point about tangible things, we’re told from day one that the “right” range is 1600-1800, knowing that work is never perfectly steady and that there will be some heavy and some light months—that range is what you should aim for over the long term.

And we have corporate/lit associate work coordinators. Theoretically every new matter is supposed to route through them so they can allocate based on who is/isn’t busy. Not all work goes through them but a lot of it does, so that helps too.

[Anonymous User]

My firm’s billable hour average for associates ranges between about 1625 and 1700 in any given year. Setting an expectation that those numbers are acceptable means no task force necessary.

But to your point about tangible things, we’re told from day one that the “right” range is 1600-1800, knowing that work is never perfectly steady and that there will be some heavy and some light months—that range is what you should aim for over the long term.

This. Relatedly, firm policies that don’t tie bonuses to a billing threshold. My firm thankfully doesn’t do this, and reading through the bonus thread on here gave me anxiety thinking what it would be like if I had to worry about meeting a certain target to get paid.

Aside from billing policies, WFH has been a godsend and no firm should go back to 5 days a week in the office. Free lunches in the office was nice for days when I did go in.

[Anonymous User]

flexible WFH and 40hrs of vacation counting toward bonus

[Anonymous User]

I disagree that culture can disappear overnight—lawyers at firms with strong QOL are there for a reason, and that includes the partners. Plus practically speaking just about everyone at my firm have families that naturally constrain expectations. (I’m speaking about smaller firms with actually good QOL, not humane biglaw.)

[Anonymous User]

I disagree that culture can disappear overnight—lawyers at firms with strong QOL are there for a reason, and that includes the partners. Plus practically speaking just about everyone at my firm have families that naturally constrain expectations. (I’m speaking about smaller firms with actually good QOL, not humane biglaw.)

Mergers happen. The managing chair can retire. The balance of power on a managing committee can shift by a single vote.

The nature of institutions is that they are subject to whimsical changes if you don't put in enforceable guidelines that have teeth and can't be easily modified. It's just human nature.

[Anonymous User]

I disagree that culture can disappear overnight—lawyers at firms with strong QOL are there for a reason, and that includes the partners. Plus practically speaking just about everyone at my firm have families that naturally constrain expectations. (I’m speaking about smaller firms with actually good QOL, not humane biglaw.)

Mergers happen. The managing chair can retire. The balance of power on a managing committee can shift by a single vote.

The nature of institutions is that they are subject to whimsical changes if you don't put in enforceable guidelines that have teeth and can't be easily modified. It's just human nature.

Again, I’m talking about smaller firms with actually good QOL (for reference I work at the top firm in a tertiary market). We don’t have a centralized management structure like a biglaw firm, administrative responsibilities of various sorts are rotated among the partnership annually. An acquisition by a biglaw firm is conceivable—Dentons swallowed one of our competitors—and would definitely change the culture but that would also effectively be the end of the firm.

[The Lsat Airbender]

I disagree that culture can disappear overnight—lawyers at firms with strong QOL are there for a reason, and that includes the partners. Plus practically speaking just about everyone at my firm have families that naturally constrain expectations. (I’m speaking about smaller firms with actually good QOL, not humane biglaw.)

Mergers happen. The managing chair can retire. The balance of power on a managing committee can shift by a single vote.

The nature of institutions is that they are subject to whimsical changes if you don't put in enforceable guidelines that have teeth and can't be easily modified. It's just human nature.

policies are easier to change than culture FYI