All legal news outlets are bursting with the news that Skadden has announced a backtracking of its prior blended model for return to the office in favor of a mandated four days in the office. And, to date, Davis Polk has followed suit.
That is not a huge surprise because when Skadden talks starting salaries, Biglaw often says “how high?” on the way up. It is proven that Skadden sets the bar in that fact setting. But, as pointed out by several reliable legal commenters, approaches to back-to-office differ from salary announcements — because the former is integrally related to law firm culture and involves issues of work-life balance that often attract lawyers to a practice. As a result, changing policies on these issues can have serious backlash effects.
Keep your eyes open for other firms that follow suit with Skadden. My hope is that is will not be many. I am a big supporter of the blend of “in office” and working from home. I know that a certain amount of in office is necessary for effective mentoring and client development, but I also know that commuting at the high cost of mass transit and dedication of time does not make sense in our current professional environment and the advances in technology. When boards of directors are meeting over Zoom, and depositions and hearings are being conducted in similar spaces, it is hard to argue that the business of law cannot effectively use this same technology to successful ends. At least part of the time.
And any talk of a “ding” to profits from a blend that includes working from home is not supported by the facts. Let us not forget that Biglaw INCREASED profits during the pandemic when working from home five days a week was the rule rather than the exception.
Greed should not be driving decisions that are so central to the success of young lawyers in an increasingly complicated world that includes two working parents and very demanding schedules. I have to believe that we can do better.
