• Home
  • News
  • Partner Says Law Firms Should Take a Cue from Obama, Who Works at Home

Work/Life Balance

Partner Says Law Firms Should Take a Cue from Obama, Who Works at Home

Posted Sep 30, 2009 10:41 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

President Obama’s home and office—the White House—are one and the same.

Of course, the president has plenty of staffers and a place big enough to accommodate them, law firm partner Patricia Gillette writes for the Am Law Daily. Those differences aside, his ability to take a break for family time is a model that should be emulated, she says.

Traditionally, lawyers who opted to do part of their work at home to make time for family were considered part-timers or workers on an alternative schedule. Both situations can carry the stigma of not being committed, and, in most law firms, they can bump lawyers off the partnership track, she says.

“However, in our new world where technology enables nearly everything, it is time for law firm leaders to acknowledge and embrace the fact that employees can access information and provide good counsel from almost anywhere,” she writes.

“It is time to eliminate ‘face time’ as the measurement of dedication and commitment. Big corner offices with senior partners in them are status symbols of the past. (And it is costly real estate, to boot, that smart firms would be wise to give up.) Hours devoted to a commute are no longer signs of commitment, but the tipping point in attempts at work-life balance. And the new reality is this: Clients don't care where the work gets done. They just want it done as efficiently and cost effectively as possible.”

Gillette is an employment partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe. She and another lawyer founded the Opt-In Project to find out how firms can do a better job retaining women lawyers.

Related coverage:

ABAJournal.com: “Too Many Women Lawyers are Like Oz’s Dorothy, Partner Says”

ABAJournal.com: “Ex-Heller Partner: Women Lawyers Were ‘Canaries in the Coal Mine’ ”

ABAJournal.com: “Orrick Partner Says Law Firms Must Change Promotion and Billing Structures”

Comments

1.

Esq.
Sep 30, 2009 4:12 PM CST

Hands down, this is the most obsurd article that I have ever read.

The White House is no more Obama’s ‘home’ than any State governor’s mansion is the governor’s home.  It is simply an official government building, with various meeting rooms, living quarters, and banquet and reception rooms.  All but the living quarters are meant for conducting official business, and the living quarters are provided ONLY during the president’s tenure, because his official quarters are in Washington DC, the nation’s capital, and because he is on duty 24/7.  But for the White House, the president’s official quarters could be located in a different state every four years.  And there are specific prohibitions against conducting official government business, specifically official meetings, at his or her private home.
 
As for ‘face time’ Each president spends years in the public spotlight, building a public reputation that will enable him to run for president.  In firms, ‘face time’ is the equivalent of being in the spotlight, building a reputatuion, so that you can later ‘campaign’ for a promotion or for partnership. 

I am really not seeing the comparison to a law firm. Is the author suggesting that it would be appropriate for associates to meet with partners at their private homes on a regular basis?  For associates to regularly receive clients at their private homes?

And then there are the IRS ramifications of being too cute by halves in attempting to blur the line between business and private property and expenses.  Is this my office suite, or my private mansion with a home office and meeting rooms?  Are my dinner parties private affairs, or am I entertaining clients?

Flag this comment

2.

Esq.
Sep 30, 2009 4:38 PM CST

Sorry, just one more thought. A better comparison for the work-at-home model would be legislators, whether congressmen or senators.  These individuals divide their time between their home districts, where their families and constituents are located [and where they have an office], and Washington DC where they put in their ‘face time’ meeting, voting, etc.

Flag this comment

3.

Matt
Oct 1, 2009 2:36 PM CST

Quote - “Hands down, this is the most obsurd [sic] article that I have ever read.”

You must not read much…

Flag this comment

4.

marion
Oct 1, 2009 6:59 PM CST

I think the point is that we are moving away from the “work at the office model” and in a few years not so far into the future, the option for attorneys to work from home and still be productive and still make partner will be as much a status symbol and the corner office. More and more folks are telecommuting these days; the MTA is getting really pricey; and technology makes Starbucks the ultimate venue for busting out that summary judgment motion. Plus, it’s win win for the employers. They can rent smaller central offices, save a ton on utilities, avoid the reduced productivity that can result from office politics and gossiping, and more closely monitor (from sheer output) the contributions of individual employees. I even think they will pay less in health care costs because employees will be happier and healthier simply due to the freedom to make their own schedules, take a mid-day nap, and eat healthier foods than what is available at the office vending machines.
The only thing is, I think this works better for associates at established firms. As a solo practitioner, it is much more difficult to convince clients that working from home and meeting them at your virtual office, actually costs them less in billable hours. My experience is that clients value that posh carpet in that high rise building in Manhattan and look askance at the notion of you rolling out of bed in your pj’s or birthday suit to work on their case before you even brush your teeth. They just don’t get it.

Flag this comment

5.

Esq.
Oct 6, 2009 8:45 AM CST

@ #4:  I actually see the opposite.  It could work well for a small or solo operation, but not so well for a larger or more established firm.

Many solo and small firm lawyers ‘based’ in Manhattan already work at home with the help of the virtual office.  For under $200/mo they have the front of the Madison, Lexington, or Wall Street address, someone to answer their phone, and the use of a conference room to receive clients or hold meetings, all while spending 50% of their time at home, and another 30% in court or at the local bar association for the free online research.

I don’t think this would work so well in the large firm context as everything is done by committee; hiring, bonuses, promotions, etc.  The face time is essential to build a brand and a reputation within the larger corporate environment.

However, I still think the comparison to the White House is utterly absurd.  That sort of thing only works on planet Palin.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.