Return to Office
With lockdown measures easing across many parts of the world, law firms are starting to plan and roll-out their office return plans. However, they are now caught in a difficult position between client and lawyer demands, which was not helped after Morgan Stanley’s Chief Legal Officer, Eric Grossman, delivered an announcement directing outside counsel to work in offices or else risk the quality of client service.
Grossman’s critical letter, obtained by Law.com, was “motivated out of grave concern that [the legal] profession cannot endure a remote work model” and that the legal industry’s apprenticeship-style training has been critical to the “development of young lawyers” (Law.com). His message was clear: Morgan Stanley won’t be using Zoom for the most important meetings and if law firms want to be retained as counsel, their lawyers need to participate in meetings in person.
Given the overwhelming push towards remote working by law firms internationally, many partners across the UK and Europe were “somewhat taken aback” (Law.com). Major firms such as Linklaters, DLA Piper and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (“Freshfields”) have formalised hybrid working policies. Even Slaughter and May - perceived by some to be slow-to-change - recently rolled out a flexi-working policy.
There are concerns that Morgan Stanley’s announcement will cause a ‘ripple effect’ and cause many firms to halt or reconsider their flexi-working policies. Morgan Stanley has a large payroll of outside counsel. According to Law.com, Morgan Stanley has been advised by 17 top firms in the last 30 days, including: Latham & Watkins, Davis Polk & Wardwell, Sidley Austin, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton and Clifford Chance. In addition, Morgan Stanley is not the first major bank to share a sceptical view of remote working. In May, Goldman Sachs’ CEO, David Solomon, famously called the concept “an aberration” (Law.com).
Law firms may have to walk a thin tightrope. Balancing two opposing demands - i.e. their junior lawyers’ growing demands for work-life flexibility with their major clients’ demands for all counsel to return to office - will be no easy feat.
Slaughter and May Pilots New Flexi-Working Scheme
Last week, Slaughter and May launched a pilot scheme for its London and Brussels associates that would allow them to work less hours, through a range of options, for subsequent reduced pay. Lawyers will be able to take longer breaks, or work on a project basis, cutting their hours up to a maximum of 20%.
On a positive note, the scheme has been welcomed internally and by some clients, noting that this scheme would grant working parents a better work-life balance (Law.com). With issues of burnout and competitiveness rife in the legal industry, some have praised this move as an innovative attempt to soothe a pressurised environment and counter a further drain on associate talent.
However, one particular concern is the impact this initiative could have on (1) the progression of associates who take it up as compared to those who stay on the ‘progression track’ and (2) clients who have developed an expectation of lawyers being accessible at all times. In addition, there may be issues implementing the scheme equally in all departments.
With the industry’s trend increasingly leaning towards developing bonus schemes that rewards associates for taking up an increased workload, it will be interesting to see how Slaughter and May’s move works out.
‘Business as usual’ – the notable deals and cases which went ahead this week:
Four City firms have recently collected their legal fees worth several millions of pounds after advising on the collapse of Arcadia’s retail chain. Freshfields has reportedly racked up £2.6m worth during a six-month period on this single project. Allen & Overy, DLA Piper and Brown Rudnick have also been appointed for various legal roles, amassing just below £150,000 worth of fees between them (The Lawyer).
A series of firms have been appointed in various roles concerning the bidding war for Morrisons, two weeks after it rejected a £5.5bn takeover bid from Clayton Dubilier & Rice (CD&R). An investment consortium, led by US private equity firm Fortress Group, tendered a £6.3bn bid for Morrisons. Its rival, Apollo Global Management, followed closely after. Slaughter and May is advising Fortress, on its indirectly owned company Oppidum Bidco Ltd, on its cash offer for Morrisons worth approximately £6.3 billion (Slaughter and May’s Website).
With lockdown measures easing across many parts of the world, law firms are starting to plan and roll-out their office return plans. However, they are now caught in a difficult position between client and lawyer demands, which was not helped after Morgan Stanley’s Chief Legal Officer, Eric Grossman, delivered an announcement directing outside counsel to work in offices or else risk the quality of client service.
Grossman’s critical letter, obtained by Law.com, was “motivated out of grave concern that [the legal] profession cannot endure a remote work model” and that the legal industry’s apprenticeship-style training has been critical to the “development of young lawyers” (Law.com). His message was clear: Morgan Stanley won’t be using Zoom for the most important meetings and if law firms want to be retained as counsel, their lawyers need to participate in meetings in person.
Given the overwhelming push towards remote working by law firms internationally, many partners across the UK and Europe were “somewhat taken aback” (Law.com). Major firms such as Linklaters, DLA Piper and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (“Freshfields”) have formalised hybrid working policies. Even Slaughter and May - perceived by some to be slow-to-change - recently rolled out a flexi-working policy.
There are concerns that Morgan Stanley’s announcement will cause a ‘ripple effect’ and cause many firms to halt or reconsider their flexi-working policies. Morgan Stanley has a large payroll of outside counsel. According to Law.com, Morgan Stanley has been advised by 17 top firms in the last 30 days, including: Latham & Watkins, Davis Polk & Wardwell, Sidley Austin, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton and Clifford Chance. In addition, Morgan Stanley is not the first major bank to share a sceptical view of remote working. In May, Goldman Sachs’ CEO, David Solomon, famously called the concept “an aberration” (Law.com).
Law firms may have to walk a thin tightrope. Balancing two opposing demands - i.e. their junior lawyers’ growing demands for work-life flexibility with their major clients’ demands for all counsel to return to office - will be no easy feat.
Slaughter and May Pilots New Flexi-Working Scheme
Last week, Slaughter and May launched a pilot scheme for its London and Brussels associates that would allow them to work less hours, through a range of options, for subsequent reduced pay. Lawyers will be able to take longer breaks, or work on a project basis, cutting their hours up to a maximum of 20%.
On a positive note, the scheme has been welcomed internally and by some clients, noting that this scheme would grant working parents a better work-life balance (Law.com). With issues of burnout and competitiveness rife in the legal industry, some have praised this move as an innovative attempt to soothe a pressurised environment and counter a further drain on associate talent.
However, one particular concern is the impact this initiative could have on (1) the progression of associates who take it up as compared to those who stay on the ‘progression track’ and (2) clients who have developed an expectation of lawyers being accessible at all times. In addition, there may be issues implementing the scheme equally in all departments.
With the industry’s trend increasingly leaning towards developing bonus schemes that rewards associates for taking up an increased workload, it will be interesting to see how Slaughter and May’s move works out.
‘Business as usual’ – the notable deals and cases which went ahead this week:
Four City firms have recently collected their legal fees worth several millions of pounds after advising on the collapse of Arcadia’s retail chain. Freshfields has reportedly racked up £2.6m worth during a six-month period on this single project. Allen & Overy, DLA Piper and Brown Rudnick have also been appointed for various legal roles, amassing just below £150,000 worth of fees between them (The Lawyer).
A series of firms have been appointed in various roles concerning the bidding war for Morrisons, two weeks after it rejected a £5.5bn takeover bid from Clayton Dubilier & Rice (CD&R). An investment consortium, led by US private equity firm Fortress Group, tendered a £6.3bn bid for Morrisons. Its rival, Apollo Global Management, followed closely after. Slaughter and May is advising Fortress, on its indirectly owned company Oppidum Bidco Ltd, on its cash offer for Morrisons worth approximately £6.3 billion (Slaughter and May’s Website).
