Biglaw

Maybe Biglaw Firms Won't Be So Quick To Follow The Leader When It Comes To Office Attendance Mandates

Or maybe this is just wishful thinking. We'll find out soon....

By  
on

Ed. note: Welcome to our daily feature, Quote of the Day.

I don’t think we’re going to see a domino effect here. Firms are making their own decisions in terms of what works for their culture. If Skadden increased salaries, everyone else would fall in line. So this is a different issue.

— Michelle Fivel, recruiter and co-founder of Hatch Henderson Fivel, in comments given to the American Lawyer on the decisions made by Skadden and Davis Polk to institute a mandatory four-day in-office attendance policy, and why other firms might not rush to follow them. “One reason why firms are doing this right now is they’re holding power over associates,” she said. According to Am Law, the following firms have not (yet) expressed a sense of urgency when it comes to adopting a four-day in-office attendance policy: Fried Frank; Debevoise; Cahill; and Paul Weiss.

Staci ZaretskyStaci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Sponsored

Topics

, , ,