Law GovLaw Gov

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest legal news from from all around the world directly to your inbox.

    What's Hot

    Freshfields Nabs Another Cravath M&A Partner

    May 22, 2022

    Score of NYC Judges Who Attended Conference Test Positive for COVID-19

    May 21, 2022

    Lawyer With Large Hong Kong Law Firm Leaves to Head Up Risk Function at Blockchain NFT Business

    May 20, 2022
    Facebook Twitter Instagram
    Law GovLaw Gov
    • Privacy Policy
    • Guest Post
    • Terms
    • Contact
    Facebook Twitter Instagram
    SUBSCRIBE
    • Home
    • News
    • Law Firms
    • Legal Technology
    • Law Practice
    • Litigation
    • Regulation
    Law GovLaw Gov
    Home » Most Lawyers Would Not Take Pay Cut For Full Time Remote Work, Fear Policy’s Impact on Retention and Women

    Most Lawyers Would Not Take Pay Cut For Full Time Remote Work, Fear Policy’s Impact on Retention and Women

    May 12, 20224 Mins Read Law Firms
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Reddit WhatsApp
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest WhatsApp Email

    A majority of U.K. lawyers said they would not take a pay cut in exchange for full time remote working, according to a survey by Law.com International, despite nearly 50% of the same poll believing that a pay cut for remote staff is a valid policy.

    In a poll of over 50 lawyers, when asked if they would opt for a pay cut alongside full time home working if their firm offered it, 72% of respondents said no. 15% said they would take the pay cut while 13% were undecided.

    47% of respondents to the same poll said they think law firm staff and fee earners should be paid less if they work remotely full time.

    One partner at a medium to large law firm flagged what they perceive as hypocrisies between law firms’ solid financials and pay cuts. They said: “Law firms cannot on one side boast about their income/profit and on the other side cut pay only because of remote work…  if such remote work remains without effect on the quality and amount of work done.”

    “A pay cut is frustrating and may lead to good employees leaving,” they added.

    Location also plays a part in influencing whether or not partners would be happy to take the deal, the survey found. Another partner at a mid-sized firm said due to living close to the office, they would rather go into the base instead of taking the pay cut.

    However, another partner said a 20%-30% hit on salary would still be “a fantastic deal to not have to commute”.

    Meanwhile, non-partners are of mixed views, particularly as the hot hiring market for junior talent continues to play in their favour. An associate, who said they were undecided on whether the would d take the pay cut, said they would be likely to leave their firm if such a policy was introduced.

    Discrimination and retention issues

    Such a policy is likely to trigger many other issues, with 25% of respondents saying the greatest impact will be exits from the firm. A Manchester-based partner said that if their firm were to offer reduced salaries for remote workers, the risk would be to push more talent to London.

    While COVID-19 remote working was first hailed as a “game changer” for women in law, many believe that a pay cut for remote workers would be a step backwards for gender parity. 19% of respondents to the survey said another major impact could be a widening gender pay gap owing to the likelihood of women favouring the policy more than men.

    In the poll, a female partner at a mid-sized to large law firm joked: “I’d expect my male colleagues to be delighted that I am working from home — it gives them a chance to crawl out from under my shadow!”

    They continued that the policy is discriminatory against women who “carry the lion’s share of the childcare duties and are for the first time in history being able to satisfactorily combine work with motherhood”.

    “The genie can’t be put back in the bottle”, the partner added. “Law firms need to stop living in the past”.

    The ongoing debate stems from Stephenson Harwood’s decision to cut pay by 20% for its people choosing to work remotely full time — a move which garnered national attention and criticism online.

    Another respondent said they are much more productive financially when working from home, and wouldn’t opt for the pay cut, stating:

    “The firm is doing markedly better financially from me working from home and has no need for my presenteeism — there is no justification for me taking a pay cut.”

    The discussion around salary for remote workers is the latest challenge for firms as they continue to tackle issues raised by the shift to remote working, including presenteeism and retention challenges.

    While initial obstacles included whether or not to introduce a formal work from home policy, more recent concerns include the potential for home working to erode workplace culture.

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email

    Related Posts

    The Hogan Lovells ‘2,400 Hours Memo’: Rational or Radical?

    May 20, 2022

    Slaughter and May, Simpson Thacher Lead on £1.75B KKR Energy Acquisition

    May 20, 2022

    Ex-White & Case Partner Alleges ‘Bullying’ And ‘Toxic Work Environment’ in Employment Tribunal

    May 19, 2022

    Chilean Law Firm Carey Adds Native Mandarin Speaker as More Chinese and Chilean Clients Seek Cross-Border Advice

    May 18, 2022

    Hong Kong Law Firm Deacons Jumps on the NFT Bandwagon

    May 18, 2022

    Willkie Expands Again in Frankfurt, Establishing a Capital Markets Practice With Two Partners From McDermott

    May 18, 2022

    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Don't Miss
    Law Practice

    Score of NYC Judges Who Attended Conference Test Positive for COVID-19

    Francesco MazzagattiMay 21, 20220

    The state court system reports that 20 New York City judges who attended a conference…

    Lawyer With Large Hong Kong Law Firm Leaves to Head Up Risk Function at Blockchain NFT Business

    May 20, 2022

    The Hogan Lovells ‘2,400 Hours Memo’: Rational or Radical?

    May 20, 2022

    Slaughter and May, Simpson Thacher Lead on £1.75B KKR Energy Acquisition

    May 20, 2022

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest legal news from from all around the world directly to your inbox.

    Our Picks

    An Ugly Week for Dechert and White & Case

    May 20, 2022

    Greenberg Traurig Advises Panattoni on Acquisition of Magnice Plot

    May 20, 2022

    Marcin Chylinski Joins Baker McKenzie as Partner and Head of Equity Capital Markets

    May 20, 2022

    Winston & Strawn Launches Miami Office, Hiring 6 Local Big Law Partners

    May 20, 2022
    Law Gov
    Facebook Twitter Instagram Pinterest
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact
    • Guest Post
    • Terms & Conditions
    © 2022 Law Gov. All rights reserved. Developed by Sawah Dev.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.