EXCLUSIVE Slaughter and May clamps down on office-dodging solicitors

_{It's all being done very discreetly.}

Slaughter and May is clamping down on lawyers who aren’t turning up to the office by tracking when they enter the building, and sharing their attendance data with group heads and HR.

Like many firms post-Covid Slaughters has alighted on a compromise which requires solicitors to work on the premises at least three days a week, with higher attendance rates required of trainees and new joiners.

Sadly a bunch don’t appear to be as fond of Bunhill Row as Deborah Finkler, the Magic Circle firm’s Managing Partner, so now it's time for a more hands-on approach involving surveillance and a ticking off.

In an email to the firm on Wednesday, Finkler explained that "While we have all experienced benefits from having some flexibility in our working week, this has to be balanced against the very clear benefits in terms of culture, collaboration and well-being of working together in the office”.

For those reasons the hybrid arrangement is now common to many UK firms, and, said Finkler, “That is why we require everyone” - except trainees and new joiners where the requirement is higher - “to spend a rolling average of at least three full days per week (or the pro rata equivalent) in the office, or at a client, in court etc., and of course more if client or business need requires it”.

But a minority of the firm’s solicitors have decided to swerve the commute, the Pret and IRL collaboration in favour of a stroll to their home office with a garden view. “While most people have been adhering to this requirement; it is clear that some have not", wrote Finkler.

And so now Slaughters will name and shame its City-shy solicitors by recording their comings and goings and confronting them with the evidence.

“Gate data (showing when people come into and leave the office) will be shared on a monthly basis with Group heads, Business Services directors and HR managers”, said the MP, “so you should assume that if you are not in the office (or at a client, in court etc.) in line with the policy, this will be raised with you and you will be asked to comply”.

A source close to management told ROF that while only a small minority of lawyers were avoiding the office, setting out the firm’s position on attendance, and enforcing it, was necessary in the interests of transparency and to be fair to all staff. The firm declined to comment.

Slaughters’ three-in, two-out plan remains more liberal than the four-in policy favoured by a number of US firms, at least one of which is making bonuses contingent on attendance.

Comments

An interesting story but not an especially shocking one I would say as it seems (unless I'm missing something) that S&M are trying to crack down on people spending LESS than three days a week in the office and to be honest, if you work at a firm like that and expect to go in less than three days a week, then you're a bit of a fool.

In any organisation it seems there is always a small minority who abuse any accommodation to the potential detriment of all.

Interested but nt shocked.

It's "fewer", not "less".

"interested but not shocked" Hi there Deborah!

2 questions:

Do S&M lawyers have their own offices (where you can close a door against the hubbub and get some work done) in the S&M building, or are they required to "work" in an open plan "office"? It always struck me as odd that, invariably, in terms of how conducive they are to document crunching productivity, office-office environments are markedly inferior to my home-office environment. If you’re going to force me to come into a noisy and smelly hell-hole merely to switch on my laptop, could you please ensure that the office you rent at hideous expense isn’t noticeably inferior to my own office.

The vast majority of vapers stealth vape continually in offices, with grim consequences for those of us with allergies / existing lung and COPD issues etc. Does S&M have a no-vaping policy, and is there any serious attempt made to enforce same? Apart from the noise and the lack of work being done, my biggest issue with attending offices in 2024 is the ever-present stink of stale vape.

when i was a trainee we had to sit in offices with partners smoking...

I would love to know what law firms think "Culture" actually is, I strongly suspect they would point to some glitzy 3rd party powerpoint with a variation on "teamwork, dilligence and respect" while in actual fact firmly believe it to be "hierarchy, deference and group think"

I wonder what data and analysis evidenced the "very clear benefits in terms of culture, collaboration and well-being of working together in the office”, and if S&M would share it - perhaps rof could ask them to.

For autistic and/or adhd lawyers in particular, among others, there are likely to be significant well-being benefits of WFH, and greater efficiency (beyond simply saving the time of a 2-way commute).

I wonder what data and analysis S&M have conducted on the disbenefits of working together in the office in terms of time spent commuting, bullying, sexual harrassment, gossip, pointless meetings, lawyers distracting each other, and lawyers gathering to discuss how much they hate working at S&M generally and this policy in particular, and where they're interviewing for other positions.

So half the partners (at least) will be caught out by this. But will they get in trouble? Nope, just those of us toiling endlessly to make them richer.

Recording attendance data & enforcing attendance also fails to appreciate that the way we work has shifted significantly since the pandemic. We go home to work from home. We don’t log off at night and stay off. Lawyers bill more hours this way. As usual, very short sighted, hypocritical, and unsurprising.

Mainly offices but sharing two per room in most cases.

"Apart from the noise and the lack of work being done, my biggest issue with attending offices in 2024 is the ever-present stink of stale vape."

To be fair though, for those of us who don't work at a small-claims firm located above a kebab shop this is less of a worry.

S&M ain’t too bad considering many of us have to be in the office 6-7 days/week.

Don’t think firms with minging open plan offices tend to enforce it, it’s an unspoken trade off

"For autistic and/or adhd lawyers in particular, among others, there are likely to be significant well-being benefits of WFH"

Specifically, that their colleagues won't have to put up with them and their constant moaning, and that there will be no risk of them accidentally being allowed into the same room as a client.

Firms with minging open plan offices tend not to enforce the attendance rule — an unspoken trade off recognising it’s not possible to do any proper work unless you have peace and privacy

I'd assume S&M is two people to office like most of the big firms - can't believe they'd go open plan.

The interesting thing here is that there is still going to be scope for annoyance - I sat on a lengthy case where the judge was partial to a 9:30am start (because they were also partial to 4 day weeks and not scheduling long enough for hearings) such that getting to Court for 9am to square any bits away meant I wasn't going to waste 30 minutes going via the office - if managers are oblivious not to notice people not coming into the office, they're probably equally oblivious to notice when people are in Court so there will be people summoned for a ticking off who will point out 4 days a week in Court/ extensive time on client sites, at conferences etc. and it'll all become a palava!

I don't object to the principle, but it doesn't solve the problem that some managers just not be very good at understanding what their people are doing.

This isn't really news, Firms want their people back in the office and that's the right approach.

Clifford Chance Dubai did this during Covid. HR emailed trainees if not coming in to the office enough (tracking swipe passes) even though partners were all working remotely from the Mediterranean/UK.

Slaughters thinks that anyone not in the office is not working.

I chortled @ Anon 10:49

"Apart from the noise and the lack of work being done, my biggest issue with attending offices in 2024 is the ever-present stink of stale vape."To be fair though, for those of us who don't work at a small-claims firm located above a kebab shop this is less of a worry."

I only go in on Mondays and Fridays to deliberately avoid others whilst still going in some of the time. Take that, WFH-haters

I assume the take your dog to work scheme is consigned to the history books?

@Anon at 11:40, Slaughters’ statement explicitly recognises exceptions for court:

“to spend a rolling average of at least three full days per week (or the pro rata equivalent) in the office, or at a client, in court etc., and of course more if client or business need requires it”

Baffled that above commenters want individual office yet in my young day everyone was clamouring for open plan as being the big buzz of the day. Plus ca change!

Why are lawyers constantly being treated like children? What other highly-qualified profession has these number of over surveillance and child-like tracking policies? Is it not enough with the out of date time recording system?

Funny who lawyers are seeing capable of providing highly specialised advice in extremely complex and high value matters but at the same time being seen as children not to be trusted…

If you bill the same hours (or more) at home as you would in the office, why does being in the office make a difference? The excuses of "collaboration", "teamwork", "the best client service" (and the rest) are utter bullshit. This is distrust in staff, plain and simple. What I want to know is what happens if your manager calls you out on your "non-attendance". Ok, you're asked to comply. And then what? What if you don't? Is your manager/Partner really going to let you go over some bullshit policy? I highly doubt it. I'd be inclined to enjoy my 3-4 days wfh, let them call me out on it, pay me my notice and then I can find somewhere else that actually trusts me to do my job.

Join Keystone - tell Slaughters to jog on.

>What other highly-qualified profession has these number of over surveillance and child-like tracking policies?

This happens in many professions and across the world. Apple bought an extremely expensive new HQ building and management was deeply unhappy with WFH. So they threatened people to get back to work, to see bums on seats in the new building. And that is when people left in droves.

So this is not related to any specific profession; instead it seems to relate to management personality types that do not trust higly-qualified professionals unless they can see their underlings.

One major international firm I know of won't collect data on staff entering and exiting the building as they think in the UK it breaches GDPR rules.

Lawyers did that to themselves - if they had been actually working from home instead of doing whatever else they do at home instead of working, law firms would not be clamoring for them to come back to the office

Anonymous 12th Jan 11:26 - your remarks are discriminatory hate speech. You are mocking the disabled. Autistic people have real struggles within law firms. Disability discrimination is rightly unlawful.
If you could be identified, these remarks would be an SRA issue.
ROF - remove that post.

@ Anonymous 12 January 24 11:26

Wow, you are a real piece of ****.

Work in law where hours (specifically in office) mean more than efficiency, relationships, D&I, health, technology etc.

100% business in office is better than doing the same work in half the time anywhere else, whilst being a progressive thinker, utilising modern technology and in an environment which accommodates all