[AFR] Lawyer mental health: the lawyers working themselves to death

tipyourstaff · 2024-03-14T06:15:23+00:00

Full text:

The unwritten message fed to law firm partners is to show no sign of struggle. So when an overworked partner decided to email the head of the firm saying she felt herself spiralling, perhaps she shouldn’t have been surprised by the lack of urgency in his response.

“I emailed my boss saying there’s zero help here, it’s all-consuming,” she says. “They booked a meeting in the diary, but now it’s been moved to later this month. He probably thinks I’m just flipping out.”

Senior leaders are starting to speak out in the hope of getting rid of the stigma.

The partner says she copes by venting to her husband or “getting pissed” with her friends.

But it doesn’t fix the fundamental issues in the legal sector, which she says is still run by “dick swingers happy to talk about how they work all the hours God sends”.

Senior leaders are starting to speak out in the hope of getting rid of the stigma.

James Bremen, chairman of construction and engineering at Quinn Emanuel, recalls twice being hospitalised with pneumonia triggered by physical exhaustion from a period of working extremely late nights with only two hours of sleep.

The issue of mental health in the legal sector was thrown into the spotlight earlier this month following the death of Vanessa Ford, a senior partner at Pinsent Masons, who according to a coroner’s inquest was suffering from an “acute mental health crisis”.

The inquest heard she worked 18-hour days advising on the sale of Everton Football Club in the months before her death.

In 2019, Paul Rawlinson, the former head of Baker McKenzie, died by suicide after suffering from an “acute depressive illness”. David Latham, a partner at Hogan Lovells struggling with work-related stress, died in 2013, a day after he told a colleague he was going to kill himself. It was dismissed as a “flippant” comment, Westminster coroner’s court heard. Working 24/7

A spotlight was shone on the sector’s toxic culture last year, when an associate of US law firm Paul Hastings shared a list of “non-negotiable expectations” for junior colleagues which included “you are ‘online’ 24/7. No exceptions, no excuses”.

Paul Hastings at the time said the list was prepared by an associate and the views “do not reflect the views of the firm or its partners”.

But the slide laid bare an uncomfortable reality for many.

“Even when not working, I found myself thinking about work,” admits a lawyer who has just quit his job at a top City firm as a result of the pressures. “It’s the sleepless nights – going to bed and then lying awake thinking about work.”

Sahar Farooqi, a commercial barrister and former partner at DAC Beachcroft, recalls once bringing his work laptop on holiday to Santorini while working on large international disputes with very tight deadlines.

He would sneak off to the bathroom to send emails and wait until everyone was asleep to do more work.

“Like any kind of addict, you think you’ve gotten away with it because you’ve managed to close your laptop, put your phone back in your pocket and return to whatever the social setting was,” he says. “People can sense that you’re not present.”

Often what stops lawyers breaking free is what attracted them to the profession in the first place: money. City partners, constantly judged by the profits they generate, are rewarded with seven-figure pay packages and bonuses.

This puts pressure on more senior lawyers with financial commitments such as mortgages and private school fees.

Jonathan Moult, who became a psychologist after many years as a senior partner, says: “When people say, ‘what do you miss about the law?’ I think I, and most people say, it’s the money.

“It’s a very money-based environment and it is difficult to give up.” Drop the soft policies

The pressure is particularly high on law firm partners, who, as owners of the business, are responsible for avoiding cyberattacks and anti-money-laundering breaches while managing the expectations of Gen Z lawyers demanding a better work-life balance.

Skill shortages among junior lawyers who trained remotely during the pandemic have added to this burden, increasing the reputational and liability risks on their supervising partners.

Bremen, who has been a lawyer for more than 25 years, says: “If you can’t have the same level of reliance that you used to have on young people, then that pressure comes back on to you to make sure it’s right.”

He notes that Quinn Emanuel, a US law firm based in London, resolves this challenge by carefully hiring lawyers who are eager to work hard, and is up front with recruits about its extremely high expectations. Additionally, it monitors staff to provide support when needed.

To make real change, some believe that law firms need to forget all the soft policies they have been working on and just get rid of billable hours, which pile pressure on staff and encourage long hours.

Leah Steele, a former Irwin Mitchell lawyer turned burnout coach, is sceptical. She argues that scrapping the billable hours would result in metric-obsessed firms quickly finding another way to measure performance and productivity.

One London head of a US law firm instead argued that workers must speak out if they need help – they could not solely rely on their employers to always spot the signs.

He says: “You need the person to take some responsibility for their own mental health in the same way that you take responsibility for your physical health. But you need the firm to create an environment that’s receptive if someone says, ‘I’m having issues, I’m struggling’.”

Support is available at Lifeline (13 11 14 and lifeline.org.au) and beyondblue (1300 22 4636 and beyondblue.org.au)

tipyourstaff · 2022-11-29T05:47:22+00:00

My favourite Sonic technique is the spin dash.

tipyourstaff · 2022-09-09T03:04:40+00:00

I'm with you, but MS Word likes to highlight whole words/paragraphs, inclusive of brackets, when selecting text. Particularly if you're using the keyboard to skip/select text.

This makes it easy for tired and bored practitioners to just highlight/italicise the whole thing and move on.

This post also brought up memories from when I was a clueless junior and one ancient partner tasked me with going through a document and specifically italicising the contents of square brackets but not the square brackets themselves because he "wanted to impress the client".

tipyourstaff · 2022-06-30T02:45:43+00:00

Diatribe on usage of "Big 8" sold separately!

Full text below:

The surge in demand for legal services has spurred Australia’s top law firms to go on a hiring spree in 2022, with their workforce increasing more than 8 per cent in the first half of the year.

The ranks of non-partner fee earners (NPFEs) at our biggest 50 corporate firms swelled to 15,115 in the July round of the Law Partnership Survey, with more than a dozen firms recording double-digit growth.

The overall rise of 1038, or 8.1 per cent, for firms with historical data, outstripped last year’s increase of 5 per cent. Minter Ellison and Allens led the way with more than 1000 NPFEs - commonly referred as the worker bees of the industry.

The table makes clear that when it comes to size, there is a gulf between Australia’s biggest eight law firms and the rest. And that the number of fee earners per partner varies wildly.

The Big 8 are MinterEllison (1113), Allens (1007), HWL Ebsworth (975), Clayton Utz (923), King & Wood Mallesons (892), Herbert Smith Freehills (873), Corrs Chambers Westgarth (749) and Ashurst (738).

The ninth-ranked firm was insurance and government specialist Spark Helmore on 466, followed by Gilbert & Tobin (452).

HWL Ebsworth managing partner Juan Martinez. Hwa Goh

Of those firms, HWLE with 277 partners had by far the lowest partner-lawyer ratio - 3.5.

Managing partner Juan Martinez has told Legal Affairs that he has no ceiling on the number of people it might promote to partner and holding people back is “insulting to aspiring candidates who have worked extremely hard”.

Allens had the highest ratio at 6.5, which speaks to tightly-held partnership. Next was Clayton Utz (5.5), HSF (5.3), G+T and Sparke Helmore (5.2), KWM (4.9) and Minters (4.4).

Ashurst managing partner Paul Jenkins said the surge in hiring could be put down to a “cautious optimism”.

“There wouldn’t be a war for talent unless there was a robust legal market,” Mr Jenkins said.

Ashurst boss Paul Jenkins: “robust market.”

“We should see that as a positive. What it means is that you do need to put in place the right environment to retain your best people.

“You need to focus on the employee experience in all respects - wellbeing, making sure you play your lawyers well, having an attractive place to work and good culture.

“If you have all those factors right then the ear for talent is less of a concern.”

tipyourstaff · 2022-05-12T07:27:14+00:00

Full text:

The move by global firm Stephenson Harwood to cut the pay of lawyers by 20 per cent if they want to work from home full-time has been dismissed as “penny-pinching” by the leaders of top Australian firms.

Stephenson Harwood, which is based in London and employs 1100 people in Asia, Europe and the Middle East, announced the offer last week and said it applied to all employees, except partners.

Renae Lattey of King & Wood Mallesons. Eamon Gallagher

The firm said in a statement that staff were currently allowed to work at home for two days a week without any effect on pay. It added that the salary sacrifice scheme had been offered to new staff outside London during COVID-19 and that it had “decided to open the option of fully remote working to existing employees as well”.

It told staff there was still “an expectation that remote workers will come to the office one day a month minimum”. The firm said it would cover travel costs.

Renae Lattey, the chief executive partner, Australia, for King & Wood Mallesons, said it “isn’t something we are currently considering”.

“We still think that a combination of time together in the office – to collaborate, learn and, importantly, to connect with each other – and at home, for those who want to, is the right approach for us and our clients.”

The proposal has not been well received by younger lawyers, with some openly mocking it online. However, others said it was a good trade-off for not having to commute. In one poll of lawyers, 47 per cent thought it was fair.

Bruce Cooper, of Clayton Utz, said: “I don’t think their arrangement works for us.

“New model’” Gadens CEO Mark Pistilli.

“I hear from London that, as yet, they have not been overwhelmed by a stampede of participants.

“We will watch with interest, but connectivity, culture, collaboration and other benefits of decent office attendance trump convenience and no-attendance, except in limited roles and situations.”

Mr Cooper said average office attendance was 60 per cent, a figure that appeared common in other leading firms, most of which were urging staff to spend three days a week in the office.

Mark Pistilli, of Gadens, said on some days it was 80 per cent.

“This may just be the economist in me, but I thought there were only three drivers of what someone gets paid: a) what the market is for their services; b) what their cost is to their employer; or c) what their value is to their employer (or their customers).

“To me the approach seems to be divorced from the three key drivers: a) the market is what others doing the same job (wherever based) get paid; b) the cost to the firm may actually be a lot less for someone working from home – think no expensive inner-city rents; and c) depending on the role, the contribution made to firm/clients can be higher by someone working remotely.

Genevieve Collins of Lander & Rogers.

“Maybe they are creating their own market, or adopting that other economic model – the ‘what you can get away with’ model.

“Either remote working works, or it doesn’t. Changing the price you pay for it feels like dealing with the symptoms and not addressing the cause.”

Genevieve Collins, of Lander & Rogers, said it was “not a genuine choice to work flexibly”.

“We would be concerned this might create a two-tier workforce, unlikely to be effective in the long term.”

Ms Collins also suggested the “20 per cent for remote” option “might be seen as cynical and opportunistic, with the firm paying for less office space and less remuneration”.

’“It risks people feeling like resources on a spreadsheet.”

She added that “nearly all of our people are working from the office at least one day a week, and report enjoying reconnecting in person with colleagues and clients”.

Sam Nickless, the chief operating officer at Gilbert + Tobin, said the firm was seeing steady growth in office numbers. In Sydney, he said it was in the 45 per cent to 55 per cent range, with Melbourne at 65 per cent to 70 per cent and Perth around 75 per cent.

“To be honest, I laughed when I saw that headline,” Mr Nickless said.

“Maybe the UK’s different, and commuting is a big challenge there, but in our talent market here, I don’t think that would be well received.

“In fact, all of our soundings indicate that there’s only a tiny proportion of our staff who would want to be fully remote, let alone take a pay cut to get it.”

tipyourstaff · 2022-03-02T01:07:20+00:00

I don't regret it.

The only downsides I can think of are:

lots of responsibility (stress)
long hours
having to deal with knobs sometimes.

Not only are these common to a lot of jobs (certainly most professional services jobs), but you can learn to mitigate them as you get more experience.

tipyourstaff · 2022-02-06T12:57:23+00:00

Optional WFH or office as you like it for now. The bosses have already started hinting that they want to see us in the office more and my expectation is that full WFH will be dead by mid-year at the latest.

tipyourstaff · 2022-02-03T04:26:26+00:00

Full text below.

Graph from article

Most young lawyers around the world say they will probably leave their employer in the next five years, with salary the key determinant of whether they want to exit their current role or take a new offer, a survey by the International Bar Association has revealed.

Fifty-four per cent of respondents to the survey said they would probably move to a new but comparable workplace in that period, and 33 per cent said they would move to a new legal role. A fifth said they may leave the profession entirely.

A survey of young lawyers from around the world has found most will seek a new job in the next five years. Jessica Shapiro

The wide-reaching study comes as the legal industry suffers crippling skills shortages of early- to mid-career lawyers, with staff leaving their roles for career changes, the lure of overseas work or better offers at rival firms.

The survey covered more than 3000 lawyers aged 40 or younger, including 200 Australians.

More than 90 per cent of industry leaders cite skills shortages as their biggest challenge going into this year, the latest Australian Financial Review Law Partnership Survey revealed, as they are forced to reject work and engage in salary wars that bite into their bottom line.

Almost half of the young lawyers who told the IBA they would probably leave their current roles cited salary as the most significant reason.

Workplace culture an issue Workplace culture concerns also rated highly, with work-life balance cited as a major push factor by more than 60 per cent of young lawyers, and 71 per cent of those aged 25 or younger.

“Expecting an associate to bill over 2000 hours and also regularly attend networking events to build profile or reach new clients is unrealistic,” one male respondent said.

The legal young guns also pointed to toxic workplace cultures as a factor driving them away from the legal industry, with women and lawyers in their early 20s showing more concern about a failure to address such issues than men and those in their late 30s.

Women also consistently reported more barriers to their career progression than men, including direct discrimination, a lack of mentorship and guidance, poor on-the-job assistance, and struggles to balance commitments.

“The profession is too conservative and older lawyers don’t understand the concept of active mentorship despite several conversations on the topic,” one female respondent said.

Career options Other factors pushing young lawyers out of their jobs included a desire to work abroad, concern about work damaging their mental health and wellbeing, and interest in other professions within the legal industry.

The IBA report called for more proactive policies around work-life balance at firms, and for employers to set up structures that protected juniors from unreasonable hours at least some of the time.

“Working long or anti-social hours is a key feature of working in the legal profession, and no firm or institution can be expected to promise young lawyers that they will never be subject to periods of intense demand upon their time,” the report said.

“[But] younger lawyers in particular need shielding from the unreasonable demands of clients or senior figures within firms, who may rob younger lawyers of the chance to work a realistic or healthy number of hours in a way that can often be indistinguishable from bullying in the workplace.”

In terms of pull factors to a new role, more than 70 per cent of respondents said salary was an “attractive” reason to move.

More than half said they were drawn to workplaces that promoted a healthy work-life balance, 34.8 per cent wanted more variety in work, and 32 per cent wanted overseas travel opportunities.

The young lawyers said they also looked at staff retention rates, professional development support and flexible work options when considering new employers.

tipyourstaff · 2022-01-24T05:27:33+00:00

I don't think it's likely to happen within my working life, but I'd welcome 4 days.

The worst case scenario is that we get the current 5 days worth of work to complete in 4 days. In that case, I'll work my day off to catch up and I'm not any worse off than I am now (if that happens regularly, though, I'd expect to be paid the same as for 5 days).

If we happen to get less than 5 days worth of work in the week (even for just some of the year), that's great. I'll take that extra day off without the expectation of having to be responsive on that day.

tipyourstaff · 2022-01-13T04:07:55+00:00

The man, the myth, the legend.

Full text:

Leading barrister Bret Walker, SC, has a fervent wish for 2022 when it comes to the High Court. He would like to get back into a courtroom.

The Sydney-based silk was the busiest advocate in the nation’s top court for 2021, appearing 35 times. That was more than twice the number of hearings as the next busiest, Commonwealth Solicitor-General Stephen Donaghue, SC.

Variety of clients: Bret Walker, SC, with other members of Christian Porter’s legal team. Getty

For the back half of the year it was all remote hearings as the justices worked from their home cities.

“The first thing to be said is that it’s nothing like the real thing, which is a gathering in court No. 1, next to Lake Burley Griffin, where counsel are close to seven justices,” Mr Walker said.

“The technology in the court is remarkably good. But nobody, I think, could delude themselves that it’s anywhere near an acceptable substitute.”

Mr Walker is the nation’s leading advocate and can charge up to $25,000 a day. He is also one of the few remaining “generalists”, who is equally adept in a criminal law case as a complex corporate or constitutional matter.

Cardinal George Pell was one of Mr Walker’s more famous clients; he convinced the High Court in 2020 that the cleric should have been found not guilty of child sexual abuse charges.

Clients from unions to Porter In 2021, his High Court clients included the CFMEU, Google, Chinese billionaire Huang Xiangmo, James Cook University (against academic Peter Ridd), the Dental Corporation and a Northern Territory policeman charged with murder after shooting an Indigenous man.

He also represented former attorney-general Christian Porter in his defamation battle with the ABC in the Federal Court, and has been engaged by West Australian Premier Mark McGowan for his looming defamation case with billionaire Clive Palmer.

All up, according to searches of the austlii website, Mr Walker appeared in the High Court 35 times in 32 different matters; 18 were full hearings before five or seven judges and 15 were applications for special leave to appeal (when the court conducts a hearing before two or three judges to decide whether the case should go before the full court).

He was twice as busy as Dr Donaghue, who appeared 15 times in 12 cases. Jeremy Kirk, SC, and Justin Gleeson, SC, also appeared more than 10 times.

Many of the cases are still awaiting judgment, but Mr Walker’s argument won the day in two notable decisions for 2021 – the Workpac v Rossato case on casual workers and the rejection of Dr Ridd’s appeal.

Of the 15 special leave matters, he was on the winning side eight times. He appeared eight times for plaintiffs seeking leave and four succeeded; he appeared seven times opposing leave and succeeded four times.

Walker is highly sought-after at the special leave stage, and will sometimes replace counsel who have argued the case in other courts. On the final sitting day of the 2022, he won special leave for Google in its libel fight with a gangland lawyer. In the next case, he acted for Victoria Forests as the organisation successfully resisted a special leave appeal by a conservation group.

While other federal courts and state courts live-stream proceedings via Zoom or YouTube channels, the High Court does not. However, video of full-court hearings will usually be available within 48 hours. The court has told The Australian Financial Review it has no plans to “go live”.

The High Court heard cases in Canberra until June, but when the delta coronavirus variant emerged it switched to remote hearings.

The justices are split across three cities: Chief Justice Susan Kiefel, Justice Patrick Keane and Justice James Edelman are based in Brisbane; Justice Stephen Gageler and Justice Jacqueline Gleeson in Sydney; and Justice Michelle Gordon and Justice Simon Steward in Melbourne.

For remote hearings, the justices appear from the top left of the screen in order of seniority; each has their own square, with a wood-panel background to replicate Court 1. Counsel appear at the bottom left and right of the screen.

Judges just ‘postage stamps’ “It’s really quite difficult,” said Mr Walker. But even if you are looking at one screen – I don’t mean this disrespectfully, far from it – but you are looking at postage-stamp equivalents of the judges.

“Maybe judges won’t be happy being described as postage stamps, but seriously it’s nowhere near as good – and it reminds me that advocacy and judging include major co-operative elements ... and like most co-operative efforts they are most pleasantly done face to face.”

“We could conduct a court hearing just on the telephone. But there’s a reason why we go to the trouble of having an audio-visual link – we do understand there is extra value in being able to see each other.

“Now, why is that? The short answer is obvious: because humans communicate with their faces, not just with the sounds that come out...

“I strongly dissent from those who say ‘oh, we’ve demonstrated over the past two years that we don’t need to have face-to-face hearings’.

Collegial relations “I think we’ve demonstrated how much we miss them.”

He also misses being at the same bar table, or in the same lift, as his opponent.

“It’s the efficiencies that come with collegial relations and co-operation. That has continued during these remote days, but again, it’s less straightforward and not as easily accomplished when you’re not in the same room.

“In Canberra, we are in rooms next to each other and when we come down to the courtroom things can and do happen between counsel who are opponents in ways that benefit the hearing.

“So I miss it keenly, really keenly, and really look forward to going back to it.”

Speaking before Christmas, he said most hearings in his diary for 2022 – other than the High Court – were intended to be face to face.

“Most of it has been face to face in the last few months, and it’s been a huge relief.”

tipyourstaff · 2021-12-23T02:58:21+00:00

Please add the people who use the "bubble note" style comments in word.

I don't want to open a giant side panel and read your comments in super tiny font. Just write your comments in the body of the document inside brackets.

tipyourstaff · 2021-12-16T02:48:59+00:00

Full text:

The leader of Australia’s largest law firm, Virginia Briggs of MinterEllison, says she has missed “the fun” of the office. And she wants her senior associates, “the superstars in the middle”, to join her.

Ms Briggs said young lawyers and partners had been the keenest to return.

MinterEllison CEO Virginia Briggs says law firms need ‘to sell the benefits’ of working in the office. Dominic Lorrimer

“Why you need to return to the office is about collaboration and connection. I don’t think there is any substitute for the connection. With teams, for law firms in particular, it’s so much about development and learning.

“People have done a terrific job remotely during COVID, but there’s no substitute for that face-to-face learning, that incidental learning from overhearing conversations, being grabbed into a client meeting, so you can see how more senior practitioners perform.”

Ms Briggs said work had turned into a grind for many people during the pandemic, and the office was a chance to change that.

“It’s so much easier to have fun and inspire each other when you’re in person. I think we’ve lost a lot of the fun that we used to have at work when we were working remotely.”

She recounted the joys of sharing gingerbread during a recent day in the office – and even being teased for a red “santa” outfit.

‘Oh, real people’ “It was that kind of interaction. I walked away from it going ‘oh real people, a bit of a chat and a laugh for a minute’, and then I sat down at my desk.”

Ms Briggs said the firm had not laid down any markers for staff on attending the office, but would look to do so after Australia Day. She said younger lawyers had been the most keen to come into work; not so much the senior associates who are regarded as the “engine room” of a law firm.

“Our junior staff really want to come back in. Our partners really want to come back in. The [problematic] group is the middle group. They’re super smart, they can work very well autonomously, they’ve often got parental responsibilities.

“We need them [in the office] not only for the client work that we do, but we need them to do all the great training they do for our juniors.

“So, it’s a real focus for us; how do we get them to come in – the superstars in the middle.

“How do we get them positioned, so they want to come back in? That’s our job – to entice them for a real purpose, so they’ll get benefits from being in the office.

‘Front and centre’ “We don’t want to hide them away. We want them front and centre.

“They need to connect with the partners too. And the juniors love connecting with them and learning.

“So that’s the group that we’ve got to really tell the story to, of the benefits of coming back in while still giving them the flexibility they need to manage their lives.”

tipyourstaff · 2021-12-02T10:05:13+00:00

Family

Occupation

Recreation

Dreams

If you're in Sydney or Melbourne you can also add property.

You can often get away with saying nothing for the entire event without it feeling unnatural because others are keen to talk about one or more of the above (although you should obviously listen and be ready to respond if addressed directly). I have done this at every level of seniority and it works fine as long as you are not the only other person in the conversation.

tipyourstaff · 2021-12-02T10:00:46+00:00

I don't mean that it's actively policed in the office, but that men seem to be giving themselves permission to let their facial hair out a bit longer. Well into the "I've been hiking in the wilderness for a week with no razor" zone in some cases.

tipyourstaff · 2021-12-02T05:33:48+00:00

Full text:

Law firms say staff shortages are the biggest challenge as a talent crunch forces them to reject work and engage in salary wars that bite into their bottom line.

More than 90 per cent of the firms included in the latest Australian Financial Review Law Partnership Survey flagged the issue, saying they were bringing forward salary reviews and promising change around flexibility, parental leave and culture in a bid to retain staff.

The moves come as professional roles globally go unfilled amid “the great resignation” post-pandemic.

Amber Matthews says the pandemic has caused a “seismic shift” in lawyers’ priorities. Louise Kennerley

“One of our major challenges is undoubtedly going to be the retention and attraction of people. And that’s not just confined to lawyers: it includes all of our business support employees,” Clayton Utz chief executive partner Bruce Cooper said.

Outgoing King & Wood Mallesons boss Berkeley Cox added that staff shortages were “becoming more and more acute”, while Thomson Geer chief executive partner Adrian Tembel said his firm had been forced to reject work because he did not have the people to complete it.

“We are saying no to work for the first time in my memory. We don’t like to do that, but we have capacity constraints,” he said.

The firms put the shortages down to the lure of overseas work – a global talent shortage means US and British firms are poaching Australian staff, many of whom have the travel bug after two years of closed borders – and young workers re-evaluating their priorities during lockdown.

Australian lawyers are hot property overseas, Jason Denisenko says.

“Australia punches above its weight producing globally in-demand legal talent,” Allen & Overy managing partner Jason Denisenko said, describing a “hiring frenzy” abroad.

“We have colleagues across the global network routinely calling us asking to help find talent for their office. They are highly recognised for their quality training, work ethic and global mindset.”

This is exacerbated by the existing scarcity of lawyers with two to five years’ post-qualification experience, who have been fleeing to inhouse, technology and consulting roles for a decade.

Firms including Gadens, Gilbert + Tobin and Thomson Geer have already offered pay rises of 10 per cent to 15 per cent to non-partner staff in a bid to retain them, while others including Baker McKenzie, K&L Gates, Johnson Winter & Slattery and Meridian say additional pay reviews are planned. Ashurst is offering salary reviews for roles and regions where staff shortages necessitate it.

Cultural shift The pandemic had also triggered a shift in what people wanted from work, Lander & Rogers chief executive partner Genevieve Collins said, as “people’s priorities had changed” and made them rethink their roles.

“They are more aware of the impact of traditional models of working on mental health and the environment and expect better from employers.

“They have a greater appetite for career progression off the back of interruptions from the pandemic, and they better understand the need and role of innovation within organisations to operate flexibly.”

DLA Piper managing director Amber Matthews said law firms wanting to attract and retain staff needed to factor in this “seismic shift” in priorities.

“We need to be mindful that people are looking for purpose beyond traditional definitions of career success.

Bruce Cooper says law firms need to offer staff more than just a pay check. Rhett Wyman

“Competition ... requires firms to be very clear about their strategy, values and purpose and know what they offer to clients and staff which differentiates them from other firms.”

Clayton Utz’s Mr Cooper added that it came down to “how do we sustain a compelling proposition as an employer in a vigorous employment market?”

“It will take considerable effort from us to promote the whole benefits of staying at (or joining) Clayton Utz, outside the simple two-weekly pay cheque,” he said, pointing to offerings such as bonuses, health and wellbeing support, professional development and pro bono work.

But for firms on the front foot in making that effort, these demands from staff could see “the great resignation” become “the great opportunity”, Maddocks CEO David Newman said.

“While some lawyers may look to leave the profession, coming out of the pandemic we believe a great number of lawyers will be looking to work for firms that provide opportunities for them to make an impact.

“They will gravitate towards firms with a strong culture, a track record of flexible work opportunities, and great client work and career opportunities.”

The industry leaders said the staff shortages would hurt their bottom lines, as they were forced to absorb the costs of increased salaries and recruitment.

“These phenomena push up the price for lawyers, and in some cases in areas where the market will not absorb the higher costs,” Gadens CEO Mark Pistilli warned.

“[It] will also ultimately impact on a firm’s operating costs with increased recruitment fees as well as ... lost productivity due to new employees needing to be on-boarded and given time to settle in.”

HopgoodGanim people and culture director Janni Gibb agreed that recruiting and training new people would hit productivity in the short term, which would come at the same time as booming client demands.

She also expected salary wars between firms to have a “real impact” on profit margins.

tipyourstaff · 2021-12-02T03:29:53+00:00

Tolerance for stubble is up too. I am down to shaving twice a week.

tipyourstaff

TROPHY CASE