header-logo header-logo

25 June 2009
Issue: 7375 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Employment
printer mail-detail

Recession boosts flexible working uptake in law firms

Internal secondments popular as recession-proofing measure

Flexible working, sabbaticals and part-time working are on the rise as top 100 firms strive to avoid redundancies.

Research by Sweet & Maxwell among 25 of the top 100 commercial law firms shows 44% encouraging employees to take sabbaticals and one in four firms offering part-time working.

A third of firms say they have considered introducing pay cuts, although only one firm has gone ahead and done this.
Nearly one quarter have frozen salaries, while 60% are still considering this option.

Offering lawyers temporary internal secondments was the most popular recession-proofing measure, with more than half of firms moving lawyers from departments that have lost work into busier departments. However, this is not always possible as clients expect highly specialised knowledge and experience from lawyers.

Sabbaticals are the second most popular option, and the third most common measure is to retrain lawyers—42% of firms have adopted this, and 28% are considering it.

Several City law firms, including DLA Piper and Norton Rose, have offered trainees £5,000 and up to £10,000 respectively to defer their starting date and take a paid gap year (subject to certain conditions) until the economic situation improves.

One in five HR directors who took part in the survey said they planned to reduce headcount, nearly a quarter plan to increase headcount, and the majority (56%) plan to keep it the same.
Norton Rose introduced a flexible working scheme in its London office in March, and received approval this month to roll the scheme out across its offices in France and Germany. Its other international offices signed up in May.

Staff can choose to work a four-day week at 85% of base salary, or take a sabbatical of between four and 12 weeks at 30% of base salary.
Spokesman Sean Twomey said the scheme was introduced “partly in response to the recession and partly as an alternative within the firm”.

Issue: 7375 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll