With
the
recent
news
of
Sullivan
&
Cromwell’s
five-day
office
attendance
edict,
law
firms
continually
find
themselves
balancing
their
in-office
needs
against
associates’
and
partners’
hybrid
schedules
—
and
it’s
no
surprise
that
the
flexibility
that
remote
work
offers
makes
in-person
facetime
seem
rather
unappealing.
If
associates
don’t
like
it,
they’ll
of
course
just
have
to
deal
with
it,
but
as
it
turns
out,
the
partners
don’t
like
it
either.
BTI
Consulting
Group
recently
surveyed
more
than
1,000
partners
from
law
firms
of
all
sizes,
ranging
from
Biglaw
to
boutique,
on
their
opinions
of
RTO
mandates.
As
it
turns
out,
a
majority
of
partners
(50.2%)
offered
a
resounding
“hell
no”
to
the
prospect
of
forced
office
attendance.
They
list
the
following
reasons
they’re
against
the
prospect
of
full-time
office
attendance
like
what’s
being
enforced
at
SullCrom:
- No
one
else
will
be
there- I
am
more
productive
working
remotely- Remote
options
keep
the
edge
off- I
go
in
when
I
need
to- I
am
an
adult
and
can
manage
my
schedule- I
collaborate
more
when
remote
—
it
is
easier
to
reach
out
by
text
and
Zoom
—
“and
can
you
believe
I
get
better
response
when
my
colleagues
are
remote”
Wow,
that
must
be
refreshing
for
the
associates
who
are
dealing
with
congestion
pricing
and
toiling
away
in
the
office
to
hear.
A
comparatively
smaller
number
of
partners
(24.3%)
say
they
would
“quietly
resist
any
mandate”
because
“the
benefits
of
flexibility
outweigh
the
drawbacks.”
Now,
you
may
be
an
adult
who
can
manage
their
own
schedule,
but
your
work-life
balance
is
apparently
being
controlled
by
an
even
smaller
group
of
partners
(6.1%)
who
believe
that
being
in
the
office
the
only
proper
way
to
work
at
a
law
firm.
Here’s
why
they
support
in-person
office
attendance
mandates:
Better
collaboration
Training
less
experienced
attorneys
Improved
productivity
Higher
engagement
levels
Builds
firm
culture
All
of
these
wants
can
be,
and
have
been,
achieved
through
hybrid
work
schedules
that
allow
associates
and
partners
alike
to
have
a
sense
of
independence
when
it
comes
to
their
work
lives.
As
we
learned
from
this
survey,
not
even
partners
want
to
be
forced
to
go
to
the
office
—
so
why
mandate
that
associates
do
what
the
partners
can’t
bear
to
do
themselves?
Hell
No
We
Won’t
Go:
Partners
Respond
to
RTO
Mandates
[Mad
Clientist
/
BTI
Consulting
Group]
Staci
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 Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.