pointless to request compressed hours in a law firm?

[stella1w]

I am mulling my flexible working request for when I return from maternity leave.

Ideally I want to work part time on the basis of a four day week and be paid pro rata.

Obviously I have to say how I think my request would affect the company etc etc. The company policy says you cannot suggest that other people do your work by which I guess it means you cannot suggest a job share or that they hire extra staff to cover if you go part time. Which makes me thing they won't go for a four day week.

The other solution would be to suggest compressed hours and work 9am to 6.30pm instead of the contractual 9.30 to 5.30. But as the firm expects everyone to do these hours as a matter of course it would seem odd to me to put in a flexible working request to do this.

Any tips on good wording for successful requests?

Thanks

Compressed hours in a law firm wouldn't work, simply because you are expected to work longer hours than contacted as standard - I have worked in professional firms that were very child-friendly but this was always the one option that they drew the line at. As you say you are already working those hours so I don't see how you could do the same amount of work in four days instead of five?
TBH I think most law firms would go for 4 day pro-rata over and above any other suggestion. Why not talk to your partner or HR and ask them what flexible working patterns they prefer. Put the ball in their court and see what happens - it also makes you look as if you are really trying to work with them in this.
FWIW the most popular pattern I found in my own experience (Both senior line mgmt and working in Diversity space in the professions) was to suggest an 80% pattern based on flexible extra holiday (eg 52 days extra holiday on top of normal holiday entitlement), with salary pro-rated and with both partner and staff member agreeing when the holiday would be taken. Typically the business cycle would be quieter over summer and christmas and extra holiday was taken then, with a 5 day week being worked during the busy times. That one actually saves the professions money because you effectively pay for your 'bench time' instead of the firm paying for it. But it only works if you have very flexible childcare arrangements.
corporate organisations can be far more enlightened than the professions about these things and I know a number of lawyers who found going in-house helped hugely in terms of getting more child-friendly work - you step away from being at the beck and call of multiple clients and it smoothes out the work load in general.

What Squiffy said. Compressed hours only work IMO where people usually work their contracted hours only, in your case starting at 9.30 finishing 5.30 and taking an hour for lunch. In organisations or jobs where 'contracted hours' are something that exists on paper only, if you request to work those hours over 4 days you are asking for an hours reduction, not compression.

Do you think your job could be done in those hours?

I don't post much at the moment because I'm so busy at work, but I saw this and thought I'd add my tuppence.

I agree with Squiffy and Flowery on compressed hours not working. However, as someone who has worked part time in a fee earning role, I do have a few comments about how you deal with the effect on the firm and tips for a successful request.

Firstly, dealing with your absence. Talk about technology. Will you be able to take calls, keep on top of emails, etc on your day off? FWIW, I check my emails about 5 times a day when not working. I ignore most of it, but from time to time I fight fires. What is your practice area like - big projects/deals/teams or smaller one-on-one relationships and quick fire questions. Also, think whether there are any trainee or junior assistants for whom it would be a development opportunity to work on some of your matters when you aren't there - that is very different to just offloading work.

Secondly, think about what day off you ask for. Think about your client relationships. What day off would suit them? E.g. in a transactional or property department, completions make Fridays pretty much a disaster most of the time. Are Mondays quiet? Would mid-week be less problematic? Spell out all this thinking in your application. Think about any other team members who work part time and whether it makes sense to dovetail with them. Think about common days for training, etc.

Thirdly, whilst compressed hours are unlikely to work, think of other ways you could 'snatch' time. This depends on how advanced your IT systems are and the nature of your role, but could you, say, agree that (barring total disaster) two days a week you leave promptly at 5:30 and pick up after the kids are in bed. I did something similar to this unofficially - for clients it was really no different to me being in a meeting or on a long conference call for a couple of hours. Could you work from home one day a week - cutting a commute?

Good luck!

Do you not have a "case load" or client portfolio? If so then surely you would just have a smaller number of cases or clients? The insistence that you not suggest that someone else do your work is really odd because it implies that they have an integer person amount of work available to be done and that really they aren't willing for anyone to work part-time. Do they really never want part-time staff? That strikes me as a poor strategy as they will lose a lot of talent over the years to other firms.

I also work a 4 day week for a large national firm and I regularly end up working the equivalent of 6 days per week. I am always in the office before 8am but have to leave by 5.20pm at latest to be able to get to nursery to pick up my DD and so often end up working 2/3 hours after DD is in bed or DH puts DD to bed so I can get work done. I can also often end up working weekends as well. I do try not to work on my day off as I look after my DD but more often than not I end up having to send constant emails from blackberry and take calls. A lot of this is from junior members who work on my cases and I dont want to leave them without any help if they need it or have to go to partners who usually end up telling them to ring me anyway even though they know is my day off. To be honest I get really fed up at times and have looked for jobs outside the law or in house but my area does not really convert easily in house legal positions and I will be looking at a significant salary drop if I go outside law!

My firm also draws the line at compressed hours as they expect you to work beyond your contracted hours anyway. They have in the past allowed 4 day week but I have heard the are now rejecting this as they feel thus just does not work. I think as others have said it depends on the type of law you do, how senior you are and how easy it would be for you to have a day off. I also think your previous work history/ attitude prior to maternity leave is a factor in that if they know you are the type of person who would still be available on your day off and do the extra hours when needed they are more likely to consider allowing you a 4 day week.

If they are showing reluctance to your request its worth reminding them there is a 3 month probationary period with flexible working requests and you could always argue they should a least give you a chance to prove a 4 day week or other request can work before they reject it although I would expect for most lawyers that will mean being at the end of your blackberry as and when needed.

Good luck!

thanks for the suggestions.
I am a trainee in a law firm therefore working from home without supervision not really possible. Also, as I have two more seats to do and no say as to which ones they might be, it's going to be very hard for me to predict which day off might work.
The idea of flexible extra holiday might work, but it would be tricky with childcare for dc2.
It seems to me that most people in the firm from secretaries to partners do a four-day week. I've been told unofficially that trainees can't work part time, but then again, they have only ever had one trainee return from maternity leave.

You're a trainee? I hate to be brutal, but I think you'll find it very hard to get part time working agreed unless you have a very progressive employer. The nature of a trainee is that, as you say, you move departments. So arrangements can't be tailored to the needs of the department. Also, the work tends to be short deadlines and, by nature, is someone delegating a task to you. So there isn't really the opportunity to manage the workload in the ways that have been suggested.

Compressed hours will also almost certainly be a total no no for a trainee. They need you when they need you- you are needing to fit it with the needs of the lawyers, whereas they are needing to find ways of fitting in with the clients.

Would you consider staying on full time until you qualify and then looking for something more flexible? Have you also checked whether going part time would mean you needed to add months onto your training contract, since it's about time in practice?

Sorry to be so negative.

I work in a city law firm and work fixed hours in the office - 8.30 to 5.30 - and then on berry or remote access in the evenings when kids are down and the firm were fine about it (been on it for 4 years now and had two kids). You do need good flexible childcare as there will be times you have to step out your fixed hours - but if you have that it's fine and v doable

Btw am 10 years qualified - but a colleague who got pregnant as a trainee finished her training contract on compressed hours

I am also a trainee in an top 10 law firm and due to return from maternity leave in the next few months. I have suggested 3 days a week as there has been a previous trainee in same situation do this. It has been refused and 4 days offered. I am appealing. The Law Society accepts part-time trainees (with an extension to the TC) and I struggle to understand why a large organisation cannot accommodate a few part-time individuals. It smacks of indirect discrimination and I have already been told that once I've qualified there won't be any jobs for me if I want part-time. Its so archaic and goes a long way to explaining why not only female equity partners are so few and far between, but even senior associates.

Stella1W how did you get on as realise I am replying to this rather late!!

Whydo people weant to spend more time with screaming babies and ironing their husband's shirts? Work is much more fun. I think full time work is much easier and better and you are more likely to get to £500k to £2m a year as a partner if you do it. Yes, its; hard when children are little ( we had five) but not impossible and you really do reap the benefits later if you can just put up with long hours at the start.

In a top law firm they will be bristling at the idea of 3 days a week because it will be difficult to meet demands of clients and scheduling - they will tell you that they can keep you on normal scheduling on 4 day basis but not three, as it will affect service to client.

What they will almost certainly accept instead is if you offer to work 3 day equivalent in that you work 140 days a year (ie 3/5 *232 working days), with these days being mutually agreed such that you take extra time off in quiet periods but work full time/4 days a week on major projects as they come up. That way you save the firm from having to pay you for 'bench time' so it is profitable for the firm.

The donwside is that you yourself will need flexible childcare to work this.

I do it in a lawfirm - 8.30 to 5.30 every day - but to be honest, I have a lovely nanny who often has to do overtime as I have to work past the 5.30 mark alot and still have to do weekend work (I work in M&A in the corporate team). I also often work from home in the evenings and clients expect me to be on my bberry 24/7 - which can be difficult. It really depends on your firm and if you have supportive partners and adequate junior support. I've been doing it (with a break for mat leave for DS2) for 5 years now so it is doable.

Sorry forgot to say - I do compressed hours 5 days a week rather than 4 - colleagues in other departments (particularly tax, pensions and property) get away with doing compressed hours in 4 days.

Firstly, dealing with your absence. Talk about technology. Will you be able to take calls, keep on top of emails, etc on your day off?

I really don't like this approach to flexible working (sorry RibenaBerry) it's horribly prevalent in professional services and amounts effectively to 'please pay me for 4 days and on top of all the unpaid overtime you expect in evenings/weekends I'll also give you a chunk of my non-working day for free as well'.

I went back from maternity leave onto a 4 day week and when I was arranging this I came up against the 'but you'll still check your email and be on your mobile won't you' and I explained that I wouldn't be as a matter of course. I'm not a doctor, as far as I'm aware no-one has ever died because they couldn't get hold of their lawyer/accountant instantly and 'in person'. I explained that if client B and the office could cope with not reaching me instantly when I was running a full day of workshops/meetings with client A then they could apply the same logic to my non-working day.

I took a mid-week day as my NWD and the day before I would check in on all my staff/major jobs to make sure it was under control. I set out of office on my email explaining I wouldn't get the mail until the next day and could either reply then or they could contact the dept. secretary instead if it was more urgent. Mobile voicemail said the same and office phone diverted to the secretary. I left the secretary and my partner an email which set out exactly who to contact if staff/clients/called eg:

• if Client A calls, person x can deal, if more urgent/important then director z
• if J from the other office calls, explain the stuff is in proofreading and person c is sending through
• if Client D calls, it will probably be a fuss about nothing, tell them it's being dealt with and I will return their call by 10 am when I'm in, if they're desperate ask manager H to call them

This secretary also had my home phone/personal mobile in case of absolute 'emergency' - in 2 years of doing this I got 2 calls off her - once when a partner had fucked something up and they couldn't sort it out (oh the irony!) and once when a v. important client called and the partner needed a brief 10 min chat to check I could do some stuff the following day and make a meeting. Throughout that time I got promoted and stayed on the development track for 'talent' or whatever it was called.

If you commit to check mail/take calls on your NWD then it may well be fine 9 times out of 10 if you're mooching about the house and bored but what happens on the day you decide to go to the seaside and there's no reception - you've created the expectation that they can reach you and then people are rigtly pissed off that they can't. Similarly I never felt it would make me seem particularly professional if I was taking client calls with a crying baby in the background or trying to mop up sick/feed a child etc. I had some very tough clients but none of them ever raised any concerns about me being out of contact 1 day a week and in fact when they found out I worked 4 days a week they were often genuinely surprised.

Gosh - I've gone on quite a rant there - sorry! Back to the original question, I do think you will struggle with compressed hours, just as the others have said. The implied expectation of overtime means it can be very unfair on other staff - it does seem to the be the option most professional services firms draw the line at.

Acekicker - Were you in law too? The OP is very old now, so I suspect that she got the no on compressed hours some time ago. Would be interested to hear...

I see your points, but in many areas, as was mentioned in the OP, saying others will do your work is not acceptable in a part time request. In her case the policy actually forbids it. Much of your approach involves other people managing things and answering calls, which is great if you work in large teams where you are all fully briefed all the time. I can see it might work in large litigation or transactional teams, depending on the type. In my niche area, you generally work alone, with a partner giving oversight (involved if you are junior, nominal if you are senior, just being copied in really). Me taking your approach would have involved essentially saying 'any issues with my files, talk to the head of department'. That would have gone down like a lead balloon and got me bumped back to full time at the end of the probationary period pretty smartish.

My clients didn't have an expectation I would answer my calls or answer their emails, but my secretary knew she could usually get hold of me if needed. I did all the things you describe regarding OOO and voicemail.

For me, the average 45 minutes or so each non working day I spent dealing with emails was more than offset by the fact that I got that day, and also that I did things like leaving at 6pm to relieve the nanny (although I did pick up later if needed), rather than being in the office well into the evening.

Not law but Big4 accountancy, I can see that it does make a difference, I was managing teams and a department so lots of setting up, planning, reviewing and dept admin. All stuff that could generally be done another day with advance planning if that makes sense, it didn't need to be done by someone else in my absence (and normally the secretary didn't have to contact colleagues either). I could see it doesn't work in the case of all professional services though (and I admit I was more preoccupied with the wider flex working aspect than the op specifics as they'd already been answered).

I do feel that there is a blanket presumption that you can't do part time in prof services because we're all supposed to be at clients beck and call every day. The most persuasive bit of my argument was apparently the 'if I'm in workshops all day' aspect. I used two big plc clients and pointed put nobody would dream of me abandoning A mid workshop to deal with B and you could see the cogs whirring as they looked at it in a different way.

It doesn't work for all roles though and i know I was very lucky to get the set up I wanted. My main problem was getting grief over chargeable hours percentages: it was accepted that my kind of role had 1 day a week admin so 20% for most people, I had the same amount of admin but of course it was 25%!

I've been working in a jobshare for 6 years in a law firm and it has worked until recently when my jobshare wanted to leave. I have an immediate boss who is very relaxed about it and can see that both parties have made it work well - he is extremely trusting and sees us just get on with it.. The head of department (don't flame me, but a lady of a certain age with no children), has reminded us often, that the situation is far from ideal (despite the fact that we have a good track record and few complaints which have come from "situation"). She isn't based in our office so doesn't have daily contact but nonetheless, wrote the situation (which she inherited) off from the start.

When my jobshare wanted to leave the main concern of the powers that be is that my "job" is covered at all times but they were not happy that this be by way of someone "stepping in" on my days not in. They would have accepted 4 days (rather than the previous 3), but not consecutive days and wanted me to be "on call" on my days off.

To be honest, I have always checked the BB and fought fires when one of us has been off sick on a day due in or on holiday but that is because I found it easier to keep up to speed with matters. When the kids are on holiday though it was really difficult - when you're dealing with 2 small kids in the park and you have clients wanting to have a professional chat with you it's hard and you can't expect your kids to suffer when, in their eyes, you aren't at work - I've done that and it's hard.

I would also say that doing that as a trainee sounds pretty difficult. It's tough enough trying to get through the training process but I think these sorts of arrangements only really work well when you've got a few years under your belt - believe me, I've had the best back up and arrangement and don't live far from work and am 15 years qualified but it's still stressful particularly if you have a partner who also works long hours.

Sorry I hope I don't sound like the voice of doom, but really think about what you believe would work for you ! Good luck

OP here - yes, I ended up doing five regular days a week, although I asked to do four compressed.. They talked a lot about putting "flying hours" in as a trainee (fair enough) but were not prepared to let me put the flying hours in over four days as I am kind of expected to work long hours for the same salary anyway.
Good news is - a few weeks in and the five days is going OK.

just food for thought - I don't really understand why it is so impossible for large professional firms to accommodate part time working. And here's why. Sure, the client wants attention 24/7 but given that generally in large firms, there is a team of people servicing a client, then why can't the long hours and huge availability be addressed by organising shifts..
it does seem to me that these kinds of traditional working patterns are a form of indirect discrimination which accounts for why 60 per cent of law entrants are women but only 25 per cent of partners are

Well, I guess the first thing to say is that lots of them do accommodate some level of part time working, normally 4 days a week or so, sometimes with additional days from home, a few job shares. Where it is often hard to accommodate is at trainee and junior level.

It is, unfortunately, the nature of the job at that stage generally - picking up the dogs body jobs as and when they come up, not a pre-planned work load. Arguably you could job share as a trainee, since less relies on ongoing intimate knowledge of the case/transaction/issue. However, that would be very hard to arrange given that trainee positions are generally filled years in advance, and the two job share partners (even if they could be found) wouldn't necessarily want to qualify into the same area - leaving them up in the air at the end of training.

But in response to your general point, I think the idea of 'teams' doesn't necessarily get you very far unfortunately. As I have said above, in my area of specialism, the 'teams' issue doesn't really apply. But even where it does, people often have reasonably distinct roles. Take a medium company sale, one corporate lawyer might be negotiating the SPA, another co-ordinating DD and the due diligence report. They know roughly what is going on, but not to the very high level of detail that would be required to seamlessly transition from person to person (as anyone who has ever covered a transaction from a colleague on holiday can vouch for, even the most thorough briefing never seems to cover everything that comes up whilst they are off). In order to run 'shifts' you would need to have a far, far greater level of knowledge about the other shift's work than team members currently do in a transaction. Effectively, you would be talking about job shares on a grand scale. And that would require a lot of time cross briefing (i.e. overlap between shifts), plus the additional salaries of paying two teams (ok each team would be paid less, but not half. And some costs, like health insurance, don't vary with hours). That would have a massive associated cost and I can't see one law firm taking the step to do that and take a huge hit in profits. Plus, clients would be very suspicious about 'paying twice' (an issue that seems to come up with frustrating regularity anyway - 'why do you need to have internal meetings', etc).

You know the one thing that could instantly change the culture in law firms and other long hours jobs - requiring that every working hour over, say, 40 or 45 be paid at an overtime rate. That would mean that there was a real incremental cost to working people too hard, and and incentive to use their time more efficiently. But let's be honest, it's a real 'top 2% of the first world' problem, so I don't see it being on anyone's agenda.

I personally think that the lack of female partners in law firms has a lot to do with the partner track - many women are expected to push things to the next level at just the time they don't want to. A less linear career progression would really help. I also think that chargeable units is a big issue - you can't work more efficiently and make it pay when your appraisal will be based on how many units you have recorded.