Fellows Bytes: Not working 9 -5, are unconventional working agreements becoming more conventional?
It’s the first week back after the Easter break, which for some (OK, most) will mean a struggle to ease back into your normal working routine. Your inbox alone may be enough to make you question why you’re sat behind a desk 9 – 5 Monday to Friday and could even result in you requesting a meeting with your supervisor to discuss a more flexible working solution. There’s a whole host of research arguing the benefits (and potential pitfalls) of a four-day working week, in fact for some countries such as the Netherlands it’s becoming the norm, as well as more and more companies championing flexible hours that suit their individual employee’s needs. So, what actually is the best way forward for IP firms in particular (and what are firms actually doing to facilitate remote/flexible working)?
Some firms may argue that in order for a positive and efficient team environment to be fostered, employees need to be physically present in the office. Implementing strict working times for the entire office could encourage team members to adjust to a similar working style which will in turn (in theory) result in increased efficiency and a better work output for the team. But in practice this very rarely works out, especially when individuals are not creatively compatible, for example some may be more productive in a morning whereas others complete the majority of their work load towards the end of their working day. We know a lot of firms who have transitioned to a paper-less/lite office and adopted some fantastic software systems that allow for an almost identical level of connectedness but over a number of locations (including those who may be currently working overseas).
If you’re lucky enough to have an international client base, sometimes it may be worth having a flexible schedule so that you can adjust to different time zones. However, this would only really work if you have a select number of longstanding clients in a similar time zone, as it could become a chore having to amend your schedule to suit whichever clients you are working with that particular month. We have known candidates who are required to work both their client and firm’s standard office hours, and that really can’t end well for anybody involved after a period of time. At the other end of the spectrum we have firms who are so open to remote working that they allow their attorneys to take time to travel the world whilst still working full or part time.
Working from home can be great but also problematic if you’re currently in training. In order for more junior members of staff to become accustomed to the daily workings and pressures of the office environment they really need to be, wait for it, in the office. Additionally, more senior members such as supervisors would need to be present to answer questions and check the progress of their trainees. But again, if the firm has adopted a software system that allows for remote communication then this might not be as important as you would first think. Firms often agree some form of flexible solution once trainees are nearing qualification and are capable of working somewhat independently.
You could argue that it’s better to have employees on flexible hours than reduced hours (or no hours at all if they decide to move somewhere that can offer what they’re looking for). The bottom line really is that firms needs to be open to the idea of more unconventional working solutions but work closely with their employees to reach a solution that is mutually beneficial for both parties.