Are In-House Counsel Finally Embracing Videoconferencing Tech?
"Some of the most non-technical people that I know are now using Zoom and Teams very comfortably," said ACC vice president and chief legal officer Susanna McDonald.
July 13, 2020 at 02:10 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
Working during coronavirus times means videoconferencing. Lots of videoconferencing. And so, perhaps unsurprisingly, many in-house lawyers have warmed up to the idea of talking to a screen.
The Association of Corporate Counsel's latest flash poll of 249 members showed that 32% of respondents were uncomfortable using videoconferencing before COVID-19 upended the world.
Now, about 93% of those same in-house counsel are OK with the technology: More than 70% said they were "very comfortable" with videoconferencing and another 23% were "somewhat comfortable."
"Some of the most non-technical people that I know are now using Zoom and [Microsoft] Teams very comfortably," ACC vice president and chief legal officer Susanna McDonald said Monday in an interview.
"I would say, as in-house counsel, I do not have any more security concerns with Zoom than I did with any vendor that we use for data and privacy," McDonald added. "All internet systems have a certain amount of risk. You have to use them appropriately and thoughtfully and mitigate those risks like any other system."
More than 94% of respondents reported an increase in the use of videoconferencing. And nearly 70% of the survey participants were using Microsoft Teams. Zoom was the second most popular app, followed by Skype for Business and Cisco Webex.
Some in-house counsel participants recommended using videoconferencing to maintain work relationships, which can be weakened when employees are working remotely. They suggested having short "water cooler conversations" over video, rather than phone calls, to check in with colleagues and build camaraderie.
Nearly all respondents reported that the remote working policy at their company had changed in response to the pandemic. But there was a nearly even split among in-house counsel who said the changes would be permanent and those who said their companies would revert to the old policy in a post-COVID-19 world.
"They're just being much more flexible with how they manage their work-from-home policies than they have in the past," McDonald said. She noted, for instance, that employers might allow employees to have more flexible hours so they can look after their children during the day.
Finally, about 41% of respondents said their organizations were rethinking office needs by reducing space or using flexible, co-working spaces. But more than 37% said they simply didn't know what might happen next with their office spaces.
"I think we all really don't know," McDonald said. "We're guessing. But we are never really going to go back to where we were before."
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Approves 23andMe's $30M Data Breach Settlement - With Conditions
5 minute readOn Governor's Desk: NY 'Death Gamble' Bill That Seeks to Correct Pension Anomaly for Judges
'Serious Misconduct' From Monsanto Lawyer Prompts Mistrial in Chicago Roundup Case
3 minute readCleary vs. White & Case: NY Showdown Over $5 Billion Brazilian Bankruptcy
Trending Stories
- 1Justices Will Weigh Constitutionality of Law Allowing Terror Victims to Sue PLO
- 2Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 3OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 44th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 5Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250