Simmons and Simmons’ decision to consider offering at least a degree of flexitime to its lawyers is a highly commendable effort. All employers need periodically to review and hopefully strengthen the ‘psychological contract’ between themselves and their employees. This particular instance of such a review represents the latest serious attempt by law firms to address the growing disconnection between employer and employee across the legal sector.
The long hours culture has been an issue for lawyers for many years. Slowly firms are waking up to this – and the fact that simply throwing even higher salaries at their employees does not seem to make them any happier (at least beyond the first month of the revised pay packet). Certainly, in undertaking human capital audits with law firms, we often find ‘long hours’ as one of the cultural aspects that fee earners complain about. Simmons’ revisiting of the hours aspect of the ‘psychological contract’ is therefore right and proper, and their suggestion that flexitime might help has merit. However, in language that will be familiar to MBA students, considering flexitime alone is ‘necessary but not sufficient’. Two related and very important factors also need to be considered in this context.
