Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
New Career Paths for Lawyers
Many lawyers today seek unconventional career paths. Instead of career ladders that envision uninterrupted, full-time, upward movement toward partnership, lawyers now think in terms of career lattices that include lateral moves, flexible work schedules, and occasional periods away from practice altogether. This highly mobile 'free agent' lawyer population creates a dilemma for law firms. Firms need a stable group of lawyers to serve their clients and become the firm's future partners and leaders. Rather than risk losing lawyers, many firms are trying inventive approaches to create more flexible career paths. Here are five current trends.
1) Making Flexible Work Arrangements Fair and Effective. Almost all American law firms have policies allowing associates to work on flexible schedules, but very few lawyers take advantage of those policies. Most lawyers believe that working less than full time is a career killer. In too many firms, flextime lawyers are unfairly perceived as uncommitted to their work. They are given uninteresting or insignificant assignments, expected to work longer hours than agreed upon for reduced pay, and written off as not partnership material. Rather than put up with such work conditions, many flextime lawyers quit.
Firms are beginning to recognize that marginalizing or mistreating flextime lawyers results in a loss of highly capable, experienced talent. To make their policies more equitable and effective, many firms designate individuals responsible for ensuring that flextime associates receive appropriate work and that both the lawyer and the firm abide by the terms of a written agreement spelling out the flextime arrangement. To ensure that its reduced hours policy operates productively, Fenwick & West LLP, for example, has presented a series of workshops designed to prevent bias and discriminatory treatment against flextime lawyers and to demonstrate techniques for leading and working in teams with lawyers on diverse schedules.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?