Recently, staff at top London law firm, Stephenson Harwood, were offered the choice to work from home permanently, on the proviso they would receive a 20% pay cut. This controversial new working policy was introduced after the company struggled to recruit lawyers locally during the pandemic. To source talent, Stephenson Harwood had to look at hiring candidates outside of London, a city where living costs are astronomical in comparison to other regional cities. In our post-pandemic working environment, this bold move has attracted questions as to whether a policy like this works in favour, or against a firm.
Diversification in the way we work
In a direct response to the pandemic, many workplaces have adjusted their working from home policies permanently. It is a way of life that many have become accustomed to – working remotely or operating under a hybrid approach. Most employees have welcomed the flexibility, citing that the traditional way of working has long been an archaic system. Many large companies, like Air BnB, have transitioned to 100% remote working with no financial repercussions or pay cuts for staff. Meanwhile, some governments, like Scotland, have instead pivoted to trialling a four-day working week.
Employee Satisfaction and Retention
Some law firms reacted to the announcement by Stephenson Harwood with support and understanding. In one poll of lawyers, 47 per cent thought it was fair. Others have criticised this move, with concerns around whether the firm will be able to retain talent due to this policy. Sam Nickless, the Chief Operating Officer at Gilbert + Tobin, said “Maybe the UK’s different, and commuting is a big challenge there, but in our talent market here, I don’t think that would be well received. In fact, all of our soundings indicate that there’s only a tiny proportion of our staff who would want to be fully remote, let alone take a pay cut to get it.”
Working from home is viewed, by many, as benefit that shouldn’t be subsidised by pay, especially given its necessity during the height of the pandemic. Employees want to continue to have the autonomy to have some control over their working arrangements and work with their employers on how this works for each individual. Returning to the rigid structure that many organisations had in place pre-pandemic would be a step-backwards, as it would fuel employees suspicions of not feeling trusted to work remotely.
What do potential candidates want?
Put simply, each firm and individual, is entitled to set their own working standard, and this should be decided on the best interests of both. When there is misalignment between the two, this can cause tension.
At InfoTrack, our company operates and thrives on a flexible working model. Daniel Ko, Head of Human Resources explains, “We are a company that champions technological advancement, and in the pandemic, we quickly and permanently pivoted our approach to embrace the new ‘flexible working’ requirement. We do everything in our power to make our in-office experience one that is collaborative, comfortable and fun. We have fully embraced a flexible hybrid working environment and since making this change, we haven’t looked back. It has allowed us to hire and onboard people nationally which enabled us to find talent in new places. At the same time, we have ensured that no matter where our people are, we make time to engage and connect with each other. This has helped us to evolve and maintain an incredible culture, having recently been certified as a ‘Great Place to Work’ for 2022.”
There is no doubt that expectations around working from home models have changed, and it’s apparent that employees value flexibility. However, it is still up to the firm to decide how they apply flexibility – be it, work from home, remote work, 4 days weeks or pay subsidies.
