This story was all the rage last week (also see the Above the Law story that garnered 800+comments). In response to a situation where an associate was not checking e-mail and, consequently, neglected to draft and send a draft letter to a client, a Quinn Emanuel partner sent a firmwide e-mail explaining that associates should be checking their e-mail hourly to ensure they are not missing any vital developments on their client’s cases.
Setting aside how the douchey the e-mail sounds, I’ve really tried hard to muster some anger at this partner. I can’t. Stuff happens after hours. You get paid upwards of $150,000. You have a blackberry. Your job is more than just the time you’re in the office. Clients will want things at odd hours for any number of reasons. This is what you signed up for.
I spent a few years working as a press guy on Capitol Hill. I made sub $40K for much of that time. I regularly received calls and time-sensitive e-mails late at night and on weekends. More than once I was in a television studio on a Sunday morning with my boss taping interviews. More than once I was scrambling at a family function to get a statement or background information to a reporter or my boss or setting up a conference call with reporters in response to some breaking news. That was my job and I understood that going in. As a PR guy I’ve had similar situations with clients.
Some jobs are like that. And I don’t have a problem with that. Of course there needs to be balance. I don’t deny that. But I don’t think expecting highly paid attorneys to check their blackberry periodically on nights and weekends tips that balance too far in the work direction. Otherwise, having a blackberry is nearly pointless.
Two things I’ll add though.
First, e-mail should not be as heavily relied-upon as it is. If the partner’s request here was so urgent, he should have called the associate to ensure that he had seen the e-mail and was going to get the letter drafted and out to the client that evening.
Second, I really start to have a problem when this isn’t really about checking e-mail. If this expectation is really, “you need to stay at work until 9 AND check your e-mail every 12 minutes,” well then I have a problem. Sure, some cases and client matters will mean you’re in the office (or on the road) for long hours over the course of a few weeks or months. Other times your face time requirements in the office should be more relaxed. That’s the whole point of having a blackberry, and a laptop, and an Internet connection. So long as you are on top of your work and are accessible requiring 12 hours days in the office is completely unreasonable.
No related posts.
One angle on the partner’s email that did not make it into the comments, at least the first hundred that I read, was whether this sort of policy increases the law firm’s risk of vicarious liability. In the interest of full disclosure, this point was brought to my attention by a professor at CUA. If the law firm has a policy that requires associates to check email every hour other than when in a tunnel, at court, or asleep, then potentially that associate is acting within the scope of employment at all times.
This scenario has already occurred in the context of an associate checking email while driving that led to an accident. I think as a matter of sound business practice the firm needs to clarify the partner’s email.
Jorge-
It’s been a while since I reviewed my notes on respondeat superior, but I think you might be right. Clarification would be helpful. Because he got sort of specific, he may have crossed the line into now needing a formal policy (something you don’t really want on the books, I’d think).
Perhaps this is more a lesson for attorneys to pause before sending a firm-wide e-mail when you’re pissed at a colleague, even if that colleague is a more junior associate and you’re a partner. If he had just drafted the message and slept on it or waited a few hours, he might have realized he could have made his point without suggesting he was instituting a formal employment policy and perhaps without an e-mail at all.
He would also realize that such an e-mail would surely:
(a) lead to negative press attention,
(b) cast him and his fellow partners in a bad light, and
(c) lead the firm to implementing a formal policy that should really be a culture thing (like spring workouts in college football – not technically required, but you better be there)