The return of attorneys and staff to physical offices in law firms has seen the adaptation of some controversial practices in order to ensure the adherence to return-to-the-office policies. Among these is the active use of secretaries and administrative professionals to monitor the lawyers’ compliance with workplace policies, as noted in an article from Above The Law.
Notably, deploying secretaries to monitor partners is not a new practice in the legal world. Many are tasked with recording the attendance of attorneys in the office, and in instances where an attorney is absent without logged paid time off (PTO), inquiries may follow to determine if the absence should have been logged as PTO.
Unfortunately, this practice raises some concerns. For instance, while tracking attendance may have significant interest to the firm, especially if employees can bank their PTO or be paid for unused PTO upon exiting the firm, the approach lacks transparency. In some scenarios, this policy is covert, creating a trust gap between the monitors and the attorneys. The open and honest approach can foster a more trustful environment within the firm.
Another consideration is the potential of eroding the team spirit. Law firms are most effective when a team mentality is fostered across all professionals within the firm. However, this may be threatened if secretaries, who are ordinarily relied on for administrative services, secretly monitor the lawyers. This covert monitoring could foster an “us versus them” mentality, causing detriment to the overall collaborative nature of the firm.
A more ideal approach would be a relaxed attitude towards office time, negating the need for covert surveillance entirely. For firms insistent on monitoring, other non-invasive methods can be adopted, like partners simply walking the office corridors to see who is in attendance. This would not only maintain the associate-secretary relationship but would also foster more fairness in the firm, since partners can share in the responsibility of keeping the office operating efficiently.
In summary, the secreterial role is already daunting without the added responsibility of monitoring attorneys’ adherence to firm policies. Hence, it should be the partners that either shoulder this responsibility or adopt more transparent policies that better foster trust and cooperation within the firm.