New York Lawyer
June 7, 2001

Q:
In our firm, we don�t have specific policies about whether people can have flexible hours. We do it on a case-by-case basis. Some people get what look like fantastic deals. One female associate, who has two kids, works two days a week in the firm and telecommutes a third day, all for 3/5 of a regular salary -- plus comp time if she works more than her three days.

Others get turned down flat when they propose alternative working arrangements. (One guy wanted to work part time to write a book and the firm said no way.) It�s not really clear why, but it could be just simple politics. I think it would be better to have written policies so that we know how these things get decided.

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:
The �policy vs. practice� debate rages everywhere. Some firms and workplaces have policies that are followed faithfully; others have policies that are ignored; others have no policy and treat people generously; and there are still others who have no policies and whose practices have no rhyme nor reason.

Ideally, the focus should be on the practice. A policy that is never implemented is worse than useless, because it raises expectations only to have them dashed. If a firm or other workplace deals with people equitably and fairly, then the absence of a policy is less bothersome.

However, the main problem with no policy � even in a workplace that is viewed as fair and equitable � is that it raises the suspicion that politics reigns, and that it�s who you know rather than your performance or professional qualifications that resolve these issues. With no policy in place, firms can offer custom-tailored arrangements to those they value and stiff those they don�t. Leaving aside whether flexible work arrangements should hinge on a person�s perceived worth and value (because that �test� itself raises political issues), the value of an enforced policy is that there is at least an appearance of equity, especially if the policy includes a concrete list of criteria to evaluate when a request is made.

As Stanford Law School Professor Deborah L. Rhode, the chair of the American Bar Association Commission on Women who has written extensively on these issues, comments, �The question points up a crucial rationale for formal policies: they increase the likelihood of both the fact and appearance of fairness.� And, she notes, �They enable lawyers to plan effective strategies for meeting personal and family commitments and avoid perceptions of favoritism.�

My final remark would go to your revealing wording of your colleague�s �fantastic deal.� Keep in mind that when she�s not at work, she�s at home chasing after two kids, not everyone�s idea of �fantastic.� Also, workplaces increasingly recognize the value, both to their employees and to the firm�s bottom line, of accommodating family concerns rather than insisting on doing things the same old way.

Investments made to accommodate valued employees at times when they have pressing family commitments can pay off down the line when they are ready to steam full ahead. So while you�re pushing your firm to put a policy in place, examine your own assumptions about flexible work arrangements.

Sincerely,
Holly English
Principal Consultant, Values at Work