New York Lawyer
July 19, 2001

Q:
I hate to sound like an old fogy, but these Gen-X and Gen-Y kids who are working as lawyers seem like they can�t stand the idea of good old-fashioned hard work. Recently when I asked a 26-year-old new hire to help with an emergency motion over the weekend, he looked me right in the eye and said he had plans he couldn�t break (didn�t say what they were) and couldn�t do it. I have to say I was so stunned that I just left his office without saying anything and found someone else willing to help.

I know people want to �have a life� -- so do I � but we�re paying these young lawyers big bucks and they need to pull their weight. I had to do it at their age and they need to step up to the plate now. What�s going on with these people?

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:
It�s hard to say whether the widespread complaints about the supposedly lax work habits of younger lawyers have any credence or whether it�s a �twas-ever-thus� comment older people make about lazy young things. I have talked to many, many lawyers who complain about �kids these days� in their firms, saying they just don�t have a good work ethic.

Here�s what the Gen-X and Gen-Y lawyers say: �We want to have a life. We don�t want to do what our dads did. We want to see our kids grow up and not be strangers in our own homes. And we hate being subject to the whims of senior partners who dream up �emergencies� that are more about impressing the client with unnecessary responsiveness than about dealing with an actual emergency. We�re going to be different from the lawyers who have gone before us.�

I think it�s impossible to generalize about whether younger lawyers have a weak work ethic. What is clear is that they are less willing to devote themselves 24/7 to their jobs than their predecessors. One of the effects of having women in the workplace is that all lawyers, male and female, have a heightened awareness of the importance of balancing work and personal lives. And it�s true that senior partners often invent emergencies, only to ensure that work is done on time or to flatter the client with lightning-quick service, even if it�s not really necessary.

The other side of the story is the merciless economics of the industry. The demands on lawyers have increased dramatically. In 1963, the American Bar Association recommended that lawyers bill 1300 hours a year; it is now the norm, even in small towns across the country, to require attorneys to bill 1800 or 1900 hours a year. And the big increase in associate salaries last year has sharply tightened the financial noose. So while one can certainly sympathize with the young lawyers� distaste for all-work, all-the-time, the bottom line dictates a certain level of good old-fashioned hard work.

While it�s understandable that partners may feel like �I did it, they should, too,� another reaction would be to devise more livable work arrangements for all. Corporations have dealt with issues of work/life balance in a much more aggressive fashion than law firms. Why not confer with in-house attorneys about how pressing an assignment is, to arrive at realistic deadlines? You can explain that you�re concerned about work/life balance in your firm. You�ll actually be better aligned with many corporations if you show concern for your employees, rather than making extravagant promises that result in staff burn-out.

Sincerely,
Holly English
Principal Consultant, Values at Work