There is certainly a small subset of lawyers in India who constantly face questions like: (a) is there a better alternative to law firms, (b) is in-house the answer or (c) is the struggle, stress, uncertainty, limited time with family, poor mental and physical health, long hours – so inherent to being a lawyer that it is almost unescapable. I don’t know if everyone faces such questions.

So, how does one answer them?

What is so really wrong with law firms? People who have never been in one – the outsiders often fail to understand it. Swanky offices, excellent salary, a flex that you feel after you say that you work at tier 1 or with some of the most recognisable clients (know that it’s probably people in the legal circle who understand the flex about tier-1s). You have everything you need then right?

The reality of working in law firms is a bit different. To start with, your bosses (and clients) inspire and speed up work by repeatedly projecting a sense of urgency or rather immediacy of any and every deliverable. This is a highly unprofessional and unplanned way of working. For people who are immediately responsible for executing the work – the associates, this is a constant source of worry. See, ultimately, the work gets done – but people in higher positions often like to believe that getting work done is not possible without a little intimidation and jump scares. Sometimes the sense of urgency and deadlines is communicated rather politely, but in a way that leaves a little scope for negotiation – with those involved in the execution of the work having no way of planning their day or life. At best, you can offset one work stream by saying that you are over-stretched in five others that you are handling. But in most cases, over-stretched you will be.

Probably it is the reason why law firms are efficient. In any top team at a law firm, missing a deadline communicated to a client is as rare as seeing a real unicorn. Even if the deadline may be inherently unreasonable or even if associates have to spend 22 hours a day.

True, there are times when clients are unreasonable. And there is a systemic problem that lawyers as service providers are never able to professionally demand decent working conditions. It’s true that some client’s are fickle and will take asking for more time as an affront and probably take their business elsewhere. But some clients are reasonable – if explained why something will take longer. They may agree to split the work – so you might still have to give something on the deadline, but it will be lower pressure deliverable overall. Also, you would have set expectations with them for the future. It is a risk – but partners who can risk to do such things – should do it. Many won’t – a lot of partners take pride in projecting an image of invincibility – and frankly that is an attribute that people want to feel in their lawyers – even if behind this façade everything is crumbling. So there are no easy solutions here for those doing the grunt work.

Also, yes, there are periods when work is tough – client is demanding and there is a lot of uncertainty. But if that becomes the case all the time, then it’s a system issue – a feature and not a bug of law firm as a workplace.

The other problem is that law firms have little to no avenues of rest and recovery. Even armies have R&R programs. Not law firms. Talk to a busy law firm associate – and you will see a helplessness in their eyes about the often endless stream of work. There are times when work is less – but because, work can come in anytime and there is hardly any planning in law firms on how to process an incoming assignment and little attempt to give certainty to anyone. In fact these ‘down’ periods turn into periods of greater anxiety – and you can never plan a leave around them. That said, some partners do have ways of delegating work that is efficient and ensures ‘optimal utilisation’. But as there is no ‘system’ – things can fall apart very quickly when multiple work streams come in. And there is of course no concept of ‘refusing’ work to clients – when there is no capacity – the quality of work, and life of associates be damned. Also, some teams do have holiday rosters and an unspoken rule to not disturb those on leave. But these are team specific things – when in fact they should be enforced at highest levels of the firm and applied equally to everyone.

A final problem is law firms don’t know how to communicate things internally. Exhortations (even firm wide) to work harder are not uncommon. They feel like impositions – particularly to those who are actually pulling their weight. Try reading your firm’s internal employee well being policies at times (like the leave policy with 40 days of leave). For one – everything in these policies is ‘subject to work exigencies’ – which is astonishing. It’s like every resource in a law firm is so unique and irreplaceable, that if needed, they and only they can execute. Shouldn’t the policy say something like – if you have a planned leave – make sure that you assign your matters to someone else and communicate this internally and externally. If every employee benefit is subject to ‘exigencies’ – then what’s even the point of these policies. And most partners have little say in how their firm manages employee benefits.

Law firms become undesirable places to work after a while because they don’t solve some very fundamental things that make a workplace sustainable – a desire to solve for certainty and visibility of workflows, better client expectation management and real and effective R&R programs. These are very basic things. And frankly without it’s unclear if they will ever be able to solve such issues. To all the 'incoming associates' – buckle up, this is what you are in for.