Advocacy Matters - Spring 2024

Not in. Called them. No answer. E-mailed
and Teams-ed them again. Start doc review
on own. Start sweating.
Around 11, the associate answers. Not an
office day. Very sorry. They are “at an appointment”.
Not in calendar. They will be
back home by 12:30. Stress mounting.
By 12, assistant answers Teams. Sick dog.
Was working from home anyway so thought
he’d punch in a little late. Cratering.
Senior partner wants an update. Likely will cry.
Mid-career litigators have it tough when it
comes to “work from anywhere” policies. We are
often answering up and coordinating down. We
remember the good and the bad of pre-COVID
offices and in-court proceedings. We are told
that flexible work arrangements are preferred
by employees, do not diminish productivity and
are competitively necessary. They also make
work more accessible and equitable. These are
all great, until there is an urgent injunction and
no one is online.
David Milosevic, principle of Milosevic and
Associates, is hoping to buck the trend. He is
currently building out more offices than he has
lawyers in his new space. When complete, his
firm will be fully in-person. As we chat, his office
is abuzz. He believes that in-person firms
hold an unquantifiable advantage. Not having
to coordinate Zoom meetings and Teams invites,
alone, saves so much time.
Goodmans partner Tamryn Jacobson agrees
with David, in part. She tells me that Goodmans,
a firm with a reputation for prioritizing culture
and mentorship while recognizing the benefits
of remote work flexibility, set out to recreate the
magic of their office once it was safe to do so. She
believes Goodmans found the hack. Everyone is
required to be in office for the same three days
each week. This strategy has addressed the significant
downside of an uncoordinated return
to work policy – commuting to work only to find
8