DLA Piper Ramps Up In-Office Mandate for US Corporate Lawyers: A Shift in Big Law Dynamics
In the evolving landscape of post-pandemic work arrangements, major law firms are grappling with the balance between flexibility and productivity. DLA Piper, one of the world’s largest law firms, has recently made headlines by increasing its in-office requirement for U.S. corporate lawyers to four days per week. This policy shift, effective from September 2024, marks a significant departure from the more lenient hybrid models that became commonplace during the COVID-19 era. As the legal industry continues to adapt to new norms, this move by DLA Piper underscores broader trends in Big Law, where firms are increasingly prioritizing face-to-face collaboration over remote work freedoms. This article explores the details of the policy, the rationale behind it, reactions from the legal community, comparisons to peers, potential legal implications, and what this means for the future of legal practice in the United States.
The New Policy: From Hybrid Flexibility to Four Days In-Office
DLA Piper’s updated in-office policy specifically targets its U.S. corporate lawyers, mandating their presence in the office for four days each week. Previously, the firm operated under a three-day in-office requirement, which allowed attorneys greater flexibility to work remotely on the remaining days. This change was communicated via an internal email and comes amid a wave of similar adjustments across top-tier law firms. Adherence to the new mandate will now factor into attorneys’ performance evaluations, adding a layer of accountability that could influence promotions, bonuses, and overall career progression.
The policy applies exclusively to U.S.-based corporate lawyers, a group that includes those specializing in mergers and acquisitions, securities, and other transactional work. Other practice areas or international offices may not be affected, though the firm has not publicly clarified this. This targeted approach suggests that DLA Piper views corporate law as particularly reliant on in-person interactions, perhaps due to the high-stakes, team-oriented nature of deals. For instance, negotiating complex cross-border transactions often benefits from real-time brainstorming and relationship-building that remote tools like Zoom may not fully replicate.
This adjustment aligns with DLA Piper’s broader operational strategy. As a global firm with over 4,300 lawyers across more than 90 offices, DLA Piper has long emphasized agility and client service. The policy’s implementation in late 2024—post-Labor Day—appears timed to coincide with the traditional ramp-up in legal work during the fall season. Recruiters have noted that such changes are often rolled out after summer to minimize disruption, allowing firms to monitor compliance during busier periods.
Reasons Behind the Change: Collaboration and Culture at the Forefront
DLA Piper has cited several key reasons for tightening its in-office requirements, primarily focusing on enhancing collaboration, fostering innovation, and preserving firm culture. In an era where remote work has proven viable for routine tasks, the firm argues that certain aspects of legal practice—such as mentoring junior associates, impromptu strategy sessions, and building client trust—suffer without physical presence. A spokesperson for the firm, in discussions shared on professional networks, emphasized that the three-day model, while initially successful, led to perceived dips in team cohesion and knowledge transfer.
Productivity metrics also play a role. Although DLA Piper has not released specific data, industry insiders speculate that the firm observed lower billable hours or delayed project timelines under the looser policy. This mirrors findings from broader studies on hybrid work in professional services, where firms report that in-office days correlate with higher engagement and creativity. For corporate lawyers, who often handle time-sensitive deals involving multiple stakeholders, the ability to quickly resolve issues in person can prevent costly delays.
Moreover, the policy reflects a strategic response to client expectations. Many corporate clients, particularly in finance and tech sectors, have themselves returned to office-based operations and expect their legal advisors to do the same. DLA Piper’s leadership likely sees this as a way to differentiate the firm in a competitive market, signaling a commitment to hands-on service. Wendy Schoen, a legal recruiter, highlighted in a LinkedIn post that the change aims to boost “enhanced collaboration, innovation, and culture,” underscoring the firm’s belief that a stronger office presence will yield long-term benefits.
Lawyer Reactions: Concerns Over Work-Life Balance and Retention
The announcement has elicited mixed reactions within the legal community. While some senior partners applaud the move as a return to pre-pandemic efficiency, many associates and mid-level lawyers express concerns about work-life balance. In anonymous forums and professional discussions, attorneys have voiced fears that the additional day in-office could exacerbate burnout, especially for those with family responsibilities or long commutes. One commenter on a LinkedIn thread described it as “a step backward,” arguing that flexibility has become a key attractor for top talent in a tight job market.
Retention is a hot-button issue. The legal profession has seen elevated attrition rates since 2021, with surveys indicating that flexible work arrangements are a top priority for millennials and Gen Z lawyers. DLA Piper’s policy could prompt some to seek opportunities at firms with more lenient rules, potentially affecting diversity efforts—particularly for women and parents who benefited from remote options. Experts like Jane Smith, in the same discussion, pointed out the impact on morale, noting that parents or those with caregiving duties might feel disproportionately burdened.
On the positive side, some lawyers welcome the structure, believing it will improve mentorship and career development. Junior associates, in particular, may gain from more face-time with partners, accelerating their learning curve in complex corporate matters. However, overall sentiment leans cautious, with recruiters predicting a short-term dip in satisfaction surveys.
Comparisons with Other Firms: Joining the Four-Day Club
DLA Piper is not alone in this shift; it joins a growing cohort of Am Law 50 firms mandating four or more in-office days. For example, firms like Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and Paul Weiss have implemented similar policies, citing comparable reasons around productivity and culture. In contrast, some peers, such as Kirkland & Ellis, have stuck with three days, emphasizing results over presence. Recruiters expect more firms to follow suit post-Labor Day 2025, as the industry normalizes around a four-day standard.
This trend highlights a divide in Big Law. Boutique firms and regional players often offer greater flexibility to compete for talent, while global giants like DLA Piper leverage their prestige to enforce stricter rules. Comparisons also extend to enforcement: DLA Piper’s integration of compliance into evaluations is stricter than some, where policies are more advisory. Mike Johnson, a commenter, questioned whether data supports these changes, echoing debates on whether in-office mandates truly boost output or merely satisfy traditionalist partners.
Legal and Practical Implications for the Legal Profession
From a legal standpoint, DLA Piper’s policy raises questions about employment law compliance, particularly under U.S. frameworks like the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and state-specific regulations. While exempt professionals like lawyers are not entitled to overtime, increased office time could indirectly affect wage-and-hour claims if it leads to untracked work. Additionally, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) mandates reasonable accommodations for disabilities, meaning firms must handle requests for remote work carefully to avoid discrimination suits.
Practically, the policy could influence collective bargaining or unionization efforts in law firms, though rare in Big Law. More immediately, it may spark internal grievances or external litigation if perceived as unfairly applied. Broader implications include talent pipelines: Law schools report students prioritizing work-life balance, so firms like DLA Piper might need to enhance perks like mental health support or childcare subsidies to offset the mandate.
Tax and real estate considerations also arise. Increased office attendance could boost urban economies but strain firm budgets for office space. Legally, firms must ensure policies don’t violate anti-discrimination laws, such as those protecting caregivers under Title VII expansions.
Future Trends: Is Full Return to Office Inevitable?
Looking ahead, the legal sector may see a bifurcation: tech-savvy firms embracing AI for remote efficiency, while traditional ones like DLA Piper double down on in-person models. By 2026, experts predict 70% of Am Law 100 firms will require at least four days in-office, driven by economic pressures and client demands. However, pushback from younger generations could force hybrids to evolve, perhaps with “core hours” or virtual reality meetings.
Global factors, including DLA Piper’s international footprint, add complexity. U.S. policies might not align with European norms favoring flexibility, potentially creating disparities. As climate concerns grow, commuting’s environmental impact could fuel arguments for remote work.
Conclusion: Navigating the New Normal in Legal Work
DLA Piper’s decision to increase in-office requirements for U.S. corporate lawyers signals a pivotal moment in Big Law’s post-pandemic recovery. While aimed at bolstering collaboration and culture, it risks alienating talent in a competitive market. As firms balance productivity with employee well-being, the success of such policies will hinge on transparent communication and supportive measures. For lawyers, adapting means weighing career ambitions against personal priorities, while the industry watches to see if this trend endures or evolves. Ultimately, DLA Piper’s move may set a precedent, but its long-term viability depends on measurable outcomes in retention, client satisfaction, and innovation.