Is the Office Objection Overruled? WFA in the Legal World

Imagine a world where a lawyer can draft a brief from a beach or negotiate a deal from a mountain cabin. In the legal industry, long known for its tradition of mahogany desks and city skyscraper offices, the Work From Anywhere revolution is making waves. Sparked by the global pandemic and fueled by technology, WFA has gone from a temporary experiment to a lasting trend in many law firms. 

However it has led to a wide divergence in how firms are approaching it with some firms fully embracing the flexibility of remote work, while others are doubling down on office culture.  It’s quite possibly the industry with the largest gap in the spectrum of what companies offer, meaning it is also a fascinating case study to dig deeper into. 

This overview looks at how law firms around the world are adopting (or rejecting) WFA policies and what that means for productivity, employee retention, and costs.

WFA in the Legal Industry: Summary

The legal industry is no longer moving in one direction when it comes to remote work. Instead, it is splitting into distinct camps. Some firms are embracing Work From Anywhere as a long-term talent and operating strategy, while others are doubling down on office presence, mentorship, and client-facing visibility. That divergence makes law one of the most interesting sectors to watch in the broader remote work conversation.

On the domestic side, hybrid work has become the dominant model across much of the legal world, but the level of flexibility varies sharply by firm and geography. Many large firms in the US now expect lawyers in the office three or four days per week, while a smaller group have gone much further in allowing fully remote work or office attendance that is entirely optional. In the UK and parts of Europe, the model tends to be slightly more flexible, with many firms allowing around 40 to 50 percent of time to be worked remotely rather than imposing near full-week attendance.

Internationally, Work From Anywhere remains far less mature and far more controlled. While domestic remote work is now relatively common, cross-border flexibility is still usually limited by tax, regulatory, confidentiality, and employment law concerns. Most legal employers that offer international remote work do so within tightly structured parameters, often with clear day limits, approved locations, and role-based restrictions. In other words, legal firms may be warming to flexibility, but very few are offering unrestricted global mobility.

What makes the legal sector so compelling is that it now contains the full spectrum. At one end are firms like Quinn Emanuel and Fisher Broyles, which have shown that highly flexible or fully remote legal models can work in practice. At the other are firms pushing lawyers back into the office four or five days a week in the name of training, culture, and client service. That split tells us something important: in law, the debate is no longer whether remote work is possible. It is about how much flexibility firms are willing to allow, and what trade-offs they are prepared to make in return.

The Rise of WFA in the Legal Industry

When COVID-19 forced offices to shut in 2020, law firms pivoted almost overnight to remote operations. To the surprise of many, legal work continued with “surprising ease” thanks to secure cloud technology and video conferencing. This begged the question: if lawyers could serve clients well from home, do we need to go back at all?

Fast forward to today, and hybrid and remote working arrangements have become the norm at many firms. In fact, an informal 2023 Law.com survey found most attorneys wouldn’t even consider jobs that demand more than three days a week in the office. Nearly half said that even a three-day office mandate could drive them to leave their firm. The message was clear, flexibility is no longer just a perk, but an expectation.

Around the world, firms are formalizing new policies. In the United States, many large firms started with hybrid setups (e.g. 2-3 days in office), while some U.K. firms set explicit remote allowances. For instance, elite London firms like Slaughter & May and Allen & Overy now permit up to 40% of working time to be remote, and Clifford Chance and Linklaters allow up to 50% remote work. Meanwhile, a few trailblazers have taken WFA to heart, letting lawyers work fully remotely if they choose.

Law Firms Embracing the “Work From Anywhere” Model

A growing number of law firms are embracing Work From Anywhere (WFA) as a long-term strategy to attract talent and increase flexibility. Rather than sticking to traditional office-based models, these firms are rethinking how and where legal work can be done.

One of the most high-profile examples is Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, a global litigation firm. In 2021, the firm announced that all U.S. lawyers, including new associates, could work from anywhere in the country on a permanent basis.

• Talent strategy: Firm chairman John Quinn described the move as a way to widen the talent pool. “By adopting this policy, we make it possible to recruit some outstanding new lawyers,” he said, no longer restricted by office locations.
• Recruitment without borders: The firm now hires in cities where it has no physical presence, expanding its national reach.
• Reducing overheads: With less need for office space, the firm anticipates long-term cost savings as existing leases expire.
• Flexible attendance: Lawyers who choose to work in the office regularly are given their own dedicated space, but there is no requirement to attend in person.

In 2023, Quinn Emanuel signed a new 132,000 square foot lease in Manhattan, but reiterated that the firm’s WFA policy remains unchanged. Harvard Business School professor Prithwiraj Choudhury called it a clear commitment to flexibility, stating, “Quinn Emanuel tells its lawyers: Work from anywhere is permanent.”

The firm is also working to maintain a vibrant office culture. One partner explained, “Our remote work plan was never intended to suggest we didn’t want a vibrant in-office culture,” adding that many attorneys in New York still come in daily.

Other firms are also testing creative models of flexibility.

• In London, Stephenson Harwood introduced a policy in 2022 offering full-time remote work, with one condition. Staff can work from home permanently “as long as you’re willing to take a 20 percent pay cut.” The firm viewed in-person work as important but offered remote options in exchange for a salary adjustment. The announcement drew mixed reactions, but it represented a new kind of WFA trade-off.
• Fisher Broyles, often described as the world’s largest fully distributed law firm, has no physical offices at all. Every lawyer works remotely by design.
  • The firm operates on just 18 to 20 percent of gross revenue, significantly below the industry average
  • Lawyers keep up to 80 percent of what they bill
  • In 2021, Fisher Broyles saw revenue rise to 136 million dollars from 105 million the previous year. One firm leader remarked, “We’re no longer an outlier” as more firms realised that remote legal work was viable

This fully remote model requires new approaches to training, collaboration and culture. But it demonstrates that legal work can be delivered effectively without a traditional office while maintaining profitability.

Smaller firms and legal startups are also embracing WFA. Many are using remote-first structures to tap into new markets, improve lawyer wellbeing and reduce costs.

• In a 2024 account, partners at a boutique firm observed that going remote-first “helps lawyers work where and when they want and stay happier”
• A 2024 study from the National Association for Law Placement found that associates who worked mostly remotely reported higher job satisfaction than those based primarily in the office

For many lawyers, particularly those with young children, caring responsibilities or long commutes, the ability to work from anywhere has made it easier to stay in the profession without compromising personal wellbeing.

What started as a pandemic workaround is now becoming a permanent feature of the legal industry. With thoughtful planning, WFA is proving to be more than just a perk. It is a strategic tool to improve retention, reduce burnout and reshape the future of law.

The Pushback: Legal Firms Doubling Down on Office Presence

On the flip side, not every law firm is sold on the work from anywhere revolution. In fact, as the pandemic’s urgency has waned, a growing number of firms (especially in the U.S.) are calling lawyers back to the office most of the week. They argue that in-person interaction is critical for mentorship, collaboration, and maintaining a strong firm culture, and some clients agree.

In early 2025, Reuters reported a trend of top firms upping their in-office requirements to four days a week for attorneys. WilmerHale and Paul, Weiss – which previously had 3-day office policies – told lawyers to start coming in Monday through Thursday. Talent strategist Karin Lister described this as a “quiet nudge” toward RTO, with many firms increasing mandates without making big public announcements.

They joined firms like Davis Polk & Wardwell, Skadden Arps, Ropes & Gray, Weil Gotshal, Vinson & Elkins, and others that had already adopted similar 4-day mandates since 2023. One Paul Weiss spokesperson explained the reasoning: “By being physically present together, we better develop our talent and ensure that we continue to deliver the level of extraordinary service that our clients expect.” In this view, face time isn’t just about monitoring work, it’s about spontaneous teamwork, training young lawyers by example, and showing clients a united, on-call team.

Some firms have gone even further. Sullivan & Cromwell reportedly ended hybrid work altogether, mandating a full five-day office week for its attorneys. That essentially marked a return to pre-2020 norms, a stance still relatively rare in BigLaw, but a clear signal of Sullivan & Cromwell’s belief that the best lawyering happens in the office. Likewise, many firms are tying bonuses or evaluations to office attendance as an extra nudge for lawyers to show up in person.

So why the push for Return-to-Office now? 

Part of it is client expectations. As big corporate clients bring their own employees back to headquarters, some have hinted (or even explicitly warned) that they expect their legal counsel to do the same. In a high-profile 2021 memo, Morgan Stanley’s chief legal officer told outside law firms that those who get their lawyers back in-office “will have a significant performance advantage” in the bank’s eyes. He even noted Morgan Stanley would not accommodate Zoom for critical meetings, signaling that firms risk losing business if their teams aren’t physically present when needed. Whether you agree or not, this sentiment put pressure on firms: if clients equate in-person work with commitment and responsiveness, law firm leaders don’t want to appear less dedicated than the competition.

Another factor is training the next generation. Many senior partners genuinely feel that junior lawyers learn by osmosis, by sitting in on discussions, grabbing coffee with mentors, and absorbing the firm’s ethos through daily immersion. As one recruiter put it, being in the office provides “shadowing, informal learning, and unspoken norms” that are “harder to convey remotely.” Firms worry that a fully remote junior team might miss out on crucial professional development. The push toward 4 days in-office is often justified “to provide comprehensive training for junior team members and enhance the firm’s culture,” as an industry report noted.

Geography also plays a role in these differing approaches. U.S. firms, especially New York-based ones, have generally been more aggressive about requiring four days in-office. In contrast, U.K. and European firms largely settled on three days in-office and more regular remote flexibility. Culturally, there’s a bit more acceptance in Europe that flexible work can continue post-pandemic. Moreover, local labor laws (such as the U.K.’s new right for employees to request flexible working from day one) may encourage firms to be more open to remote arrangements.

To give a sense of the spectrum of policies, below is a snapshot of how various law firms are handling WFA:

As the table shows, approaches range from one extreme to the other. Most big firms have landed somewhere in the middle with hybrid setups. Even firms known for WFA like Quinn Emanuel still maintain offices and encourage use, while even the most traditional firms have had to accept some remote work as part of modern expectations. The legal industry remains split on just how far to take flexibility, and that split often comes down to differing views on productivity, culture, and the bottom line.

International Remote Work Policies in the Legal Industry

While domestic remote work has become commonplace in the legal sector, international remote work policies are still evolving. Law firms are cautiously exploring these arrangements, balancing flexibility with compliance, risk management, and employee wellbeing.

Common Features of International Remote Work Policies

Many law firms are implementing structured international remote work policies that typically include:

International Remote Work Risk Tiers

Firms often categorize countries based on various risk factors:

Note: This table is illustrative from our WFA policy builder. Risk classification varies by firm based on internal legal, tax, and compliance reviews.

Key Compliance Considerations

From avoiding sanctioned countries to safeguarding client confidentiality, legal teams need to tread carefully when offering remote flexibility. Whether you’re supporting associates on the move or rolling out a firmwide WFA policy, these are the core areas every firm should be checking before approving international work.

Does WFA Affect Productivity?

A critical question lingers in this debate: Are lawyers as productive working from anywhere as they are in the office? Law firm leaders who favor office returns often assume that being together in person yields better output and collaboration. However, the data collected so far paints a mixed picture.

According to Thomson Reuters’ Institute, there is “no definitive evidence” that bringing lawyers back to the office has significantly boosted productivity or collaboration. In their 2024 survey of large law firms, the anticipated jump in efficiency from face-to-face work “remained elusive”, some teams thrived in person, others saw little change. Simply put, physical presence alone didn’t guarantee higher productivity. In fact, many firms enjoyed record performance during peak remote-work periods. Industry analyses showed that in 2021, when remote and hybrid work were widespread, a “surprisingly sizeable” number of law firms saw revenues and profits surge over 20% compared to the previous year. Of course, that was aided by strong market demand for legal services, but it demonstrated that lawyers could hit ambitious targets even while working from home.

Some studies even suggest remote work can enhance productivity for certain tasks. One study cited in Inc. found that knowledge workers (including professionals like lawyers) spent more time on core work and about 20% less time on “communication” (chatting, idle talk, etc.) when working from home. Participants saved hours by not commuting, and on average they achieved higher output and better work-life balance in a remote setup. This isn’t to say that all aspects of legal work benefit from solitude, creative problem-solving or training juniors may indeed happen faster with colleagues huddled in a conference room. But when it comes to churning out research, drafting briefs, or other focused tasks, many lawyers report being equally (if not more) efficient from a quiet home office.

It’s also worth noting that senior lawyers often value remote flexibility as much as juniors. Some partners with established practices appreciate the freedom to work from a home library or vacation house, coming to the office only as needed. In fact, flexible policies tend to yield the highest satisfaction among those with the most experience. As the Thomson Reuters report highlighted, lawyers who felt their firm’s policy was too rigid were the most dissatisfied, and these were often people under stricter office requirements. Conversely, those given more autonomy generally felt trusted and empowered, which can boost morale and by extension, the energy they put into their work.

The bottom line on productivity: So far, WFA and hybrid models have not harmed productivity in the legal sector. Most firms continue to meet billing targets and maintain service quality. Where issues do arise, they’re often due to burnout or poor management rather than remote work itself.

With no clear drop in output, the idea that lawyers must be in-office to perform is becoming harder to defend. The table below outlines how office and remote models differ across key productivity factors.

Note: These comparisons reflect general trends reported by firms and industry studies. Individual results may vary depending on firm size, culture, and implementation.

Talent, Retention, and Recruitment in a WFA World

Perhaps even more important than productivity is how WFA impacts recruitment and retention. Law firms depend on top talent, and today’s legal professionals have made it clear: flexibility matters. Firms that fail to offer it risk losing lawyers to more adaptive competitors.

Flexibility is now a baseline expectation at legal firms

In 2022, the American Bar Association found that 44 percent of lawyers with under 10 years’ experience would leave their current role for greater remote work opportunities. Support staff share similar preferences, with hybrid or remote schedules now considered standard by much of the legal workforce.

“Rigid RTO policies can alienate top performers, especially younger attorneys who now view flexibility as a baseline expectation, not a perk.” – Legal consultant

Even modest in-office mandates can backfire. One informal law firm poll showed that 50 percent of respondents would consider leaving if required to work in-office three days a week. The more days required, the more attrition rises.

WFA opens new talent pools for legal firms

Offering location flexibility gives firms a competitive edge in recruitment. A mid-sized firm might now attract a top-tier lawyer living in a lower-cost region who would never relocate to London or New York. Quinn Emanuel embraced this model, saying the policy lets them “hire the best litigators … wherever their desks are.”

WFA also supports diversity goals by enabling lawyers from different backgrounds, family situations, or geographies to stay in the profession.

Higher satisfaction leads to stronger retention

The 2024 NALP study found that associates working remotely reported higher job satisfaction than those in-office. That satisfaction is linked to reduced burnout and better work-life integration. Without commutes and with the flexibility to manage life admin, lawyers are staying healthier and more engaged.

• No late-night drives home
• Time back from commuting
• Easier integration of family life
• Longer careers for senior lawyers
• Lower burnout rates for juniors

But flexibility must be intentional

WFA is not a universal solution. Some lawyers genuinely prefer the structure and energy of an office setting. Others raise valid concerns that remote work could lead to unequal experience within the firm.

This includes worries such as:

• Missing out on informal mentoring or on-the-spot feedback
• Being passed over for high-visibility assignments
• Fewer chances to build relationships with senior partners
• Less exposure to firm culture or client-facing opportunities

These concerns are especially common among junior lawyers and those who are new to a firm. Without deliberate intervention, remote employees may end up feeling overlooked or disconnected from key moments of learning and growth.

Firms that are serious about long-term retention are taking steps to address this. They are building intentional structures around remote work to ensure inclusion and equity:

• Regular virtual mentoring check-ins
• Clear project assignment frameworks
• Scheduled in-person retreats or offsites for remote teams
• Transparent performance tracking across both office and remote staff

The firms most likely to succeed are those that balance flexibility with fairness, making sure that every lawyer, regardless of where they work, has access to opportunity, visibility, and growth.

The Cost Equation: Office Overheads vs. WFA Savings

Running a law firm is not just about legal expertise, it is also a business. The shift to WFA has real cost implications, especially around office space and operational overhead.

Traditional office costs still loom large

Firms that continue to mandate regular office attendance face traditional expenses:

• Prime city-centre leases
• Utility and maintenance costs
• Support staff
• Commuting subsidies

Some firms, like Quinn Emanuel, have even expanded their physical footprint. In 2023, they signed a new 132,000 square foot Manhattan lease, maintaining a strong office presence alongside their WFA flexibility. But maintaining large offices, especially if half the desks sit empty, can be expensive. Analysts point out that hybrid models often mean underutilised space, driving up the cost per occupied desk.

Real estate consultants now advise law firms to consider

– hoteling (shared desks for drop-in use)
– redesigning office layouts
– reducing their total square footage

Where WFA reduces costs for legal firms

Firms that lean further into WFA can unlock major savings.
The most extreme example is Fisher Broyles, which operates with just 20 percent overhead by having no physical offices at all. While few traditional firms will go that far, even downsizing can make a real difference.

John Quinn has acknowledged this too, stating:

“It is inevitable… as leases come up, we’re going to look at how much space we utilise.”

Less space means lower rent, fewer maintenance needs, and greater flexibility. Some firms have already sublet floors or let go of leases altogether after seeing strong performance from remote teams.

Why Some Legal Firms Still Invest in the Office

Not every firm is rushing to cut back on real estate. Some are deliberately investing in return-to-office (RTO) strategies, believing the benefits outweigh the costs.

These include:

• Stronger team culture and collaboration
• Faster onboarding for junior lawyers
• A professional space to impress clients

In these cases, higher overhead is accepted as the price of preserving a traditional model.

Office vs Remote: Both Carry Hidden Costs

A 2025 industry commentary noted that requiring in-person work can increase admin and compliance complexity, especially for multi-city or global firms. Office-based models may need to navigate:

• Varied local employment laws
• Different tax withholding rules
• Overlapping cybersecurity standards

On the other hand, fully remote setups must invest heavily in:

• High-grade IT and cybersecurity infrastructure
• Compliance frameworks for cross-border work
• Insurance and risk coverage for remote setups

So, the equation is not simply “office equals cost, remote equals free”. Both models require significant investment, just in different areas.

The Shift: From Real Estate to Tech and Talent

Where WFA takes hold, firms are reallocating resources. Instead of spending on rent, many are investing in:

• Secure cloud-based platforms
• Home office stipends
• Virtual collaboration and networking tools

These upgrades are designed to make remote work sustainable for the long term.

Firms with no offices often report healthier profit margins
Cutting rent allows them to pay lawyers more or offer more competitive pricing.

Take FisherBroyles, for example. The firm shares 80 percent of revenue with its lawyers and avoids the overhead of traditional space. In a climate where clients are increasingly cost-conscious, that kind of structural advantage can become a strategic edge.

So how do the costs really compare? Here’s a side-by-side breakdown of where money typically goes in each model.

Note: While both models carry costs, WFA tends to shift spending away from real estate and into digital infrastructure, security, and employee support.

Finding the Balance: The Future of WFA in Law

As we look ahead, the legal industry appears to be in a period of experimentation. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to how much remote work is “right.” Each firm is weighing client needs, business strategy, and employee expectations to strike the right balance. We’re likely to see continued hybrid arrangements dominate, with perhaps three days in-office as the new normal for many, and variations around that theme. A significant number of firms seem content with 3/2 hybrids (three days in, two remote), which “tends to work well for both employers and employees” according to recruiters, giving a mix of face-to-face time and flexibility.

Yet, the pendulum could swing. Some predict more firms will inch up to four days in-office as a default, in part to ensure junior lawyers get ample in-person training. On the other hand, if attrition spikes at firms with stricter policies, we might see a retreat back to looser hybrid schedules. The talent market will likely dictate a lot, firms won’t stick to a hardline stance if it means losing their best people. As one legal commentator noted, the pandemic proved “law doesn’t have to be practiced from a cubicle.” Firms that thoughtfully evaluate their policies and communicate clearly about expectations will be best positioned to keep talent happy, meet client demands, and preserve their culture.

It’s also possible we’ll see continued innovation in this space. Some firms might adopt “fully remote teams” for certain practice groups or back-office functions, even if other teams are mostly in-person. Global firms could let lawyers work from different countries (subject to bar rules), effectively operating 24/7 across time zones. Others might invest in regional hubs or coworking spaces as a middle ground between home and a central office. And technology will only get better, virtual reality meetings or more advanced secure cloud systems could further erode the gaps between remote and in-person work.

In the end, Work From Anywhere in the legal industry is here to stay in some form. The genie is out of the bottle, both lawyers and clients have seen that remote lawyering can work. The firms that thrive will likely be those that remain flexible and open to change, adapting their models as needed rather than insisting on a rigid approach. Whether it’s fully remote, hybrid, or something in between, the future of legal work will almost certainly be more location-agnostic than the past. As one survey of legal professionals concluded, a “flexible hybrid approach has emerged as the preferred model” in big law, and even initially skeptical attorneys have “enthusiastically embraced” these new policies.

For clients and lawyers alike, the priority is results. If a lawyer drafting a contract from her home office delivers the same quality as one down the hall, most clients won’t mind, some might even appreciate the efficiency. And if a talented attorney values working from a quieter locale, a savvy firm will find a way to accommodate that rather than lose the talent. The legal profession may have centuries of tradition behind it, but it’s proving it can evolve with the times. Work from anywhere is no longer a radical idea; it’s part of the new landscape of law. Finding the right balance between anywhere and together will be the challenge, but also the opportunity, for law firms in the years to come.

How WFA Helps the World’s Leading Legal Firms Work From Anywhere

At WFA, we’re already trusted by some of the world’s largest legal and professional services firms to help them safely and successfully implement their work from anywhere policies. Our cutting-edge remote work tax technology and global mobility software empower legal organisations to manage complex compliance risks – from permanent establishment concerns to employment law issues — in seconds instead of weeks.

With WFA, legal firms can:

• Protect compliance and avoid costly tax exposures

• Save time and fees previously spent on external advisors

• Confidently operationalise a sustainable work from anywhere policy

Ready to make work from anywhere work for your firm? Book a demo and discover how WFA can simplify global compliance and keep your talent where they’re happiest and most productive.

Donal Brady

Donal Brady is Co-Founder and Head of Product at Work From Anywhere, a platform to help companies execute a successful workation policy. He has deep expertise and experience in the world of remote work having spent nearly twenty years working in finance leadership roles with global multinationals like PwC, before entering the world of global mobility with International SOS and then pivoting into the software industry with Accel-KKR backed Smart Communications. He walks the walk with Work From Anywhere, speaking 5 languages, having travelled to 65+ countries and worked in 10.