The Commute: A Major Reason Lawyers Are Pushing Back on RTO
Lawyers with families tend to opt for living in the suburbs. That means a commute. Supposedly the best version of that is the relaxed trip in from, say, Greenwich, Connecticut to Grand Central in Midtown Manhattan.
However, that has many horrific versions of the commute. The lawyer might only be able to afford a house further up the line from Greenwich, such as in Norwalk, CT or even Trumbul, CT. And the law office may be in the Financial District, that is, Downtown Manhattan, which adds on a subway ride. Repeat all that late in the evening.
So, it's not breaking news that The Wall Street Journal reports that the major objection to RTO is the commute. There is a correlation between the number of those commuting who tend to commute into a location and the number of office vacancies. Those with a choice are opting not to RTO.
Eventually law firms might have to deal with this. Hybrid might not present enough of a solution. Is it in the future that more law firms will adopt the Quinn Emanuel model of forever WFH?
Full Disclosure: In pre-remote days I had to take the Metro North from "up the line" to both Midtown and Downtown.
Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.
Comments
Post a Comment