ABA Section of Business Law

Volume 12, Number 4 - March/April 2003

It's been a year since Nicole Auerbach attended the Ragdale Foundation, an artists' retreat in Lake Forest, Ill. Situated in a house built in 1897 that's set on 50 acres of undisturbed prairie land, Ragdale provides living and working space to writers, visual artists and composers from all over the country. Auerbach spent a week at the colony, recording a CD of original lullabies she had written for her two young children.

But Auerbach isn't a professional musician - she's a lawyer.

"People at the colony were amazed when they found out," said Auerbach, now a partner at the Chicago office of Katten Muchin Zavis Rosenman. Auerbach's time at the Ragdale Foundation was part of a four-week sabbatical offered by her firm. "Everyone was surprised that sabbaticals were even offered at such a large-firm corporate setting."

Auerbach was instrumental in first getting her firm's sabbatical policy implemented in 1999. As chair of the associate committee at the time, she was looking to address quality of life matters she felt were important to younger lawyers. Auerbach had heard that McDonald's Corp. offered sabbaticals to their employees after 10 years with the company and that many businesses in Silicon Valley had similar policies. She wasn't aware of any law firms in Chicago that did it, however, and since mid-level associate retention was an issue for most firms at the time, Auerbach thought a sabbatical policy would be a nice way to set KMZ Rosenman apart.

The agreed-on policy stipulated that after five consecutive years of work with the firm, associates were eligible to take a four-week paid sabbatical sometime within the next year. Since the policy took effect, 16 people - 85 to 90 percent of those eligible - have taken sabbaticals.

Auerbach had been with the firm for seven years at the time and was grandfathered into the program. Although she was on the brink of making partner, she applied for her sabbatical and actually took her leave at the beginning of her partnership. She said it was worth it 10 times over.

"I now have this CD for myself," Auerbach said. "It's something I couldn't have done on evenings and weekends - it wouldn't have been the same experience. I really thank the firm because I never would have had the opportunity to do this as a full-time lawyer."

Other KMZ Rosenman lawyers have used their time off to do everything from relaxing and recuperating to traveling to exotic places. James W. Hutchison falls into the latter category. He and his father had always talked about going to Russia, and when KMZ Rosenman implemented its sabbatical policy during his fourth year as an associate, Hutchison called his father to tell him they would finally get their chance. After two years of planning and preparation, the trip became a reality when father and son spent 18 days on the Trans-Siberian Railroad.

After starting in St. Petersburg, they traveled to Moscow and then met a Russian family on the way to Siberia. The woman happened to be an English teacher and was able to translate. The family gave the two Americans a tour of Irkutsk, Siberia, and even had them over for dinner. Hutchison and his father then continued on to Mongolia and ended their adventure in Beijing.

"It was one of the most significant trips of my life," Hutchison said. "I have so many memories and so many pictures."

After flying back from Beijing, Hutchison still had time enough left of his sabbatical to load up with supplies from Home Depot and build a roof deck on the top of his home.

"I don't know how to relax," he joked.

Sabbaticals are traditionally thought of as semester or yearlong breaks for college professors, but statistics show that they extend far beyond the world of academia. While there is no data specifically on the legal profession, an annual survey released last April by the Society for Human Resource Management shows that 17 percent of organizations nationwide offer paid sabbaticals and 5 percent offer unpaid sabbaticals. Legal workplaces seem to be no exception.

Pat Schiltz, associate dean of the University of St. Thomas Law School in Minneapolis, focuses his writing on law firm matters and the practice of law. He said lawyer sabbaticals were almost unheard of until firms in Los Angeles and San Francisco first began offering them in the 1960s. Since then, they've dropped out and popped back up at different times.

"One thing I've found is that sabbaticals wax and wane with the economy," Schiltz said. "The better the economy, the better the sabbatical packages. That's pretty much been consistent."

Although the number of organizations offering sabbaticals has decreased in the last few years, sabbatical policies are starting to gain more acceptance as many firms look to counter negative publicity for having 2,000 (or more) billable hour requirements. They promote sabbaticals as a way to retain associates.

Joe Altonji, director of the legal consulting firm Hildebrandt Inc., said it can cost $200,000-$300,000 or more to replace an experienced, middle-level associate in a high-level corporate firm. That includes many factors such as actual cost, headhunter fees, the downtime a firm suffers on matters they're involved in, training time and the period of inactivity a new associate inevitably has while getting acclimated to the job. The cost also depends on the level of the associate and the kind of firm as well as the area of law.

While it's generally good to take reasonable measures to improve retention, Altonji said, there's always a certain level of attrition that's healthy for a firm. The key isn't to keep every associate you bring in, but rather to hold onto the rightassociates. Losing high-quality lawyers because of burnout isn't good business.

"The baby boomers were far more driven to be work-dedicated," Altonji said. "Now there's more of a demand among young lawyers for balance in life."

Then it's no surprise that 80-hour workweeks, the constant pressure to rack up billable hours and the increasing demands of private practice are leaving many associates feeling burned out and fed up.

In "Law and the Billable Hour," an article in the February 2002 issue of the ABA Journal, then-ABA President Robert E. Hirshon acknowledged that the billable hour may very well be damaging morale in the legal profession. Pro bono work is one area adversely affected, but Hirshon said that "the demoralizing consequences of billable hours extend much more broadly." He continued:

Studies suggest an unease in our profession, especially among younger lawyers. The causes are varied but all seem to lie in the difference between working in a profession vs. working a job. Mentoring, life-balance, workplace stimulation and innovation are affected when the timesheet reigns. The billable hour is fundamentally about quantity over quality, repetition over creativity. Because a lawyer's time is not an elastic variable, increased billable-hour requirements are squeezing out other aspects of what it means to be a lawyer.

Hutchison agreed that the requirements are getting out of hand. He is required to bill 2,000 hours a year - up from 1,800 hours when he started his career seven years ago.

"We have to make sure that we don't let this pursuit of hours go any further," Hutchison said. "There are only so many hours in a day that someone can work, and I hope we've reached the point where it's going to level off."

But are sabbaticals a solution to burn out? Altonji doesn't think so. He said associates care about things like competitive compensation, working in a good environment, learning and developing their skills, and doing interesting and exciting work - not being promised a sabbatical years down the road.

"Sabbaticals isn't the issue for young lawyers," he said. "The quality of life they're looking for isn't achieved by getting three months off every five years. That doesn't help you manage your family life or make up for missing your kid's Little League games and being late for dinner every night."

Altonji was surprised that sabbatical programs for associates even existed. He guessed that the people most interested in taking sabbaticals would be partners - older lawyers who don't have young children and who could use the time off to travel or pursue other career goals.

Although it's true that most existing sabbatical programs are for partners rather than associates, Auerbach tells a different story. She contends that associates are those most in need of a break.

"The general feeling in our firm is that partners can be much more flexible in their hours and have a better negotiating position," she said. "If they needed four weeks off, it could probably be arranged. Associates are the ones working the incredible hours, and they don't have the same power to negotiate for time off."

Hutchison also disputed Altonji's claim that sabbaticals aren't important to associates. Rather, he sees extended time off as a huge incentive for young lawyers.

"I think we've reached the point where raising salaries isn't enough anymore," he said. "Money can make people happier, I suppose, but if someone is generally unhappy at a job, money isn't going to be the answer. Once you've worked a certain number of hours, time becomes more valuable than money."

And while Hutchison believes that sabbaticals are a step in the right direction, he said they're only one aspect of achieving life balance. So should the worth of sabbaticals even be evaluated based on their ability to solve the greater problem of overwork?

Maybe that's missing the point.

Firms that have implemented sabbatical policies seem to be under no delusions that their partners and associates will suddenly endure an otherwise poor working environment if the promise of time off is dangled before their weary eyes.

And that's because a firm with such a policy isn't likely to stop there in addressing life-balance issues. Rather, a firm that gives lawyers time off in spite of the adage ingrained in professionals that "time is money" speaks greater volumes about its general attitude toward the quality of life of its employees.

"Our sabbatical policy isn't the only perk we offer, but it is a unique step we've taken that makes it clear to associates that we understand and are committed to the issue of life/work balance," Auerbach said.

That is a good thing for both individual lawyers and the firm, and sometimes it's hard to separate the two. "Sabbaticals are meant to be a reward for the hard work that associates put in for five years," Auerbach said, "but that naturally results in good feelings toward the firm that gave them that opportunity as well."

Loyalty and gratefulness certainly seem to be overriding themes among lawyers who have returned from sabbatical. Anne Castle, partner and chair of the management committee for Denver's Holland & Hart, has taken three sabbaticals throughout her career and observed the effect sabbaticals have had on her peers.

"It makes people enthusiastic about the work they do and about the firm they work for," Castle said. "They're grateful for the opportunity, and that engenders a positive attitude toward the program. How could you not feel great about this firm that gives you three months off?"

Hutchison said a sabbatical can be a big factor in a lawyer's decision to stay or leave a firm, especially since many third- and fourth-year associates at large firms are recruited by headhunters. He said that even if he had been seriously thinking about leaving KMZ Rosenman for another firm (which he wasn't) he never would have given up his trip to Russia once he had started looking forward to it.

There are other benefits as well. While a sabbatical might not be a cure for consistent stress and overwork, it could give lawyers a much-needed spark both before and after the fact.

"A sabbatical is almost like a lottery ticket," Auerbach said. "It gives you the ability to dream, except it's more tangible than a lottery ticket because you already know you've won. It gives you a light at the end of the tunnel and eases your feeling of being burned out."

Holland & Hart, one of the innovators in lawyer sabbaticals, first developed a policy in 1973 that allows partners to take three paid months off every five years. Lawyers reach this point after spending eight years in associate ranks and two years in partnership. Jim Davidson, the firm's director of finance, calls the program "a rousing success." Its purpose, he said, is to give lawyers a chance to recharge their batteries and return to work refreshed.

A sabbatical policy may sound like a money-losing venture, but many firms look at it as an investment. While firms obviously eat the cost of paying employees who aren't producing, they reap the benefits when lawyers return rejuvenated and increase their productivity. They also might avoid the exorbitant cost of replacing worn-out lawyers who leave the firm.

"It comes at a price, but it's been well worth it," Davidson said of Holland & Hart's program. "The lawyers love it, and you can tell a difference when they come back. It helps them recharge."

In her book, Rest Assured: The Sabbatical Solution For Lawyers, Lori Simon Gordon argues that in addition to relieving temporary career malaise, sabbaticals can satisfy the draw of wanting to experience more outside of work than professionals have time for in one lifetime.

Gordon herself had been a successful partner at Latham & Watkins in Chicago for four years when she took a life-changing sabbatical that eventually inspired her book. Her career was almost too good to be true, but Gordon needed space from the discipline and expectations that pushed her through college, graduate school and 12 years of intense law practice.

"The more people thought I should be planning something concrete and productive, the more I craved the absence of those things," Gordon writes. "After spending what seemed like every day of my overachieving life working toward the next and higher goal, I needed a break."

Latham & Watkins didn't have a formal sabbatical policy, so Gordon made her own proposal to management. She was granted seven months off but later extended her sabbatical to a full year. Gordon spent time with friends and family, enrolled in several photography classes, and began designing and making gold and silver jewelry - one of her lifelong passions.

When it was time for her to return to work, she realized that she wanted to experience a different career and make more time for her personal relationships and her art. However, Gordon says that unlike her, most of the lawyers she interviewed for her book got the life experiences they wanted from their sabbaticals and returned to work refocused.

"It was great for me," said Ellen Marks of her year-long "leave of absence" from Latham & Watkins. "It let me take a step back and figure out if I wanted to keep working in the legal profession."

She found that she did. Marks had always been interested in writing fiction, and in 1993, she thought the time was right to try her hand at it. She spent a year in the Cayman Islands writing her first novel and starting a second. The break gave her a chance to jumpstart her writing career so that when she returned to law practice, she was able to make time to continue writing.

Marks said the skills she acquired during her writing sabbatical also benefited her as a lawyer. Since she had moved to a foreign country where she knew no one, she was forced to work on her social skills and develop independence and confidence. Her attention to detail and focus on language carried over as well.

"I'm not sure if I would say that the way to become a better lawyer is to take a sabbatical, but mine did help me grow as a person, and anything that helps you grow as a person naturally helps your career," she said.

Others use their sabbaticals to do things directly related to their careers. In her book, Gordon cites several lawyers who have enrolled in classes, taken visiting professorships to teach a class on an area of law they practice, learned a foreign language, or done pro bono work.

Davidson spoke of one Holland & Hart partner who took time off to travel around, writing wills for economically disadvantaged people.

Despite these success stories, many firms don't think a sabbatical policy would fit into their practice. Gordon, however, argues that just about any firm can find a policy that works for them, whether it be paid or unpaid, for partners or associates, or offered for four weeks or six months.

According to the Society for Human Resource Management, larger organizations, those having more than 500 employees, are much more likely to offer sabbatical programs than smaller organizations, those that have fewer than 100 employees. However, Gordon points out that even some sole practitioners have found ways to take sabbaticals.

She addresses some of the common worries that law firms have and, like a true lawyer, rebuts them.

One concern is that lawyers could sever important client relationships by picking up and leaving for months at a time. Other associates or partners at the firm also might become resentful for having to take on the extra workload.

However, Hutchison said that a little planning and preparation helps smooth things over. As a litigator, he made sure to avoid scheduling important trials or hearings during the time he would be on sabbatical. He also started telling his clients and peers three to four weeks in advance when he would be gone and reminding them as the sabbatical drew nearer. By the time it came, he said, everyone was well aware of his plans. As for other lawyers at his firm, Hutchison said he received nothing but support.

"I didn't get flak at all, from partners or associates," he said. "Everyone was interested in what I was doing and genuinely excited for me."

And lawyers are usually happy to help out when they know their turn is coming too. "It's a self-perpetuating thing," Castle explained. "It becomes economically rational for you to take a sabbatical since you're paying for everyone else to take theirs."

Davidson said Holland & Hart tries to assign more than one lawyer to big clients anyway so that the disruption is minimal when someone is absent for awhile. The firm's policy also stipulates that no more than 20 percent of partners can take a sabbatical in any year. Another way to maintain client relationships is for lawyers to check in with the office periodically in case something comes up. Hutchison took that approach and said it worked well for him.

Some firms also might be concerned that lawyers will take the paid time off and then choose not to return to work. It's certainly possible.

"A couple partners have taken a sabbatical and not come back," Davidson said. "They just decided they didn't want to practice law anymore and rode off into the sunset."

Holland & Hart now has a safeguard in place in its policy to prevent the same thing from happening again.

However, Gordon says that in most of these cases - hers included - the lawyer probably would have left the firm sabbatical or no sabbatical. "As long as it is done in an organized and professional way, the law firm or corporation is better off not having a lawyer whose heart is not in his or her work and who might be unproductive or disenchanted," she writes.

Auerbach said that while debating the implementation of a sabbatical policy, the associates' committee at KMZ Rosenman ultimately decided that any problems that might arise were nothing they couldn't handle. So far, they haven't regretted their decision.

Perhaps the most important ingredient in any successful sabbatical program is simply support from management. If associates and junior partners get the sense that senior partners look down on sabbaticals, they'll be afraid that taking one could hurt their chances for advancement in the firm.

"Many firms have programs that aren't widely used," Castle said. "Our program was initially proposed by well-respected partners who were the first to take their sabbaticals. They had only good things to say about their experiences, and now sabbaticals are viewed as a real energizing opportunity by everyone."

She said that while sabbaticals sometimes have to be postponed, almost all partners take them at some point.

Hutchison spoke of a similar attitude at KMZ Rosenman. In response to the reluctance of some associates, management sent out several memos strongly encouraging them to take advantage of the policy. "They obviously wouldn't force anyone to take time off, but they made an effort to tell you that you're expected to do it," he said.

Are sabbaticals the solution to long workweeks and stress? Of course not. Only a complete overhaul of the traditional billing model could even come close to accomplishing such a feat. But can sabbaticals rejuvenate weary lawyers, engender loyalty toward their firms, and provide for valuable life experiences outside the professional world? Those that have taken sabbaticals make a strong case in their favor.

So while sabbaticals may not be a permanent escape from the rat race, they could be just what lawyers need to catch their breaths, find some balance, and jump back in.