Page 48 - CLT083120

48 ¦ AUGUST 31, 2020 CLOSING ARGUMENTS

EDITORIAL BOARD

Does Working Remotely Really Work for
Lawyers?

One surprise emerging from the COVID-19 collected over the ensuing weeks and months, de-
pandemic, at least according to the plethora spair turned to hope, and then to optimism, and
of news reports and articles on the subject, then outright giddiness. Armed with their laptops
is how effectively professionals and white collar and iPhones and linked together by what became
workers have adapted to—indeed, embraced—the the ubiquitous and highly awkward and annoying
notion of working remotely. When the crisis hit, Zoom meeting, employees appeared to be working
many workers were, of course, forced to report for from home with minimal negative consequences.
work every day, just as they did before lockdowns Little or no empirical data existed to support this,
were imposed around the country. Health care but that was the perception.
providers, manufacturing employees, sanitation In fact, pundits wondered whether this tempo-
workers, bus drivers, police officers and many oth- rary arrangement was getting enough traction to
ers could only do their jobs in situ. But millions of become a permanent model for a large segment
others, confronted with executive orders deeming of our workforce. And if that happened, decreased
them “non-essential” or with hastily adopted cor- demand for office space would necessarily follow.
porate policies prohibiting their presence in their Real estate developers with large office building
offices, were forced to work from home. holdings became queasy.
At first, alarm and consternation prevailed. We are not qualified to prognosticate on the
How can this possibly work employers wondered. future of this phenomenon in general, but our col-
How can these employees be left to their own de- lective experience in the practice of law in all its
vices? Who will manage them? But as data was forms compels us to raise at least some questions

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune