The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50805
LAW OFFICE MANAGEMENT "My practice is still expanding so why put an arbitrary time frame on that? I work out at a gym three mornings a week. I'm a shortboard windsurfer. So are you going to tell me to go lie on a couch?" NED LEVITT, AIRD & BERLIS LLP Rights Commission ruling that Mitch McCormick, an equity partner with Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, could proceed with an age-discrimin- ation complaint regarding the firm's attempt to force him to retire. The human rights code in B.C., as in some other provinces, including Ontario, has effectively banned mandatory retire- ment in employment relationships, having done away with earlier provi- sions that limited age-discrimination complaints to people aged 64 and under. Faskens argued unsuccessfully that McCormick, as an equity partner, was not an employee and is not there- fore covered by this legislation. In spite of this ruling, many law firms continue to rely upon mandatory retirement provisions in partnership agreements, taking some comfort from the fact that the B.C. Human Rights Commission conceded that the circum- stances in McCormick's case, where the firm controlled his work in various ways, may not apply to other situa- tions where partners might not be con- sidered employees. Nevertheless, in a society where mandatory retirement is no longer the norm, law firm managers would obviously far rather persuade partners to retire than try to enforce a questionable provision in their partner- ship agreements. But how do you do this? How do you persuade someone like Levitt to slow down as his career continues to gain momentum? How can you con- vince people to direct their energies into hobbies or other interests after focusing for most of their lives on little else but their law practices? What will it take to get those whose earning power has never been greater to reduce their income soon after a global economic crisis that has wrought havoc upon many retirement savings plans? as they approach retirement years." However, he adds, "We have a busi- ness to look after." And that business, like that of any other law firm, requires that succession plans be put in place. Clients expect this, he says. They need to know who will take responsibility for their affairs when their primary contact leaves the firm. For that reason, the firm has a policy that, for five years leading up to retirement, partners should begin to "transition" their practices, expertise, and client relationships. Jolliffe acknowledges it is natural for For Levitt the simple answer is that you can't and you don't. In fact, he says, people at his previous firm tried and failed. He had been running his own firm, specializing in franchise and distribution law, but decided to move to Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP at the age of 58, having chosen Gowlings partly because it does not insist upon retirement from equity partnership until the age of 70. While he does not fault Gowlings in any way, Levitt says he became uncomfortable when he realized he was expected to begin making a transition towards retirement in his early 60s. Not wanting to let go of his practice, he decided instead to move to Aird & Berlis, a firm he says will never force him to retire. Scott Jolliffe, chairman and chief executive officer of Gowlings, says, "We have one of the best, if not the best, arrangements with our senior lawyers 24 A PRIL 2011 www. CANADIAN Lawyermag.com people not to want to give up control of their work and their relationships with clients. In fact, he says, "As you approach your retirement years, that may become a stronger personal feeling as you want to ensure that you remain relevant and important." Dealing with this issue effectively requires a dialogue, he says, "where everybody understands the needs and goals of the other." It's important to ensure the senior lawyer feels respected and has some measure of certainty that he or she will still have a meaningful role in the years leading up to retirement as well as a stable income. He says the key to this is changing the method for measuring a lawyer's contribution to the firm so there are financial rewards for passing on relationships, developing work for the firm and passing it on to others, mentoring and supporting younger lawyers, and drawing upon his or her expertise to provide the firm with a second opinion or advice on various matters. Jolliffe also says some lawyers con- tinue with the firm as "income part- ners" long after resigning as equity partners. He cites the example of for- mer Ontario chief justice and attorney general Roy McMurtry, still playing an active role as counsel to the firm at 77.