Eversheds to outsource UK-wide secretarial jobs
Share
Eversheds will shed up to 95 secretarial staff as the firm prepares to outsource its documentation processes with outsourcing company Exigent.
Lee Ranson
The firm is in the process of rolling out documentation to an offshore site after completing a pilot with Exigent in its Cambridge office.
Earlier this year The Lawyer reported that the firm piloted the outsourcing scheme in its Cambridge office, with 10 secretaries being put on gardening leave between May and July (25 May 2009). It is understood that the 10 employees are still on gardening leave.
Since the end of the pilot Eversheds has looked at ways of rolling out the outsourcing scheme across its offices. The firm has decided that it requires one secretary for every four fee-earners with the rest of its needs being met by Exigent. Currently there is one secretary for every 3.4 fee-earners.
Eversheds managing partner Lee Ranson said: “The pilot was designed for us to evaluate how outsourcing works on the ground. We then went back to the business to discuss exactly how it would work across the firm. It will affect offices differently.”
The firm is announcing the initiative to its staff today and will begin rolling it out across its UK offices between now and Christmas.
Ranson said: “This is something that was taken up in other professions a long time ago. The legal profession is just starting to look at this now.”
Earlier today TheLawyer.com reported that 22 associates from Eversheds’ real estate team are in redundancy consultation (10 September 2009).
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Readers' comments (26)
ScoobyDooDoo | 10-Sep-2009 1:26 pm
They've had problems in the past with get rich quick schemes but they know they'll get rich with this scheme, and quick.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
ScoobyDooDoo | 10-Sep-2009 1:26 pm
They've had problems in the past with get rich quick schemes but they know they'll get rich with this scheme, and quick.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mike Hunt | 10-Sep-2009 2:52 pm
ScoobyDooDoo - if something is worth saying, it's worth saying twice?
Let's hope that the loss of immediacy that having colleagues in the same office brings is a price worth paying.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peregrine Mason | 11-Sep-2009 0:12 am
I recall reaching a very effective arrangement with a secretary who wanted to work from home after taking maternity leave. I would dictate to a digital recorder and send the result to her as a WAV file by email. Result: immediate turnaround by an excellent secretary whose skills we did not wish to lose. The other fee-earners in my department would all send her non-urgent work (such as attendance notes) either by email or simply popping tapes in the post. She would come to the office one morning a week. No reason why many fee-earners could not work from home using such secretarial support. Could result in a significant saving in overheads.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Sep-2009 7:54 am
Quote from the Exigent web site:
"Confidentiality and security are also guaranteed as we use a combination of encryption technology and established operating procedures to get the work done."
Security is 'guaranteed' eh? This is a *bold* claim... security is *never* 100%.
Moreover, what do clients think of such a move? Are they happy that potentially sensitive details of cases and so forth will be processed oversees? What about cases relating to personal sensitive information and the Data Protection Act (e.g. medical cases)?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Sep-2009 9:03 am
Boy am I glad I don't work there as a secretary anymore!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Sep-2009 10:10 am
Another tinpot scheme by Eversheds intended to show how progressive and client centred it is. You'd think it would focus on more fundamental problems - like woefully low revenue per lawyer. Touting a "commitment" to diversity and outsourcing won't help here folks. You have to wonder about the people that run this place.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Sep-2009 2:47 pm
Outsourcing is often more cost effective. Companies that work in legal outsourcing know that security and accuracy are imperitive and without these their reputations would be shot. Secretaries who are not doing basic tasks may be more focused on research and have more time to develop better relationships with clients and fee earners.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Sep-2009 3:19 pm
How can outsourcing be more cost effective - one of the main things to come out of this experiment is that Eversheds finally realised secretaries do far more than just type!! We are not actively encouraged to develop better relationships with clients or fee earners - we are here to do whatever the fee earner requires of us - without a pay rise for the last two years!! May be Eversheds should concentrate on keeping good quality staff because once the upturn comes about the quality of staff they require will all have been snapped up by firms who appreciate just what a secretary can do!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Sep-2009 3:51 pm
Considering Eversheds has already lost an enourmous amount of talented secretaries, it is disgusting that much recruitment is "insider dealing" by management and half of that management isn't even needed! Maybe too many cooks shuld be used here? Keep the people who run your business happy, like your support staff and you in turn will make your money!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment