CHERYL CHAI
Associate Editor

Layoffs seem to be an instinctive reaction in times of economic woe. Recent news reports have shown that 7% of local companies have carried out retrenchment exercises or plan to do so this year.

Nonetheless, while cutting costs by retrenchment may seem like the most effective and immediate measure to help businesses stay afloat, those considering this move should bear in mind that certain costs are necessary for the productivity and morale of the business. As the saying goes – “pennywise, pound foolish”.

Law firms, in particular, should avoid such measures as retrenching legal talent lowers work morale and is only a short-term solution. When the economy recovers and the demand for legal services increases yet again, firms that choose to retain and recruit lawyers during the economic downturn will find themselves in the enviable position of not having to face the expensive and inefficient task of replacing talent from a short supply pool. All things considered, the cost of recruitment, orientation and integration can actually be more expensive than the cost of retaining the lawyers.

While refraining from retrenchment exercises amidst declining transactional work may pose problems, it is at this point that local firms should take the cue from their American counterparts who use their downtime to engage in pro bono work (Nate Raymond, “Pro bono Report 2008: A Silver Lining to Economic Downturn?” The American Lawyer (July 14, 2008)).

Involving lawyers in pro bono activities enables firms to better tolerate excess capacity by keeping lawyers engaged, honing their skills and exposing them to areas of practice that they might not otherwise encounter. Furthermore, training and mentorship programmes are a necessity, regardless of the economic climate, and pro bono is an effective means of providing them. Bolstering pro bono policies also furthers a firm’s corporate social responsibility agenda, thus improving its reputation and visibility in the community.

Business and economic concerns aside, the fundamental objective of pro bono, which is to improve access to justice by providing free legal help to those who cannot afford the hefty legal fees or qualify for legal aid, must not be displaced. There is always a need for pro bono work and perhaps this need is even greater during difficult times as those most severely affected tend to be the poor and disadvantaged. Hence, the legal community must become even more committed to the pro bono agenda to allow people of all means the chance to pursue and defend their legal rights.

After all, what goes around comes around.