Law360 Canada (May 21, 2026, 10:23 AM EDT) --

Hilary Angrove

From undergrad to law school, we were sold the idea that merit would matter more than face time. In university, you are graded on how you perform, not how often you are in the classroom. Whether you studied in the library or at your kitchen table, where the work happened did not matter, only whether you did it. Seven years of training built around that principle. Then you enter the working world and all of that disappears overnight.

Requiring face time as your main KPI is particularly hard to justify for lawyers, where the metrics of performance are measurable. For instance: How many client files did you close? How many virtual meetings did you hold this week? Did you hit your revenue targets? These are not vague, impressionistic questions. They have answers. And yet many firms continue to evaluate lawyers in large part on whether they were seen … in office.

What COVID accelerated, remote and hybrid work as a mainstream norm, is quietly being reversed as many firms are bringing back or tightening return-to-office mandates. These mandates are often framed as neutral management policy. In practice, they are disproportionately punishing women, especially those balancing caregiving, school pickups and elder care.

The problem is not that women are less committed or available for work. Women are outperforming their peers academically and being hired by major firms based on merit. They make up 56 per cent of law students and 50 per cent of associates. Yet in 2023, only 28 per cent of law firm partners were women. The ability to enter law is no longer split along gender lines. Retention and advancement are.

In my experience, where advancement depends on physical visibility those who cannot comply are perceived as less available, less committed, and less promotable even when their output is excellent. There is also a pay dimension: recent reporting on broader return-to-office trends found women are more likely than men to leave jobs, accept lateral moves, or take lower-level positions to preserve flexibility.

According to a report published by the Canadian Bar Association, women are found to leave large law firms at nearly twice the rate of men, with the majority citing exhaustion, lack of flexible work arrangements and limited upward mobility as the main drivers. 

I built Angrove Law as a fully virtual firm from day one. Flexibility was not a perk I added later. It was the foundation. I was trying to create somewhere that I wanted to work. By creating a flexible remote work environment for lawyers, I have had a front-row seat to exactly what the rest of the legal profession is losing.

One of the lawyers I hired had been working remotely since COVID, and by all accounts was thriving. During her second maternity leave, her firm told her she needed to come into the office a minimum of twice a week. When she explained she could not make that work because of the commute, their solution was simple: move closer. She came to me instead. She is a skilled 10-year lawyer who would normally be outside the price range of a smaller firm. But the savings of working virtually, such as no commute costs, no parking, no convenience food combined with the ability to be present for her children, made the trade-off worth it — even financially.

Another lawyer I brought on was at a large firm and exceptional at her work, a standout lawyer at the firm. She has relatives in Europe and wanted the ability to travel to see them occasionally without burning through vacation time. Her firm required a minimum of one in-office day per week, which did not make financial or jet lag sense. She also felt stifled by the bureaucracy of Big Law. She wanted to work somewhere that would listen to her. At Angrove Law, she has that.

A third lawyer came to me from a family law practice an hour from her home. Her reference had one concern: she often wanted to work from home and was frequently late, during winter. What they didn't mention was that she had a kilometre-long driveway to plow before she could leave. At Angrove Law, she could live in her hometown and access opportunities that no longer required relocating to a city. Did I mention she always hit above target? Whether that was gratitude or just what she was always capable of given the space to do it, I'll leave that for you to decide.

These are not isolated instances. I have had candidates turn down higher-paying roles at traditional firms to join us because of flexibility. I have also lost talented people to higher-paying in-office jobs. But what I have never had is someone leave because the virtual model compromised the quality of their work or their commitment to it.

The way my team works is simple: everyone sets their own schedule and is accountable to clear KPIs. One lawyer starts at five in the morning and wraps by early afternoon. Her clients love the early availability. Another takes a long midday break to work out and have lunch with her family. They are adults. They manage their time, they hit their metrics, and they keep their flexibility. Nobody is performing productivity.

The return-to-office push is not bringing back some golden era of legal excellence. It is pushing experienced, skilled, high-performing lawyers (often women) out the door. This push is often quiet, through a series of impossible trade-offs that men are statistically less likely to face.

Hilary Angrove is CEO and co-founder of Angrove Law, a virtual flat-fee law firm serving clients across Ontario.

The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.