This weekend, I’m preparing to say goodbye to the home office where I’ve blissfully worked this summer and head back to my law school office full time for the academic year. I used to work from home more during the semester, but since taking over as director of a law clinic (an active law practice), I prefer to be in the office where I’m more accessible.

At the same time, I’m thinking about a startling decline in the number of faculty candidates on the market in a given year.

Fewer People Are Applying to Be Law Professors

According to data from Sarah Lawsky, there were 662 candidates in the AALS hiring pool in 2010. There was a steep drop off between 2013 and 2016. Then there seems to be another drop from 2020 to 2022. I haven’t yet seen the numbers for the latest applicant pool that came out this month.

There are many possible explanations for this decline. The first drop off coincided with the drastic decline in the number of applicants for admission for law school, suggesting a trend away from the legal profession (and preparation for it) by both students and educators.

But what explains the latest drop off? One possible explanation is that law schools are more selective and so only candidates with multiple years of qualifications (Ph.Ds, postgrad fellowships, prestigious clerkships) are applying.

Hybrid Work: The End of the Law Professors’ Monopoly

But this week I find myself wondering about another trend that may simply be making law teaching less appealing. Back in the old days when I started teaching (2008), one of the great attractions of law teaching was the ability to decide where you worked, and when.

Yes, professors had their faculty offices. But that thing called “office hours” developed because you couldn’t just count on finding them there. Sure, they might be in class, in a meeting across campus, or away speaking at a conference. But they also might be working in that now-familiar way: at home, in their house slippers.

There were always some good reasons for this. For example, one important aspect of many law professor positions is conducting research and writing, usually of long-form pieces like law review articles or books. That type of work requires some hours of uninterrupted concentration. For many faculty members it has always been easier to get this at home, and to carve out certain hours each week to focus on it. Hence, “hybrid” work has long been an accepted part of the culture at most law schools.

The Changing Legal Marketplace for Hybrid Work

Since COVID began, of course, “hybrid workplaces” have become common in many industries, including many law practice settings. Employers are increasingly offering such arrangements because a majority of employees demand them.

And so far, there’s a fair amount of evidence that the flexibility afforded by hybrid arrangements increases employee productivity and intent to stay in the job (though there remain questions about how to measure productivity and how supervisors can monitor it).

So perhaps law teaching is not jut becoming a harder profession to enter. Perhaps it’s also becoming less uniquely attractive, as other forms of intellectually stimulating legal work offer just as much (or more) workplace flexibility.