Associates Don’t Want Unlimited Vacation—Here's What They Want Instead

Key Takeaways:

• Transparent, market-based compensation and bonuses, including clarity around summer special bonuses
• Hybrid flexibility, with most associates preferring no more than three days per week in the office
• Clear development pathways, including honest partnership timelines, training in business development, firm economics, management skills and sponsorship
• Alternative career tracks, such as perma-counsel roles for those who do not wish to pursue partnership
• Secondments and access to in-house opportunities, which support career exploration and strengthen client relationships

In this op-ed for The American Lawyer, Kate Reder Sheikh explains why associates increasingly view unlimited vacation as a benefit that looks good on paper but is rarely usable in practice. She outlines what associates actually prioritize in 2026, based on conversations with candidates and current market data.

At a moment when firms are doubling down on high-visibility perks like unlimited vacation, while also tightening in-office mandates, the gap between what many firms are offering and what associates actually value is continuing to widen.

This mismatch has significant implications for firms trying to retain and recruit top talent. A prime example of this is unlimited vacation—which is a "trap," in the words of an associate I recently helped make a lateral move. "It’s just a way for them to not pay you out for unused vacation time. You can’t actually take it," she said.

I've heard this feedback about unlimited vacation over and over again, for years. Actually utilizing time off is frowned upon. Especially when many partners seem to never take vacation, this trickles down and others from taking breaks. A generous policy can be on the books without anyone feeling safe to actually take it.

What do associates actually want in 2026, then?

They want market compensation and bonuses.

Yes, this includes the summer "special" bonus, whether it comes in the dog days of August or is rolled into a winter bonus. Associates are not happy with moving goalposts when it comes to these summer bonuses, such as announcements that they will be awarded, but only if associates hit a previously undisclosed, new billable target. Transparency and proactive communication are key.

Most associates want to be in the office three days a week at most.

The trend is moving towards four days a week, and the response from associates has been fast and it has been clear: no thank you. There are, of course, some associates who are built differently. They are usually attracted to the traditional New York-based white shoe firms, and they’re happy to come in five to seven days a week. They were born for it. But they are not the majority. "Going in more than three times a week is a waste of personal time, billable time, money. It is inconvenient, unnecessary, and I simply won’t do it anymore," a senior associate told me. One associate bristled at the term "return to the office" since, as she noted, she attended law school during COVID, directly out of college, and has never been full time at a firm. To her, it's not a return; it’s a most unwelcome new thing.

Associates want training and transparency around their path at their firm.

They want targeted senior boot camps around business development, clear expectations to be ushered into partnership, and reliable sponsors. They don’t want to be jerked around. They don't want to be told that they’re on track, only to be told later—when they are hard-to-move eighth-year associates—that they are absolutely not. In terms of boot camps, they want the nitty-gritty. They want firm economics to be laid out: revenue, profit margins, leverage. They want clarity on origination credit. They want to hear war stories on how business is developed. They want to be trained on talent management: how to lead more junior associates more effectively including best practices on delegation and feedback. And they want personal brand advice, and models. Finally, they want to know what the actual criteria is for partnership, and what timeline is realistic.

They want a perma-counsel position.

Not everyone wants to be a partner! Partnership is less appealing to up-and-coming generations than it has been to those who came before. A recent Above the Law/Major, Lindsey & Africa Millennial Survey showed that only 35.8% of millennial associates envision themselves as partners at their current firm. Those statistics carry over to Generation Z. Even for those who want to make partner, it’s also becoming an increasingly difficult dream to realize, with a 2025 Leopard Solutions analysis shows that only 8-12% of associates make partner in BigLaw. Plainly, it's not the desired outcome for many, and for those who have it as the ultimate goal, it may be unattainable. So, up or out is unpopular, and being able to remain as senior talent on a team without worrying about business development is compelling.

They want secondments, and clear paths to an in-house role.

This includes robust and timely sharing of information about jobs at client companies. When an associate goes to a client, they can deepen the firm's relationship with that company, resulting in a win-win. Why firms don’t generally allow for this to be seamless is a million-dollar question. Associates really enjoy having access to secondments in order to understand if in-house is the right option for them. Sometimes, a secondment will drive that lawyer right back into the arms of their firm, with the itch scratched. Clients appreciate them, associates want them, and it makes the firm indispensable. More of this in 2026, please!

Associates are clear on what drives them to stay, and what drives them away. It’s up to firms to heed the messages to retain their top people, or to make sure to keep them “in the family” via a placement to a client. Unlimited vacation isn’t the ticket, but some combination of the above factors can be just what’s needed for the outcome to be favorable for all involved.