6 minute read

Risk Watch: File management and practitioner supervision in the era of social distancing – By Grant Feary

Connected while apart: File management and practitioner supervision in the era of social distancing

GRANT FEARY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, LAW CLAIMS

Advertisement

The Bulletin Committee requested that this article be on the topic of “file management when working remotely – confidentiality and security”. This request was no doubt made in light of the experience of 2020 where COVID-19 restrictions caused major changes to the manner in which law was practised. During the strictest of the “lockdowns” – which in SA at least were mercifully short compared to other jurisdictions – we had to come to grips with working from home, remotely from the office. There has been much written about the advantages and disadvantages of working remotely, including that the “new normal” will involve a much greater element of remote working, even when (hopefully not if) the COVID-19 beast has been tamed.

The starting point for any consideration of confidentiality and security issues in file management when working remotely must be to recognise that the basic underlying duties of a practitioner to maintain their client’s confidentiality and to ensure the security of their client’s file and information are unchanged, whether you are working from your office, your home or anywhere else. The obligations set out in the Solicitor’s Conduct Rules regarding confidentiality (ASCR Rule 9) and the implied ethical obligation regarding keeping client files secure and any obligations under the Privacy Act will apply, pandemic or no pandemic, to your practice, whether that be conducted in your office or from your kitchen table.

It is obvious, therefore, that all of the same precautions you would take in the office to keep client files secure (locked filing cabinets, locked office doors, computer systems secured by passwords, virus protection etc) must be taken whilst working remotely. Just as you would not allow people who are not associated with your practice to wander in and out of your office looking at client files, you should not leave client files or your computer on the kitchen table when your kid’s friends are over. It should go without saying that client files and/or your computer should never be left unattended, either in your car or, worse, at the coffee shop when ordering or going to the toilet. The Australian Cyber Security Centre’s tips for protecting personal information when working remotely include the following: • Use trusted Wi-Fi. No café Wi-Fi! • Secure devices when not in use— locked drawer, locked room, not sitting on a desk • Implement multi-factor authentication • Use a Virtual Private Network (VPN) • Use strong and unique passwords • Update your software and operating systems • Avoid using portable storage devices where possible • Use trusted sources for information • Be aware and increase your employees’ awareness of seams

Further to this, use work email accounts, not personal accounts for all work-related matters.

Proper file management when working remotely can also give rise to other challenges – file notes of telephone conversations should be consistently made and filed properly, as should all client letters and documents, whether you are running an electronic file or a paper file. Additional attention to these logistical considerations (e.g. consistent printing and filing for paper files) needs to be given if practitioners are not in the office and lacking their usual administrative support.

Supervision of staff is also a major issue when working remotely. Some lawyers might see supervision as a “soft skill” or a task that can be put to one side when client matters get busy. Such a view would dangerously underestimate the importance of proper supervision and, in respect of those practitioners supervising practitioners on restricted practicing certificates, be inconsistent with the applicable LPEAC Rules. As the LPEAC Guidelines for the Supervision of Newly Admitted Practitioners (approved 22 July 2016) make clear, supervision is the responsibility of the supervising practitioner and should not be delegated to others. The LPEAC Guidelines also say that supervision of a practitioner on a restricted practising certificate

“must be distinguished from a lawyer’s general duty to supervise practitioners and other employees who are performing legal or paralegal work for which the lawyer is ultimately responsible. Supervision of this latter type of work is a risk management, productivity and profitability tool. Supervision in the context of the [LPEAC] Rules is entirely different, and while it contains elements of risk management, productivity and profitability, it fulfils a much wider purpose. It is the final formal component of a practitioner’s legal education and must be viewed as such by the supervising practitioner.”

Despite the differing sources of the obligation to supervise identified above by the LPEAC Guidelines, it is good practice for those supervising practitioners to have regard to the LPEAC Guidelines even if they are engaged in general supervision (i.e. not necessarily just of those on restricted practising certificates).

In this regard, the LPEAC Rules (Rule 5(3)) (written pre-COVID-19)

state that the supervising practitioner and the junior practitioner should be located in the same or substantially the same physical location. On 30 March, 2020 LPEAC issued an addendum to the LPEAC Guidelines entitled “Remote Supervision of Practitioner Subject to Supervised Practice (Category CPC) During COVID-19 Restrictions”. It is said in this document that, for the duration of the COVID-19 requirements for social distancing LPEAC understands that it may be difficult for the requirement that the supervisor and the supervisee work at the same location to be complied with. The 30 March, 2020 document provides that there must be an initial meeting between the supervisor and the supervisee which must occur before commencing work remotely (or as soon as possible thereafter).

This meeting is to address the following: • Method of communication. A primary method of communication must be agreed as well as a preferred secondary method of communication. The primary method of communication for contact that would usually occur face to face is video-conferencing software.

The following are secondary methods of communication: - Email; - Phone call. • Frequency of supervision meetings, including agreed times and days (subject to the requirements set out below). • How written work will be dealt with. • How new tasks will be assigned. • How ad hoc queries will be addressed. • The extent (if any) to which the supervised practitioner is permitted to engage directly with client. LPEAC considers that such direct contact between client and supervised practitioner should not involve providing substantive legal advice unless authorised in writing by the supervisor.

Following the initial meeting, further meetings between the supervisor and the supervised practitioner may occur remotely. The supervisor and the supervised practitioner must meet using the agreed primary method of communication at least twice each week. There must also be contact between the supervisor and the supervised practitioner by a secondary method of contract at least once every day. The supervisee must keep a supervision diary (which must be counter-signed by the supervisor and provided to the Board of Examiners as part of any application to be issued with an unrestricted practising certificate) which sets out time, date and medium for each supervision meeting.

The LPEAC document also states that once the COVID-19 social distancing requirements have been relaxed, it is expected that normal, face-to-face (non-IT facilitated), in office meetings will resume. It is not clear what particular COVID-19 restrictions LPEAC had in mind when ratifying these additional Guidelines and whether the current looser restrictions applicable in SA are restrictions of the nature intended. From a Risk Management point of view, however, these Guidelines are a good starting point for remote supervision (whether that be required by the LPEAC Rules or otherwise) and all practitioners who are supervisors or supervisees should be familiar with them. Further, all such practitioners should also be familiar with the main LPEAC Supervision Guidelines adopted in 2016 as referred to above, see https://www.lawsocietysa.asn.au/pdf/ EP_Guidelines_for_the_Supervision_of_ Newly_Admitted_Practitioners.pdf.

There are a number of other important points to be made about supervision in a more general sense and a Risk Management seminar concentrating on supervision issues will be held later in 2021. B

This article is from: