ABA Journal - Law News Now

Comments

• Report Abuse

1. Posted by Michael Johnson - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 18 hours, 43 minutes ago

   There are several things wrong with this article.  First, in regards to Perkins Coie, I noticed that the article only mentions associates who act like jerks, noting that they will hurt their chances of making partner and will need to meet with HR.  Frankly, these are obvious results that don’t require a policy (official or unofficial) and have existed in every firm for decades regardless of its size.  Second, Perkins Coie wouldn’t likely respond the same to partners who act like jerks.  In fact, I think it would be safe to assume that a partner would be treated with kid gloves, especially if he or she has a large book of business.  Third, in regards to Duane Morris, once again its policy seems rather obvious.  If a partner doesn’t want to share his or her book, and the rest of the partnership wants a piece, then of course such partner won’t have a leadership role and may be forced to leave the firm.  Once again, however, if the partner has a large enough book, and is sharing the wealth a little, the chances of anything happening to him or her are minimal.

   The bottom line is that firms are doing little to combat jerk behavior, regardless of their press releases to the contrary.  Such press releases are intended to lure laterals and unsuspecting law students into accepting offers of employment.  If you have a substantial book of business (partner or associate), no firm is going to do anything about your jerk behavior unless it would result in liability for the firm (and even then, many firms will quietly settle cases to keep you at the firm).

2. Posted by David Yamada - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 18 hours, 29 minutes ago

   I am the author of the Healthy Workplace Bill, model anti-bullying legislation that creates a cause of action for workers who have been harmed by psychologically abusive mistreatment at the hands of supervisors and co-workers.  Varieties of the HWB actually have been introduced (but not yet enacted) in some 12 states since 2003.  For more information about workplace bullying, go to the website of the Workplace Bullying Institute, www.bullyinginstitute.org, and the website of my new non-profit, the New Workplace Institute, www.newworkplaceinstitute.org.

   David Yamada
   President, New Workplace Institute

3. Posted by lawstudent in Madison - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 18 hours, 6 minutes ago

   Mr. Yamada—
   I understand your concern for a healthy workplace, but at some point, don’t you think suing someone over their personality traits is going a bit too far.  We have been dealing with jerks in the workplace since the beginning of time. 

   If I, as an employee, have a problem with the people I work with, I should have the courage to bring it up to a supervisor.  If nothing gets done, then why should I stay there?  I tell you what these laws would do:  They will allow people to file frivolous claims with no repercussions.  How can we ever show that this person was not feeling this or than as a result of a co-worker’s behavior?

   I’m just sort of sick of the government, state or federal, trying to protect every nuanced idiot out there.  I would think that legislatures should have much bigger fish to fry.  Here in Wisconsin, we can’t even get a budget passed!

4. Posted by 2nd year associate - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 17 hours, 46 minutes ago

   I agree with lawstudent in Madison.  I am definitely in favor of less jerks at work, and as a female associate, I can assure you they exist.  However, sometimes its not the supervisor but the entrenched partner’s secretary who can be a real jerk.  The abillity to file lawsuits against bosses does not fix the problem of people refusing to behave professionally.  The legal profession in particular needs to take at look at the ethics rules imposed by every state in the country and follow them.  That will cure the jerks at work problem more efficiently and effectively than legislatrues wasting time on idiotic bills.  Mr. Yamada, please lobby for health care benefits (that actually work) and business friendly family leave.  Do not waste your time on this drivel.

5. Posted by laurasbuffy - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 16 hours, 3 minutes ago

   Mr. Yamada’s bill permits suing co-workers as well as bosses.  That’s the abusive secretary that was mentioned.  In an ideal world, suing would not be necessary.  But a lawsuit (and especially a win) against an abuser in one firm gets noticed by other firms.  It’s a carrot and stick approach.  “Let’s just all be nice” doesn’t often work.

6. Posted by Nan - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 14 hours, 59 minutes ago

   Another law? Quite frankly, I do not believe we can legislate “jerks”. I disagree that because jerks in the workplace has been a problem since time began that we should simply accept this as a fact of workplace life. However, a law is not the answer. Just this year, 2007, I found myself working alone, no less, with a male attorney who was the ultimate obnoxious jerk. Sexist, racist, unethical. One day he held a jock strap type of undergarment in front of me and asked me if I thought “he would still fit into it.“ This in a basement office with no windows except at the reception area, which was empty as the receptionist had resigned. When this jerk ignored my repeated requests that he cease his obnoxious behavior in my presence, he countered with the typical reply, “You are too sensitive.“ Or, “You are taking things out of context.“ Laws will never eradicate what these individuals refuse to acknowledge or grasp. My ultimate response? Resign. Would I want to have further contact with this JERK by filing a lawsuit against him? No way! 

   People should leave. If enough people did this, the JERKS would find themselves alone and through word of mouth might also find themselves with a declining client base. Take control. Resign. And tell everyone, in fair and accurate terms, why you resigned. No matter how well intended, yet another law on the books attempting to regulate human behavior is NOT the answer.

7. Posted by Avatar910 - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 14 hours, 42 minutes ago

   Remember, sometimes you want a jerk for a lawyer, because the other side has one, or it is a effective negotiating tool.  While that personality trait may not be office-friendly, and there are legions of articles about trying to eliminate the “Rambo” litigator, many clients demand such personalities.  This, then can carry over to the office from the courtroom or deal.

   I suggest that people need to realize that the ofcie is not their life, everybody is not nice and just get over it.

8. Posted by AZeiss - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 14 hours, 26 minutes ago

   Reverse psychology - the better a partner or associate treats his assistant, the better service, loyalty and respect they will in turn receive.  Law school fails to teach these future associates and partners that Manners, Class and Integrity 101 are just as important in the real world as Civil Codes and boxing gloves in a lawsuit.  No cussing zones should be enforced just like no smoking zones.  A partner or associate shouldn’t expose the rest of the office to his/her lack of self-control.  It wouldn’t be tolerated at a staff or paralegal level.  And it is a cop-out to expect or encourage a long-term employee who has invested time in a firm and built up benefit hours, bonuses and senior level status to quit because he/she can’t take the heat in the kitchen.  Abuse is a different topic than personality qirks here.  Harrassment is a law now - remember.

9. Posted by Pete in Michigan - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 10 hours, 38 minutes ago

   If one was able to make psychological examinations of the top attorneys at any major law firm, one would find a lot who suffer Narcissistic Personality Disorder (“NPO”). As the literature states, it is impossible to have a relationship with a person with NPO.

10. Posted by Natalie - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 9 hours, 45 minutes ago

    I am a paralegal at a mid-sized firm.  My interview for this job was conducted by one of the partners and the associate with whom I would be working taking me to lunch and engaging in a long conversation with me.  They informed me that their main criteria for employees were an ability to get along with others and willingness to learn.  They stressed that the goal of the firm was to create a pleasant work environment so that they would be able to keep their employees long term.

    It is now six years after that unusual job interview, and I am fiercely loyal to my boss and the firm.  I have seen clients fired because they were abusive to staff.  I have never seen an attorney be abusive to the staff, because the partners have been very careful about everyone they hire.

    I have been offered employment by other attorneys for more money.  No thanks!  I am happy here with my bosses who actually care about their employees.  The “no jerk” policy here is a win-win situation for the amployers and the employees.

11. Posted by De_novo_09 - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 6 hours, 34 minutes ago

    GOOD!  It is in the profession’s interest to internally enforce civility and politeness.  There is absolutely no excuse for rude behavior.

    Avatar910…your logic perpetuates the stereotype.  Jerks are not professional and I don’t want them in our profession.  There is absolutely NO excuse.

12. Posted by Rebecca Pontikes - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 5 hours, 34 minutes ago

    It is disturbing that so many of these posts accept that there is nothing to be done and that employees should “resign”—resign and go where?  Find a new job?  What if that is not possible?  Not all victims of workplace bullying are well-educated attorneys who have a plethora of options.  Many are single parents who are living paycheck to paycheck—what to do if that person holds the jock strap up?  Resign?  What if that jerk is the one who would be giving the reference? 

    The argument about frivolous lawsuits can be made about any law—including breach of contracts between businesses which I’m sure all of the postings about frivolous lawsuits would be quick to say are necessary to protect business interests. 

    It’s time we all accepted the need to protect the rights of American workers to the same extent we protect the rights of businesses without the “frivolous lawsuit” bugaboo which is simply an excuse to do nothing and allow abuses of power that ruin people’s lives.

13. Posted by B. K. SHARMA - 1 year, 1 month, 1 week, 2 days, 2 hours, 53 minutes ago

    It is a situation where the firm is loosing of having appropriate employees and suffer. In other countries, this situation is rather worse.  I agree with Rebecca, to safeguarding the interest of worker is equally important as the business.