Law And More

Radical Compassion: Derek Chauvin and Leslie Van Houten

In our Buddist-oriented meditation group, there is a discussion half-hour.

During that 30 minutes this evening there was an almost universal reflection: What might Derek Chauvin be thinking and feeling in his cell?

Sure, maybe Chauvin is focusing on his appeal. In Bloomberg Law, Bernie Kohn presents the possible grounds for that appeal.

But, in solitary confinement, Chauvin has lots more time to muse on more than an appeal.

We wondered if he is anything near that "moment of clarity" when raw reality breaks through. That is, when he is in total touch with what he did to another human being - unjustly. If so, we asked each other: Was it acceptable for us to have compassion for the infamous Derek Chauvin. The official term for that set of feelings is "radical compassion."

Admittedly, when a crime is so heinous, it is difficult to muster up compassion. In the book "The Manson Woman and Me" Nikki Meredith examines the lack of empathy in regard to murderer Leslie Van Houten. Because there is such little looping into identification with what might have factored into Van Houten's actions, it's unlikely that Van Houten will ever get parole. 

What we in our meditation wrestled with were all those human issues of how Chauvn ever got to where he was when on the neck of George Floyd. What trauma hadn't he processed? What was the tipping point in the hardening his heart? 

Yes, we admitted we had compassion for Chauvin the man. We also hoped that he could change. But it's likely no one will believe that if he does change. There aren't many who believe Van Houten when she explains her transformation.

The trial is over. But we as a nation remain reeling. There could be a route to collective inner peace if we embrace hope that Chauvin can come to agree with the jurors. That he had done something very wrong. Let's believe that this human being has the capability for salvation.

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Reputation Restoration and Goldman Sachs - Now a Wrap for Image-Fixer Jake Siewert But New Branding Challenges Emerge

"Jake Siewert, who guided Goldman Sachs’ reputational recovery in the aftermath of the global financial meltdown, is joining Warburg Pincus." - Kevin McCauley, Odwyerpr.com, April 16, 2021.

In 2010, in Rolling Stone Matt Taibbi had positioned and packaged Goldman Sachs as "The Great American Bubble Machine." Taibbi contended:

"From tech stocks to high gas prices, Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression ..."

Siewert took that on. His strategy was essentially to make Goldman Sachs transparent and to humanize its executives. Tools for that included podcasting and social media. Most of Wall Street shuns such openness. Siewert also healed relationships with much of media and with policymakers.

Now Siewert is moving on.

But new kinds of reputational trouble have arisen for Goldman Sachs. The media and internally its employees are focused on its culture. The rot is within.

In a recent edition of Vanity Fair, William Cohan turned over Goldman Sachs' ugly underbelly.

Within the organization, the beefs range from overwork to frat-boy values. In regard to the latter a former intern Patrick Blumenthal filed a lawsuit in 2020. In that lawsuit "Blumenthal v. Goldman Sachs, et al.," the plaintiff claims harm from hazing.

This could bite the leadership in the butt, just as it had in Deloitte UK and KPMG UK. Because of the contentions about a toxic culture, one executive stepped down from that particular position, another resigned from the company.

In western economies there is a movement against all forms of workplace bullying. 

Obviously, the Goldman Sachs' brand is in play, yet again. Heads could roll.

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

The Ranking Game Has Come to This: Temple Online B School's Former Dean Moshe Porat Indicted

"The indictment unsealed Friday charges Moshe Porat, 74, the former dean of Temple’s Fox School of Business and Management, in Philadelphia, with conspiracy and wire fraud for allegedly providing phony information to U.S. News & World Report between 2014 and 2018." - Patrick Thomas, The Wall Street Journal, April 16, 2021.

Two of Porat's subordinates at the time were also indicted. They were each charged with one count of conspiracy related to committing wire fraud.

Porat denies that allegations.

The cooked-up data about the online M.B.A. program focused on:

Number of students who had taken the Graduate Management Admission Test exam

Average work experience of students

Percentage of students enrolled part-time.

In 2018, the school notified U.S. News & World Report that the data had been manipulated. Soon after that, Porat was forced to leave. There were then federal and state investigations.

However, as the sayings go in law: The bell had been rung. The egg had been broken. Before this disclosure by the school, for four consecutive years that online program ranked number-one in the U.S. News & World Report ranking system. 

Students who enrolled in that particular program because of that ranking then had to deal with the reality that their alma mater was involved in a front-page media scandal. That could reduce the brand value of their degree. 

Anything to do  with rankings in higher education is big news, That's because higher education is in essence BigBusiness.

When rankings slip for any professional school, be it business or law, those in leadership could lose their jobs. When rankings increase that usually results in higher quality students applying, brandname professors accepting positions, more research funding and larger donations from alumni.

The pressure is intense. Therefore, if it is proved that Porat and his team fudged the numbers or if they take a plea deal, that would be no surprise. Rankings represent a high-stakes game.

Ironically, the ranking game itself had gotten into a pickle this year. That happened with how U.S. News & World Report ranked law schools. As Law.com reports, three times it had t0 change the rankings of law schools. That threw shade on its own branding. It also opened the door wider on a discussion of the ranking game itself. Should it be allowed to continue?

Earlier several elite business schools refused to submit data to a ranking organization. They claimed that COVID had disrupted too much for the numbers to reflect any reality.

Reflection: Is the ranking process itself in play?

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

Amazon: Documentary "CamperForce" Throws More Shade on the Culture of Its Workplace

The RVing craze is not just a result of wanderlust. At least not for a growing number of elderly. 

It's become, the documentary "Camperforce" captures, both their only affordable habitat and their transportation to seasonal gigs.

One such  assignment is at Amazon. The tasks Barb and Chuck Stout do can actually cause them pain. The couple lost their nest egg during the 2008 global recession. And they have evolved into the RV generation of migrant workers. 

The Amazon website provides details about its Camperforce work program. It is positioned and packaged as a great deal. However, as with many jobs at Amazon, it's controversial in what it actually demands. 

Those Amazon jobs are also featured in the hit film "Nomadland." 

For the aging, the world of RVing seems to be binary. There are those retirees who are enjoying the good life on the road on their terms in a full-service vehicle. And there are those who have embraced that lifestyle as the only way they can afford to make ends meet. 

This article in Moviemaker provides a link to that documentary "Camperforce."

Here is the free guide for how to land, hold and move on to better work, no matter your age Download Outwitting ageism.

Small changes can trigger big success in your career and your business communications. Swing by for a complimentary consultation (janegenova374@gmail.com)

Law Firms Loop in with Clients' Values - Dawning of the ESG Era

Capitalism is softening, finally.

More and more corporations are going on record that their values transcend the bottom line. This is sometimes referred to as "The Triple Bottom Line."

It truly could be the coming of the ESG Era - that is, factored in are stakeholders such as employees, vendors, communities, planet earth and overall governance. Nerd Wallet provides an introduction to ESG investing. 

Part of that macro movement are micro initiatives such as Utah's Regulatory Sandbox. The big news in that is the launch of Law on Call, owned by non-lawyers. It makes legal services more accessible and affordable. That can be perceived as a threat to the traditional delivery of legal services in America. Providers ranging from BigLaw to solos could be affected.

Of course, venturing into social values is risky. That's what corporations such as Coca-Cola have discovered.

So, it's predictable, as Law.com reports, that law firms would loop into this corporate embrace of values which might be controversial. Some have already developed ESG practices. The focus of them is to help guide corporate clients through the maze of the legal, financial, public relations and political issues associated with a broadening of the stakeholder base. 

Blooomberg reports that PwC predicts that 60% of mutual funds will be ESG by 2025.

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Not the Professionals or Human Beings They Were Pre-COVID: Legal Sector Should Anticipate Values Earthquake

The legal industry might anticipate an earthquake in values.

That force field could rock law firms and in-house legal departments. The pheonomenon could be triggered both from those inside and third parties.

The U.S. Supreme Court might be shaken up also. Last Friday, U.S. President Joe Biden announced establishing a 32-person panel to review every aspect of the High Court. 

As The Wall Street Journal reports, the majority of Americans are not the professionals and human beings they were before COVID became a reality in March 2020.

Let's look at that from our own experience. You probably have plenty to add.

First of all, they get it that they are alive. They didn't die from the virus. Sure, those they cared about or knew from work those who did die. However, they didn't. Survival provides a platform for a new start. Despite hatred of change, many are ready to do just that: Change. 

Also, they might have experienced profound anxiety about their professional status. Would their law firm lay them off? Corporations' financial performance got hit hard by COVID. In-house legal was no longer a safe (and relaxed) harbor. After so much suffering they have gained a fresh perspective about the place of work in their lives and how much they are willing to endure for traditional achievement. 

Therefore, it's no newsflash that James Suzman's "Work" is a best-seller. Although it's ponderous - 464 pages - it ranks high on Amazon - 33,314. In addition, Stanford Graduate School of Business professor Jeffrey Pfeffer is getting attention for his "Dying for a Paycheck" movement against exploitation of the global workforce. 

And, third, social isolation provided over and over again that moment of clarity: Relationships are important. Human beings are a social animal. You bet, make time to find and nurture those human ties.

The legal industry will have to pony up real solutions for work/life balance. Read Glassdoor and the universal complaint is too much work, much of it unscheduled. That eliminates the opportunities to lock up social. For Jones Day, an associate posted on Glassdoor in January 2021: "zero work/life balance." That employee gave the firm a 2.0 out of a possible 5. 

Of course, media outlets are in the business of picking up on trends. The disruption in the cultures in the legal sector is what they will probably focus on. And it's not just the advocacy player Abovethelaw. Traditional media centers such as Law.com are also looping in. Recently it published an article that indicated some skepticism about Orrick's much-praised paid Unplug initiative. 

For decades, thought leaders will analyze how COVID transformed the perception of work per se and the collective unconscious of America. A lot is so so different. It's up to the legal sector to adjust.

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

The Door Has Been Opened - Business Leaders Enter Risky Space of Taking Positions on Social Issues

" ... business leaders are facing new pressures from progressive activists to prove that those commitments were more than just talk. As activists press companies ... CEOs are again finding themselves walking a difficult line on emotional, political issues, risking blowback from all sides." The Wall Street Journal, April 10, 2021.

The most recent issue which has stirred up controversy is the Georgia law about voting. But there will be many more.

The Biden Administration is an activist one. So much has been put in play. And, as they say in law, the door has been opened on taking stances on developments which intersect with the public good.

Yesterday, Joe Biden announced the formation of a 32-person panel to review every aspect of the U.S. Supreme Court. Constituencies, ranging from media to consumers/clients, feel a right and perhaps a duty to ask corporate leaders about how they view such a matter. And, what action or actions they are taking. In a sense, the fundamentals of crisis management have kicked in. If those aren't done right the organization can loop around in sustained turmoil. 

Some of the new pressure on corporate leadership is reflected in the emergence of ESG investing. That is, the demand that business focus on more than simply the bottom line. Instead, it must pay equal attention to stakeholders other than investors. Those include employees, vendors, communities and planet earth.

However, corporations are not alone in being forced to align their business with what supposedly is in the public interest. Recently, Bloomberg detailed the mixed state of affairs at law firm Paul Weiss.

On the one hand, Paul Weiss is a major supporter of liberal causes. That includes significant donations. In addition, it has multiple points of access to the Biden Administration. Many would label it "liberal."

On the other hand, its client list ranges from Exxon to private equity. Exxon is perceived as a factor in climate change. Private equity is condemned for destroying jobs. 

Time will tell how much pushback Paul Weiss receives.

The notion that law firms should be careful in selecting what clients to represent and how became mainstream with the pickle Boies Schiller found itself in. It chose to represent sexual predator Harvey Weinstein and did that in a manner that turned off many. All that had been positioned and packaged in an article in The New Yorker by Ronan Farrow. 

In the court of public opinion the argument that everyone and every entity has a right to a defense is accepted, yes. However, it's being modified by this: If you choose to be that defense, we will distance ourselves from you. The consequences could range from yanking accounts to high-profile protesting. 

Obviously, what both corporations and other institutions such as law firms require is brilliant public relations. They have to "sell" in the court of public opinion the rightness of their values and actions. Not that they expect everyone to agree. But the argument has to be solid.

For years, employment law powerhouse Sanford Heisler has shaped its branding that way. The plaintiffs it has chosen to represent were presented in the court of public opinion as having a legitimate beef. And, one that had/has implications beyond that particular alleged injustice. 

Meanwhile, organizations might find it smart to parachute in consultants to modify or even overhaul their cultures. Regarding the latter, an economic boom equaling that of the post-war could begin.

A lot of business is at stake.

The media outlets could raise the bar on what is expected from institutions. After all, they will be making a lot of money.

Talent will be able to choose again where to work. Already, Millennial associates in law firms are nudging values issues.

Ethics again will enter the national conversation about business. Leaders will be assessed as to that old-fashioned attribute - "character." 

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

BigFour, Now CBS - Will BigLaw Be Next in Having to Address an Alleged "Hostile Workplace?"

"CBS has parted ways with top executives in its television station group amid an investigation into their conduct ... The executives, Television Stations Group President Peter Dunn and David Friend, its senior vice president of news, were suspended in January after a Los Angeles Times report on allegations the pair had fostered a hostile work environment." - Joe Flint, The Wall Street Journal, April 7, 2021.

The investigation, which is still not over, is being conducted by law firm Proskauer Rose. The CBS Entertainment Group Executive George Cheeks has not indicated what that review has revealed. But, what we do know is that the two executives have been terminated.

Those two terminations follow the steps taken by two BigFour accounting firms in the U.K. in response to the existence of a "toxic" workplace.

At Deloitte U.K., Dimple Agarwal stepped down from her leadership position in diversity. She is still employed at Deloitte U.K., though.

At KPMG U.K.'s chairman, Bill Michael resigned. However, that might not change much. Bloomberg Law observes that the culture of the BigFour is slow to remimagine itself.

And, therefore, despite the terminations and stepping-back at CBS, Deloitte U.K. and KPMG U.K., the leadership at BigLaw might not do much to change the culture. However, given the growing media attention to "hostile workplaces" and "toxic work environments," law firms might have to at least address the contentions that such exist. 

Universally, a beef in BigLaw is about oppressive partners. Often, in the media that's referred to as "bullying." And, it's frequently documented with surveys.

Glassdoor, the platform for posting anonymous employee opinions and ratings, showcases those kinds of complaints.

For instance, for Jones Day, one employee comments, "Management is poor, they will make up things that you supposedly did wrong in order to prevent a salary raise, long hours, bizarre start-finish times with no flexibilty, management exhibits favoritism, have to work nights and weekends ..."

At Paul Weiss, here it is: "I was not motivated to work because I was yelled at and chastised for any mistake that I made. This is usually because upper management yells down the chain to the people they work under, and the cycle keeps going. That is how you learn at Paul Weiss (at least in my department). If you can drink the koolaid and fit in, it's great. You'll need to be intense and able to take criticism well. I don't think I was ever praised ..."

At Willkie Farr, the posting reads: "Some of the more powerful partners in Houston are very difficult to work for and it makes the entire office an unpleasant place to work."

And, at Boies Schiller, here you have the colorful observation: "I've worked here only a few months but this place is toxic. It's the Hunger Games in suits. There's a very prominent Bro culture that undermines the simplest of things."

Sure, BigLaw makes a lot of money for the folks working in it. But so does BigFour Accounting in the U.K. and CBS does in the U.S. Yet, Deloitte U.K., KPMG U.K. and CBS took high-profile steps to disclose unacceptable conditions and move to correct specific instances of it.

BigLaw might find pressure in the court of public opinion to make examples of partners who are perceived as creating a hostile place to work. To make not subject to lawsuits, they might have to hire another law firm to conduct the internal investigation.

Will that change the culture? It could be a start. Meanwhile, Millennial lawyers are introducing their own values to working in the legal sector. If there is no hope of alignment, talented associates know they can go elsewhere. Some have considered the timing right for going solo. 

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

Counterculture Type Activism Among Law Students - Push Back on Gibson Dunn, Just Like Paul Weiss, for Client List

There are not only associates becoming oriented toward taking on the role of change-agents.

That confident activism has also come to law schools. In a sense that mirrors the dynamics of the late 1960s/early 1970s counterculture.

Back then, even careerist-focused students in professional schools and graduate programs went out there, protested and often suffered consequences. Regarding the latter, I lost a part-time position at the University of Michigan (later, was reinstated).

But, as we said: The cause was worth it. In addition to being part of generating what we perceived as positive change, we picked up skills in advocacy. Later, preparing communications for that type of outreach was to be my career path. 

That same mindset could be taking over segments of law students.

Bloomberg Law reports:

"Gibson Dunn & Crutcher should set an ethical standard for representing fossil fuel companies, a student law group [Law Students for Climate Change] said Wednesday, citing the firm’s work on the Dakota Access Pipeline."

In addition, the Law Students for Climate Change, with members from 50 law schools, objected to Gibson Dunn's having Chevron on its client list because of its defense work associated with Ecuador. 

The shade thrown on Gibson is not an aberration.

Last October, law students, reports Law.com, had protested in front of Paul Weiss' Manhattan headquarters for its representation of Exxon. That energy corporation has been perceived as a factor in climate change. 

What is on a law firm's client list and how that law firm goes about its work for that client are not new, of course, as issues for push-back.

It could be conjectured that one-time litigation powerhouse Boies Schiller began on its downward trajectory when its co-founder David Boies took on the Harvey Weinstein defense. The New Yorker article by Ronan Farrow was a reputation-killer. That was 2017. Now, it's primarily negative news about Boies Schiller which media outlets cover. 

Outside pressure on law firms can become the game-changer of 2021 and beyond. Their branding is being co-created by third parties. Not only their own marketing and public relations functions which broadcast wins, lateral hiring and scaling are in charge of their reputations.

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

Paul Weiss' Liberal Mindset/Network - Conservative Client List (will it defend open-carry?)

"That client list [of Paul Weiss] increasingly sits uneasily with the Democratic Party’s progressive tilt." - Bloomberg Law, March 24, 2021.

What that article explicitly mentions are controversial conservative clients which Paul Weiss defends. They range from Exxon to private equity funds. Yet Paul Weiss' branding is liberalism. It also contributed heavily to liberal causes.

Gallows humor around the legal sector could be this question: Will Paul Weiss represent supporters of open-carry? Ha-ha. The liberal Paul Weiss looping in with a high-profile conservative legal issue.

Yesterday, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Calfornia ruled 7-4 that states can restrict the open-carry of guns without violating the Second Amendment. As Daily Mail speculates, this could wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, here in Arizona, strutting around Walmart are folks with guns and ammo on their belts. Given what happened in Colorado, there could be a grassroots movement for the state to take away that right of open-carry. I often wonder: Suppose I accidently bump into one of those open-carry people with my shopping cart?

The humor wouldn't be too much of a stretch. An especially blatant example of the tension between Paul Weiss' liberal branding and its client list is the federal lawsuit "Christine Crawford, et al. v. McDonald's U.S." Here is a copy of that complaint which seeks class action status. 

Last September, more than 50 former Black franchise owners filed that lawsuit.

As Mike Snider reports in USA Today, they contend:

" ... that the company steered them to operate restaurants in 'economically depressed,' communities and 'dangerous locations.' These store locations had high rent and operating costs and were likely to generate lower sales than comparable ones elsewhere ..."

Paul Weiss is representing McDonald's USA in that litigation. And who is on the front lines of that is Paul Weiss partner Loretta Lynch. As the Paul Weiss website documents, Lynch is both a woman of color and former U.S. Attorney General in the Barack Obama Administration. 

In a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, Lynch argued that it was in the self-interest of McDonald's to assist those owners of franchises. That is a strong point. Those following the litigation also can raise the issue: Business is complex. Not everyone who enters it has the needed knowledge or the skill. 

In this era of the push for racial justice and leveling the financial playing field for minorities, it can be puzzling why Paul Weiss accepted this particular case. For my communications-coaching boutique I am honored to assist a Black client. The legacy of suffering is palpable.

Should a law firm enjoy the branding and networking perks of liberalism and yet represent issues which a progressive ideology might assess as not in the public interest?

Full Disclosure: There is a bit of personal resentment here. I am registered as an independent. Also I have done many assignments for traditional corporations. Therefore I understand that mindset and its economic stances. As a result, I had pitched for assignments involving conservative issues. Because of my liberal-tilted blogging, no surprise, I have never passed the vetting process. Unlike Paul Weiss, I can't have my liberal beliefs and access to lucrative conservative accounts.

More Full Disclosure: About a year ago I did an assignment for Paul Weiss. Its chairperson Brad Karp dazzles with his high Emotional Intelligence. 

Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.