Law And More

Jones Day - What Was It Thinking in Court/Social Media Response to "Savignac/Sheketoff v. Jones Day et al."

Public relations may be more of a wild-card game to play than litigation.

Jones Day, once a low-profile black box, has decided to leverage the court of public opinion for lawsuits filed against it. That began with gender bias case "Tolton et al. v. Jones Day." It posted on its website about the lawsuit. Here is that statement. 

Now it might have gone out of control with the parental leave bias litigation "Savignac, Sheketoff v. Jones Day et al." Here is a copy of the complaint. The two plaintiffs had been former U.S. Supreme Court clerks.

The plaintiffs, among a number of beefs, contend that it is illegal for Jones Day to provide more paid parental leave for females than males, there was retaliation when plaintiff brought that to the attention of Jones Day, and there had been a pay gap between female and male associates. 

As Jack Newsham reports in Law.com, Jones Day issued a public statement in social media about the litigation. That was in addition to filing in court a motion requesting a 30-day extension of when it has to respond to the lawsuit. Here is that statement. posted on its website.

Essentially Jones Day claims:

• The contentions ignore law and biology
• There was no retaliation. Savignac was fired because of poor judgement, lack of social skills, and perceived disinterest in a career at Jones Day.
• Sheketoff was paid equitably, despite mixed reviews of her performance. 

A fundamental of public relations is: Knowing when to put it out there and when to lay low. The ambitious in the public affairs industry should take the leap into the analyzing the dynamics of Jones Day's new approach to branding. 

Reflection: Is white shoe law firm Jones Day becoming undone? Meanwhile, consumers of the legal media are enjoying the theatre. 

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.

Fox - Who's REALLY in Charge?

"I call the shots on the big debates."

That's what U.S. president Donald Trump contended about Fox in an interview recorded by Mediaite. He also noted that his worst polls come from Fox.

He kept reiterating that Fox is different now. But he didn't give the parameters of the "now." Or, how it is different.

So, the question arises: Who does call the shots at Fox?

Of course, former creator of Fox Roger Ailes no longer is calling any shots. He had been forced out, then died of an accident shortly after (Amazing there weren't more conspiracy theories about that. After all there had been rumors he was trying to put together a competitor to Fox).

According to Michael Wolff's book "Siege," Rupert Murdoch still really hasn't handed the power over to the next generation. But even Murdoch, Wolff indicated, had to cave to the force field of Trumpism. Incidentally, Wolff devotes a lot of pages to the leaders and players at Fox. Here you can order "Siege."

Given the possibility of a Trump (stock market/overall economy) Crash, the debates could be the most-watched live presentation on cable for 2019.

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

The Suing Couple - This Time Ellen Pao, Buddy Fletcher Are in Court for Divorce (not alleged bias)

They were once a power couple. 

Ivy league educated.

Sophisticated.

She a tech venture capitalist, then oversaw a social media platform, and next an advocate for leveling the playing field for women in Silicon Valley. He had been the head of a hedge fund - Fletcher Asset Management.

Their networks were golden.

And, both became household names because of lawsuits about alleged bias.

She - Ellen Pao - took on venture capital firm "Kleiner Perkins" after she was axed. She contended gender discrimination, in an era before #MeToo.

He - Buddy Fletcher - took on the Dakota when the board wouldn't allow him to purchase a fifth property. He contended it was because he was African-American.

Both lost those lawsuits.

Now, they are back in court. Only, as the New York Post reports, it is for divorce. That kicked off in 2017. It goes on and on. 

The way their marriage is ending is filled with as much hostility as their earlier lawsuits. Both seem to have a deep sense of entitlement. 

The accusations will likely make their way into a cover story by Vanity Fair. That glossy had already covered the couple a number of times. Here is the 2013 Vanity Fair article "Sex, Lies, and Lawsuits."

He claims he is destitute and requests financial support. His head fund collapsed. There had been dark accusations about it. He also requested in court and lost that Pao be kept away from their daughter. He is representing himself, that is, doing all this pro se.

She wants him out of her pocketbook and life. Apparently she had managed to land on her feet financially after losing the lawsuit and her job at Reddit. Currently she is living at the Ritz-Carlton Club and Residence. 

The theatre attached to both is palpable. They're drama magnets. 

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Lawyers, Law Students with Suicidal Ideation - Soon, You Will Be Able to Dial "988" for Immediate Help

Lawyers and law students are no strangers to suicidal ideation. And, unfortunately there are those in the legal sector who didn't stop there. Among the tragic deaths was that of Gabriel MacConaill.

A new kind of help will be on the way. The FCC reported earlier this week that it has received an overwhelmingly positive response to its study about implementing a three-digit number for a suicide hotline. That would be "988." It would replace the 10-digit 800-273-8258. Here is that report.

A law last year mandated that initiative be studied. FCC head Ajit Pai said, given the feedback, he would make the "988" suicide hotline a reality. During the past two decades, suicides in half the states have increased by more than 30%. 

Human beings in extreme distress might be able to remember "988" and use it. After all, just about everyone has a mobile phone which is with them at all time. They might not have been able to remember a 10-digit number. 

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.

Michael Wolff's "Siege" - All The President's Lawyers

Legal sector insiders probably won't be reading Michael Wolff's June 2019 book "Siege." At least not to find out the dirt about U.S. President Donald Trump's lawyers.

But those who hover on the fringes, watching Dan Abrams on ABC, likely will enjoy Chapter 3 of the book. The title is "Lawyers." 

For example, they will find out that Alan Dershowitz is no heavy-duty legal scholar. Instead, he is more of a celebrity lawyer, the kind who knows how to publish the right books and use the medium of television. A Baby Boomer, Trump grew up with that medium.

When Trump was searching for a killer lawyer who would work the television optics he invited Dershowitz to the White House. He was considering hiring Dershowitz. Most the BigLaw firms didn't want to get into the loop. Their committees voted down that business because Trump was being Trump and they were also afraid of being stiffed on the bill.

But Dershowitz wanted a million bucks to do the job on a formal basis. So, Trump moved on to the Rudy Giuliani who would work for free. It seems that Giuliani wanted to get out of the house. His third marriage, like the previous two, was a disaster. But to take the job, which paid nada, he had to step down from his position at Greenberg Traurig which wanted no part of all that. 

Wolff confirms the bad blood between Trump and the White House lead counsel Don McGahn. Actually it was worse than the media portrayed it. McGahn hated Trump. 

In essence, Trump assumed, like Richard Nixon, that he was above the law. For example, he would tell McGahn that it was his [Trump's] Department of Justice. Trump wanted people around him who would reinforce that notion. Then, ironically, he would torment them for being suck-ups. As we know, James Comey wasn't among the suck-ups and he got the boot. 

In the book, Wolff also observes that the U.S. legal system can be gamed. That is accomplished through bringing on enough legal juice and muscle. 

As Trump became more convinced he was above the law those in White House made it their mission to avoid attending certain meetings. They didn't be in the loop on Trump's agendas. They knew they couldn't afford the legal bills if they were dragged in. 

On Amazon, "Siege" ranks high - 8,810. In terms of describing legal and political dynamics it is probably a more useful and engaging read than Wolff's earlier book "Fire and Fury."

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.

Drudge Report - The Business of Attention

The Drudge Report, whose signature used to be the Flashing Blue Light, never misses the chance to grab attention.

Today, the grabber is the economy. As the world knows the Dow closed at down a bit more than 800 points. Meanwhile, outside the U.S., economic developments in Germany and China signal a downward trajectory. 

So, the Drudge Report has a triple headline:

Yields Flash Recession Warning! 

Stocks Dive: -800

Banks HAMMERED

What this showcasing of bad U.S. economic news demonstrates is that Matt Drudge looks out for Matt Drudge, not Donald Trump. Essentially a conservative, Drudge has pivoted from a hard-liner who had curated pro conservative news and the negative liberal kinds. That began when Trump crossed lines that Drudge might have considered not smart. What Drudge is is a smart businessperson. While so many digital sites have disappeared, his ranks in the top tier. 

Of course, Trump is furious that media outlets are highlighting the troubles in the U.S. economy. His reelection depends on a robust current economy and a forecast for more of the same in the future. Yet, already, the quarterly GDP growth rate isn't where he said it would be. 

What Drudge gets is that man is the economic, not the political, animal.

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

A Maturing Digital Economy - No Place for Another Uber (e.g. WeWork)

Will WeWork play out the troubles of Uber?

Both started out as disruptive forces in the economy.

Both became popular.

Both, like Amazon, adopted the business model of high growth, ignoring profitability (but Amazon pulled that off without extreme losses),

And, both can't seem to move toward profitability.

Uber had already done an IPO.

WeWork had filed to do one.

Both players might not be around in five years. Investors have grown weary of Uber's promises of future profitability.

In its IPO prospectus, WeWork lists the risk factors, reports Fortune. Obviously, they resemble those of Uber's. And any one of them can sink the ship.

They include:

•  Inability to achieve profitability
•  Difficulty managing growth (that could continue to be growth without profitablity)
•  Any challenge in maintaining existing membership
•  The impacts of a global economic downturn.

Uber and WeWork both became symbols of the new digital economy. Back then that was exciting. Now that the digital economy has matured, constituencies, ranging from investors to workers needing employment security, are looking for a lot more than that.

Takeaway: Keep our eyes on how the WeWork IPO goes and how the stock price fares after that. 

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.

Epstein Conspiracy Theorists: Factor in the Cockroaches

The world media outlets don't need the slowdown in the global economy, climate change, or even Donald Trump as the story.

They have the conspiracy theories attaching themselves to the death of Jeffrey Epstein. Those could have legs for a long time.

Among the latest theory is that Epstein "outsourced" his suicide.

According to Lewis Kasman, who had been in the John Gotti Sr. loop, Epstein couldn't have pulled off killing himself on his own. The surveillance cameras go 24/7. Also, he needed the equipment. He had the money to pay for help with a suicide. And that's what he did.

Kasman notes that cockroach problem in the jail cell might have been a tipping point. The powers that be claim they can't spray because of toxicity. Therefore, the cockroaches are plentiful and aggressive enough to invade every opening in the human body. Epstein, accustomed to lux, might have made the decision not to go on. So he ponied up the cost of exiting all that. 

Here are more details from the New York Post.  

An earlier theory, put out there by a former inmate in the Metropolitan Correctional Center was that, no way, could Epstein have pulled off a suicide. The cell isn't configured to allow for that. It had to be a murder. Here are more details from Fox. 

Soon enough psychologists might be parachuting in. They could speculate that Epstein had been a narcissist. A narcissist loves himself (or herself). Therefore, suicide was not probable. Bring on the murder theory. 

Fading will be interest in theories about who killed John F. Kennedy or why.

Next November around Thanksgiving don't expect many media articles about that sunny day in Dallas, Texas. Instead they will delve into that hot weekend in Manhattan when a billionaire died in a jail cell. 

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.

Experience Caps, Price Point, The Dilenschneider Group's Championing Deep Expertise

In the age-discrimination lawsuit "Kleber v. Carefusion Corp" the plaintiff contended age bias in hiring came via an experience cap.

The Carefusion help-wanted was structured to require 3 to 7 years of work experience as a lawyer. No more than that.

Here is a copy of the complaint.

Dale Kleber, age 58 at the time, had plenty more experience than that. However, he still applied for the position. Eventually, Carefusion hired a 29 year old applicant.

The question arose: Was an experience cap leveraged as a stealth tool to discourage the aging from applying for certain jobs?

Well, Kleber's specific challenge didn't pan out.

As Bloomberg Law reports, the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the plaintiff.

Here is a copy of that decision.

The Seventh Circuit, 8 to 4, stated that experience caps didn't constitute a type of disparate impact theory. That is, it wasn't a form of seemingly neutral policy that operated as a type of bias against a protected class.

However, some experts warned employers there could be more Kleber-like experience cap lawsuits. Likely, there will be.

Meanwhile, more and more help-wanted specify experience caps and those Google Forms applicants fill out as part of the job search process explicitly ask the number of years working in X or Y niche. That could be managing Price Per Click (PPC) advertising.

Pragmatism rules that applicants would size up what the "right" number of years is and then play in that very specific sandbox. Yes, redo the past to fit with the present.

Otherwise, there may be no access to the toys in that sandbox, ranging from a weekly pay check to benefits. 

But, the present is not so much about raw age bias, is it. 

Instead it's more about price point. Unless a business has a clear and powerful point of differentiation, it can be caught in competing via price. The best briefing on that is "Blue Ocean Strategy" by W. Chan Kim. Here it can be ordered from Amazon.

To keep the price-to-the-consumer/B-to-B market low, employers seek out workers with just enough experience to do the task well so that they can be paid as low compensation as possible.

The new college graduate who had an internship at a marketing firm specializing with PPC would look a lot more attractive to the budget of the employer than an applicant with 6 years experience. Sure, the newbie will probably fly the coop after 2 years but those 2 years could be very profitable for the business.

More and more help-wanted ads indicate that new college graduates are preferred. Since the 90-yar-old could just be graduating college, that phrasing gets employers off the hook on age bias.

In addition, there has emerged a new human resources model - Burn & Earn. It is described in "Disrupted" by Dan Lyons. Here that hilarious book can be ordered from Amazon. Essentially the game is about bringing in a bunch of enthusiastic newbies, training them to do A but not B, make a bundle, and expect them to keep exiting. Repeat. 

Interesting, though, there is a business, based in Manhattan and Chicago, which seems to champion deep expertise. That's the public affairs firm The Dilenschneider Group. On its website it has a section listing its major players and their years of experience. Here you can click it open.

Listed, for example, are:

•  Fred Bona - 40 years
•  Bob Dilenschneider - 30 years
•  Art Gormley - 30 years.

In the fast-moving world of communications, that's counter-trend.

After all, the sandbox, more and more in a digital universe, is custom-made for digital natives. Clients and prospects know the importance of everything from online influencers to local search engine optimization (SEO). So the new toys in the sandbox include everything from help paying off student loans to free food. 

The question is if businesses such as The Dilenschneider Group which position and package long years of experience as a plus have created the unique edge? Or, are they at a new kind of disadvantage? More importantly, does that give the business leverage with price point? 

As those issues are being duked out in the court of law, the hunt for work, and business branding, as early as the age 40 those needing income are finding doors slammed shut because of bias. Here is the article I published on that. If there is a severe economic downturn, that could worsen, of course. Because of their relatively high compensation, the aging usually have a target on their backs. 

Here is my book, free to click open, on how to navigate around all that Download Outwitting ageism. And here, also free, is one on being able to change. Addiction to any comfort zone can mean professional death. 

Full Disclosure: In my early 40s, Corporate America purged itself of middle-aged middle managers. I had to reimage myself as an entrepreneur. Having gotten the hang of how to change, I plan to stay working 60 hours a week until I am 80. Then, I will re-evaluate.

Readers are invited to submit thoughtful commentaries on this issue. Please include content, identity of author, photo, and contact information. Appropriate articles, up to 700 words, will be posted on Law and More. Please send to janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Depressed Lawyers - Relocate Where There's Still a Neighborood Bar (but you have to hurry)

It is really happening: Folks no longer look forward to bellying up at the neighborhood bar. Or, as it had been called in the old days "tavern" or "saloon."

For years, churches and reformers of all sorts have been praying for that.

Remember when kids were instructed to shake down dad for the paycheck before he headed into the bar?

And there were also those buckets of blood on Saturday night when fights broke out.

Usually women, at least the respectable kind, had not been welcome. In Hudson County, New Jersey, back then, nice woman had to sit at tables. They weren't allowed near the bar. 

In Boston Magazine, Gabriel O'Malley documents that the neighborhood bar is fading as an institution in the culture of the U.S., Britain, and Ireland.  

Essentially, "neighborhood bar" is defined as hosting regulars, allowing casual dress, and having no theme. In the U.S. alone, Nielsen found that between 2004 and 2014 one in six shut down.

The reasons include:

•  Less drinking in general
•  More excercise
•  Struggling to connect through digital devices
•  More at-home with Amazon Prime, Netflix, and HBO
•  Breaking open a bottle of wine at home.

Sure, that development seems good. Yeah, demon alcohol destroys families. 

But, actually, eliminating the neighborhood bar can push a community and individuals deeper into loneliness - a growing international epidemic.

In America, from the get-go, neighborhood bars functioned as third places. Even in Puritan times, there was plenty of socializing that way. Getting intoxicated wasn't a reason for censure. The drunk was only tossed out of the bar when aberrant behavior got really out of hand. In her amazing book "Drinking in America: Our Secret History" Susan Cheever chronicles how Americana boozing is. Or, was.

And English majors know all about how pubs had been part of the social fabric in Britain and Ireland. 

Could any other form of third place spring up to fill that void?

If it does, singlehandedly it might reduce the loneliness-related clinical depression and suicidal ideation.

But, until it does, lawyers losing their emotional footing might find a place to live with a neighborhood bar. The more run-down it is, the better. And if you do, Law.com can put a halt to all those articles about mental illness in the legal sector. 

Not getting results from your marketing communications? Complimentary consultation – janegenova374@gmail.com.