A law firm in Boston put out a job application to be an associate in their law firm….and be paid 10k a year. The associate would have the option to earn on business they brought in but still, the salary is 10k. I think there is something kind of interesting here. The idea that you would get experience and have the opportunity to bring in business isn’t the worst option. Not all attorneys know what they are doing when they start. They are being paid six figures but the partners still have to teach them everything. WIth this method, if someone really wants to be an attorney and is having a tough time getting a job, taking this gig just might be an interesting proposition.
I realize that if you have taken the time to go to law school that this kind of salary could seem like an insult. Further, not really sure how many people can live off of 10k in Boston. However, if you knew you could be fast tracked to making partner, you would get valuable experience and had the opportunity to bring in clients, it could be something to consider. Money is important of course so if you can’t eat or have a roof over your head, this job wouldn’t be the answer. I like the idea though as I think more law students would benefit from this type of opportunity. Usually if you start in a big firm, you may not have as much experience with bigger cases as they want to train you for a few years (which, there is nothing wrong with that either). I just think for the right person, this could be a promising opportunity. Oh – and 32 people applied so it looks like for some, this could be the right fit!
Hello Not So Legal’ers! I did a video post about this but had to follow up….growing up in Dallas, I went to Walmart. Why did I go to Walmart you might ask? I don’t really recall but I vaguely remember the florescent lights and the many sections of weird shoes that no one wants to buy.
Aside from the florescent lights, apparently Walmart likes to discriminate against women (allegedly). Five women brought a lawsuit against Walmart and thousands more joined in as they all allege sexual discrimination. One supervisor told one of the plaintiff’s that she should get “dolled up” when she went to ask for a raise. Walmart is standing by their claim that they give equal opportunities to everyone and always help women advance in their careers. The joy of this case is that the reason why it may actually even go anywhere is because SO many women came forward to join the class so the lawsuit could be filed.
The Supreme Court is going to hear the case to decide whether these group of women will classify as a “class” for the purpose of filing a class action lawsuit. Walmart claims they are missing the “commonality” element, which means that the group of women suing do not have enough in common to be considered a class for the purposes of the filing. I am fairly certain they all probably have some story that would be around the idea that someone told them to get “dolled up” for an interview.
Cases like these can really create a difference in the workplace and differences for the better. I had a supervisor once ask me if I thought the real reason men met took meetings with me was because they wanted to date me. Another one once asked why I didn’t wear more skirts. Random sexual questions don’t just happen at Walmart, it happens everywhere. I am glad these women had the courage to speak up! For all the men out there, would love to hear of when women have been treating you inappropriately at the workplace. Curious to see how many stories we can hear about that!
Always remember to honor your power and stay tuned for the next posting .
A reporter was fired from her news reporting job because her employer found out she was a stripper on the side. How did her employer find out that Sarah Tressler, the stripper, was in fact a stripper? I guess everyone has a blog these days as Sara had a blog where she disclosed that she was a high society reporter by day and stripper by night. I am going to check out her blog by the way.
Anyway, her employer contends she didn’t disclose she was a stripper in her employment application so that is why she was fired. Her attorney, Gloria Allred, maintains that strippers are mainly female so if she was fired because of being a stripper, that would have an adverse effect on women and woman are a protected class when it comes to sexual discrimination, therefore she was discriminated against when she was fired. Not sure I think it is a strong enough argument nor am I following the argument. What is the adverse effect on women? The next argument Allred makes is that Sara was an independent contractor, not an employee of the the strip club so technically one could argue she had no obligation to list the job on her employment application. Don’t follow that one either as when someone asks your job history, usually people put any kind of job — employee or independent contractor. I would say that stripping kind of fits into that category of things that are probably not the most optimal for a job description and I am pretty sure that is the reason that is why she left it out. Soooo, what do we think? What if her side job was at Starbucks and she didn’t disclose it — do you think she would have been fired for that too?
I don’t condone stripping. I think there are other ways to make money. However, I am not sure I agree that she should be fired. An employer has a right to decide who they want working for them and what kind of behavior is acceptable but what someone does on their own time should be up to them so long as it doesn’t interfere with their job. The high society thing and disclosing it on a blog was probably not the brightest idea. Too bad she isn’t reporting on sports or maybe on the automotive section of the newspaper. Probably would not have been as many issues there.
It is interesting how the topic of sexual harrassment came up when David Letterman admitted to having sex with some of his workers. Is that what I should call them? Workers? Colleagues? Women who wanted to sleep their way to the top? Not that I think any of them intentionally would ever say that is what they were doing but it is an interesting concept to think through.
The US Equal Opportunity Commission website describes sexual harassment as the following:
The victim as well as the harasser may be a woman or a man. The victim does not have to be of the opposite sex.
The harasser can be the victim’s supervisor, an agent of the employer, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or a non-employee.
The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.
Unlawful sexual harassment may occur without economic injury to or discharge of the victim.
The harasser’s conduct must be unwelcome.
I can’t help but think that any conduct that David Letterman was ”conducting” was unwelcome. I am not taking sides as I am all for women’s rights, etc, etc but I would have to hear more details and “the other side of the story” to see this as anything but a case of a man in power and women that are enamored with that power. The person I feel the most sorry for is David Letterman’s wife.
I received an interesting email from someone asking me to address an issue that often finds itself in the workplace. What happens when you are passed on being promoted within a company and the job is given to someone that you feel doesn’t have the appropriate skill set and received the promotion based on “connections” with upper management? My first inclination is to say I’m sorry because that is never a pleasant situation in the first place. However, time to put on the legal thinking cap to see if there is anything that can be done about it.
The first word that comes to mind is discrimination. Is there discrimination in this situation? Employers have a right to promote within a company but if there is actual discrimination in the way the person was chosen, there might be a claim there. The Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Laws (http://www.eeoc.gov/abouteeo/overview_laws.html) describe the different laws that are in place to protect against discrimination in the workplace. These laws are increasingly growing and changing as clearly there is a need for employees to be protected these days. However, I know there are certain people who take the position that if you don’t get what you want, tough luck — just simply go out and get a new job. I find that mentality is in the minority as most people first think of how to get back at the employer rather than being proactive and looking for a new (and perhaps even better) job.
If there was an intentional act of discrimination on the employer’s part (ie: there is proof that the job was given to someone else because of a race or gender issue), then certainly you should explore all of your rights. In most states before you file a civil claim, you must first file a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Most states have local agencies called “Fair Employment Practice Agencies” that regulate anti-discrimination laws. Be sure to check your local state listing for this information but some helpful tips on filing a claim can be found here: http://www.eeoc.gov/charge/overview_charge_filing.html. Further, if you have an employment agreement where it was agreed that you would be promoted at a certain time, I would recommend taking a closer look at your agreement to see whether you have a breach of contract action.
Ultimately what you really have to decide is how much time and effort you want to spend fighting a battle against your employer. It is easy to understand the anger and frustration that might come along in this situation. However, getting angry only affects you and certainly not your employer. They don’t care; they have already made the decision regarding the promotion. I am a firm believer that everyone has a right to stand up for themselves, along with being able to work in an environment where they can grow, succeed and be encouraged to do their best. Don’t ever feel as if you have to stay “stuck” in a job. If someone at your company is getting promoted based on “connections” but that person can’t do the job, ultimately it is “too bad, so sad” for the employer. The key is even if you decide to file a claim, hopefully you have already made the decision to leave and are on a better path anyway.
. 
Let's make the law entertaining, shall we? 
