Conflict with same-year colleague Forum

[cavalier1138]

I'm glad this thread is here for people to refer back to if there's ever a question about whether sexism is still an issue in the legal field.

Also, get your shit together, people. Some of the posts here sound like they're straight out of a "Mad Men" script.

[emkay625]

.......wtf dudes.

[Anonymous User]

I'm glad this thread is here for people to refer back to if there's ever a question about whether sexism is still an issue in the legal field.

Also, get your shit together, people. Some of the posts here sound like they're straight out of a "Mad Men" script.

Sexism and racism. It's always funny to me when people think others are exaggerating it.

[rpupkin]

I'm stunned by the degree of sexism on display in this thread. I completely agree with Nony.

For the record I never said or implied that I agree with Kellyfrost's opinion. I asked the question, "What if the stereotype were negative towards men?" just to see if A Nony Mouse's reasoning would be coherent and internally consistent. And I think there is nothing wrong in making that inquiry, because any accusation of bigotry must be bullet-proof in its underlying reasoning.

Huh? First, the sentiment "stereotypes based on gender—when applied in a professional setting—are harmful" is not an accusation of bigotry. Second, why is there a special "bullet-proof reasoning" requirement when someone asserts or suggests that gender stereotypes are harmful?

[Mr. Blackacre]

Sometimes this forum actually is cancer. The comparison to Mad Men is pretty adequate, and I sincerely hope I never work with any of you a**holes. Saying this as an "emotionally stable" man, whatever the f. that means.

[lawhopeful100]

I think this has gotten off topic, but I agree that, generally, there is a different dynamic with asking someone of the same sex as you to get a beer vs. asking someone of the opposite sex. That's not to say OP can't approach in that way, even if they are the opposite sex. As others have said, they know the individual the best. But there are actual and perceived differences between me going out alone after work on Friday with just a same sex coworker and getting drinks vs. getting drinks with someone of the opposite sex. Not to get too Mike Pence over here lol.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I give up.

[UVA2B]

I give up.

You're doing the Lord's work here Nony. Don't let those who might just never get it/move the goal posts at will get you down.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. I talked with colleague; colleague is still incredibly pissed. Not someone I want to work with in the future but I think we can get through this matter without killing each other.

Our "resolution" is that I handle the next set of tasks in front of us without any input from colleague as to what our status is, what needs to be done, etc. It will add a ton of time on my end but if that's the penance I pay to preserve harmony here I'll do it (kind of seems fitting for not having done the work previously and made colleague spend the time).

Also I couched things in gender ambiguous terms intentionally to avoid this kind of sidebar argument. Sorry Nony/thread.

[kellyfrost]

OP here. I talked with colleague; colleague is still incredibly pissed. Not someone I want to work with in the future but I think we can get through this matter without killing each other.

Our "resolution" is that I handle the next set of tasks in front of us without any input from colleague as to what our status is, what needs to be done, etc. It will add a ton of time on my end but if that's the penance I pay to preserve harmony here I'll do it (kind of seems fitting for not having done the work previously and made colleague spend the time).

Also I couched things in gender ambiguous terms intentionally to avoid this kind of sidebar argument. Sorry Nony/thread.

I'm glad you put resolution in quotes. It doesn't really sound like that great of a resolution. You recognize your failures and mistakes and I think that is important here. I'm not going to go any further beyond that.

[dabigchina]

I have no views on gender. I just think this person OP is working with objectively sucks if they are throwing a fit about work the firm is doing for free.

I thought the whole point of pro bono is to get litigation experience, not "credit". It seems like the other person would want as much of the experience for themselves as possible.

[Phil Brooks]

I'm stunned by the degree of sexism on display in this thread. I completely agree with Nony.

For the record I never said or implied that I agree with Kellyfrost's opinion. I asked the question, "What if the stereotype were negative towards men?" just to see if A Nony Mouse's reasoning would be coherent and internally consistent. And I think there is nothing wrong in making that inquiry, because any accusation of bigotry must be bullet-proof in its underlying reasoning.

Huh? First, the sentiment "stereotypes based on gender—when applied in a professional setting—are harmful" is not an accusation of bigotry. Second, why is there a special "bullet-proof reasoning" requirement when someone asserts or suggests that gender stereotypes are harmful?

No, the sentiment was, "It is sexist to change your behavior towards a coworker based on beliefs in stereotypes about how men and women behave." It was an accusation of bigotry. I wanted to know if the content of the stereotype mattered (i.e. does it matter whether the stereotype is negative towards men or towards women?). A Nony Mouse answered that no, the content of the stereotype does not matter, just that it's a stereotype based on gender. Fair enough.

[Npret]

OP here. I talked with colleague; colleague is still incredibly pissed. Not someone I want to work with in the future but I think we can get through this matter without killing each other.

Our "resolution" is that I handle the next set of tasks in front of us without any input from colleague as to what our status is, what needs to be done, etc. It will add a ton of time on my end but if that's the penance I pay to preserve harmony here I'll do it (kind of seems fitting for not having done the work previously and made colleague spend the time).

Also I couched things in gender ambiguous terms intentionally to avoid this kind of sidebar argument. Sorry Nony/thread.

Why didn't you pull your weight from the beginning? Nevermind that's water under the bridge now.
Anyway it's great you got to a good resolution. Good job handling it OP

[lolwat]

I just think this person OP is working with objectively sucks if they are throwing a fit about work the firm is doing for free.

I thought the whole point of pro bono is to get litigation experience, not "credit". It seems like the other person would want as much of the experience for themselves as possible.

Depends on a lot of factors I'd imagine. For examples

1. A lot of "litigation experience" in a pro bono case doesn't really differ that much from a paying case, so that colleague may not necessarily gain anything from having to do more of it.
2. The more time this colleague has to spend on the pro bono case is less time they spend on paying cases. Some firms appear to put a cap on how much credit an associate get for doing pro bono matters. So if there's 200 hours worth of work to be done, and if they put in 180 hours and you put in 20, well, I can see a legitimate cause of frustration if a lot of that time might not count for them.
3. On the issue of credit, many firms do "high impact" pro bono cases that generates media coverage, awards, etc. And in that sense, if an associate putting in near-zero hours gets publicly recognized for "their work" on the case as much as an associate who puts in all the work... well, that's also a legitimate cause for frustration.

That's just three things I can think of off the top of my head. Having someone not pull their weight but yet nonetheless perceived as having done equal work is really shitty for the person/people who do put in the work.

[Npret]

Also OP doesn't need a reputation for taking "credit" for other people's work with the partners, associates or whoever. OP made a mistake and fixed it.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. I talked with colleague; colleague is still incredibly pissed. Not someone I want to work with in the future but I think we can get through this matter without killing each other.

Our "resolution" is that I handle the next set of tasks in front of us without any input from colleague as to what our status is, what needs to be done, etc. It will add a ton of time on my end but if that's the penance I pay to preserve harmony here I'll do it (kind of seems fitting for not having done the work previously and made colleague spend the time).

Also I couched things in gender ambiguous terms intentionally to avoid this kind of sidebar argument. Sorry Nony/thread.

Why didn't you pull your weight from the beginning? Nevermind that's water under the bridge now.
Anyway it's great you got to a good resolution. Good job handling it OP

OP here. This is a valid question and appropriately colors the reason I know I'm decently to blame here:

1. I'm corporate and other person is lit. This is lit-related, so the experience helps colleague more than me.

2. It also interests colleague more than me. I hate drafting filings and figuring out the minutia of filing nonsense. Nevertheless I signed up for the matter so I can't really use that as an excuse.

3. I've had 200-250 billable months consistently now. I suspect I am billing more than colleague but am not and never tried to get into a hours-dick-measuring contest on that point.


What I should have done is pulled my weight from the beginning and checked in with colleague at the start. As I can't go back in time this seems like my best option without making waves.

[Lettow]

Is this biglaw? I wonder to what extent angry coworker woke up one day and realized he/she was incredibly stressed at work and didn't have time to work on pro bono project, reimagining how things got to this point--turning himself/herself into the victim. Now as a "resolution," he/she doesn't have to work on the project and can focus on other matters, relieving the stress. Such a thing sounds typical of a man/woman.

[Lettow]

I agree that, generally, there is a different dynamic with asking someone of the same sex as you to get a beer vs. asking someone of the opposite sex. That's not to say OP can't approach in that way, even if they are the opposite sex. As others have said, they know the individual the best. But there are actual and perceived differences between me going out alone after work on Friday with just a same sex coworker and getting drinks vs. getting drinks with someone of the opposite sex.

I don't see how gender makes any difference in how you would interact with a coworker. The coworker is either an acquaintance or a workbro. You couldn't offer a beer to an acquaintance without it being awkward to a degree, regardless of gender. You could offer a beer to a workbro without it being awkward to a degree, regardless of gender. What difference does gender alone add to the equation?

[jchiles]

Kind of sucks for your client that one of the attorneys is deliberately holding back on offering their input (informed by prior months of work on the project) and for your firm since you agreed to a resolution that results in your needlessly spending more time on the matter but whatever glad you got it figured out.

[Easterbork]

No, dude, you are absolutely wrong on this one.

I'll reserve judgment on who is right and wrong until OP reports back with how the situation was handled and ultimately resolved. Again, most important is that OP gets this resolved.

This could have been avoided if you instead asked, 'does your coworker identify as male or female?', instead of looking at gender in such set in stone terms.

[ballouttacontrol]

No, dude, you are absolutely wrong on this one.

I'll reserve judgment on who is right and wrong until OP reports back with how the situation was handled and ultimately resolved. Again, most important is that OP gets this resolved.

This could have been avoided if you instead asked, 'does your coworker identify as male or female?', instead of looking at gender in such set in stone terms.

lmaooooo

[quiver]

OP here. I talked with colleague; colleague is still incredibly pissed. Not someone I want to work with in the future but I think we can get through this matter without killing each other.

Our "resolution" is that I handle the next set of tasks in front of us without any input from colleague as to what our status is, what needs to be done, etc. It will add a ton of time on my end but if that's the penance I pay to preserve harmony here I'll do it (kind of seems fitting for not having done the work previously and made colleague spend the time).

Also I couched things in gender ambiguous terms intentionally to avoid this kind of sidebar argument. Sorry Nony/thread.

Why didn't you pull your weight from the beginning? Nevermind that's water under the bridge now.
Anyway it's great you got to a good resolution. Good job handling it OP

OP here. This is a valid question and appropriately colors the reason I know I'm decently to blame here:

1. I'm corporate and other person is lit. This is lit-related, so the experience helps colleague more than me.

2. It also interests colleague more than me. I hate drafting filings and figuring out the minutia of filing nonsense. Nevertheless I signed up for the matter so I can't really use that as an excuse.

3. I've had 200-250 billable months consistently now. I suspect I am billing more than colleague but am not and never tried to get into a hours-dick-measuring contest on that point.


What I should have done is pulled my weight from the beginning and checked in with colleague at the start. As I can't go back in time this seems like my best option without making waves.

OP, while you messed up from the beginning by not pulling your weight, you're way ahead of a lot of lawyers by realizing it was your fault and trying to make amends. Props to you and good luck in your case.

(For the record, the other associate seems off base in flipping out over this. S/he should have just gone to OP and said something like, "hey, I'm drowning on this pro bono case, can you please pitch in more?" It sounds like OP would have been receptive to that.)

Also, the gender debate in this thread is just dumb. Apologizing and offering to take on more work was the way to go regardless of gender. Totally with Nony here.

[A. Nony Mouse]

No, dude, you are absolutely wrong on this one.

I'll reserve judgment on who is right and wrong until OP reports back with how the situation was handled and ultimately resolved. Again, most important is that OP gets this resolved.

This could have been avoided if you instead asked, 'does your coworker identify as male or female?', instead of looking at gender in such set in stone terms.

Doesn't actually make a difference, but since you just wanted to make a cheap shot I realize you knew that already.

[star fox]

I feel like OP is just intentionally not using gendered pronouns now.

[bruinfan10]

I mean, these people are poking fun at you, right Nony? There's no way they actually believe that the appropriate strategy for workplace conflict resolution depends on the gender of the angry coworker. This is trolling.