Fired summer associate Forum

[Yeezus.]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

[BirdLawExpert2020]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

Exactly what I heard too.

[Aptitude]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

Will probably have a career either in the White House or on the Supreme Court

[pithypike]

Yikes. Call career services ASAP. You need to find something.

[lawlzschool]

Yikes. Call career services ASAP. You need to find something.

...also maybe stop fondling non consenting colleagues...

[Zipman]

Shocked anyone reads ATL. I've never seen so many shitty puns forced so aggressively down a reader's throat

[deanrobbins1]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

LMFAO any context for this? was it at a firm party or the youngish "fun" partners taking associates out for bottle service (I remember how "cool" some ppl in my class thought that was) and the SA thought her dancing with/kinda near him = invitation to get gropey? or did he just spot her by the copy machine and "grab 'em by the pussy" ??

[coramnonjudice]

Is there a good alternative to ATL?

[cavalier1138]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

LMFAO any context for this? was it at a firm party or the youngish "fun" partners taking associates out for bottle service (I remember how "cool" some ppl in my class thought that was) and the SA thought her dancing with/kinda near him = invitation to get gropey? or did he just spot her by the copy machine and "grab 'em by the pussy" ??

Is one of those versions better than the other?

[QContinuum]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

LMFAO any context for this? was it at a firm party or the youngish "fun" partners taking associates out for bottle service (I remember how "cool" some ppl in my class thought that was) and the SA thought her dancing with/kinda near him = invitation to get gropey? or did he just spot her by the copy machine and "grab 'em by the pussy" ??

Is one of those versions better than the other?

The implication seems to be that it's more "excusable" to grope someone at an after-hours party than during normal working hours in the copyroom, but it's flatly wrong. Attending a party while female does not remotely imply consent to being groped.

[lawlzschool]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

LMFAO any context for this? was it at a firm party or the youngish "fun" partners taking associates out for bottle service (I remember how "cool" some ppl in my class thought that was) and the SA thought her dancing with/kinda near him = invitation to get gropey? or did he just spot her by the copy machine and "grab 'em by the pussy" ??

Is one of those versions better than the other?

The implication seems to be that it's more "excusable" to grope someone at an after-hours party than during normal working hours in the copyroom, but it's flatly wrong. Attending a party while female does not remotely imply consent to being groped.

Yea I don’t really see the LMFAO in this

[impactplayer]

Can't believe OP came in here asking how to save his career after he sexually assaulted another person. You've got more to worry about than landing another biglaw gig, brother.

[Halp]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

LMFAO any context for this? was it at a firm party or the youngish "fun" partners taking associates out for bottle service (I remember how "cool" some ppl in my class thought that was) and the SA thought her dancing with/kinda near him = invitation to get gropey? or did he just spot her by the copy machine and "grab 'em by the pussy" ??

Is one of those versions better than the other?

The implication seems to be that it's more "excusable" to grope someone at an after-hours party than during normal working hours in the copyroom, but it's flatly wrong. Attending a party while female does not remotely imply consent to being groped.

So glad to see someone else say this. The implication in the original question is just so insane to me. It’s just nuts that in 2019, a woman dancing at a party is still seen by some as somehow less “pristine” or “blameless” (for lack of a better word) than a woman working during normal office hours in a copyroom. I guess nice girls don’t dance, or something? Or maybe female summers are just supposed to stay off the dance floor if there are males on it, but the guys are free to dance without worrying about *the implications* of doing so? (Cue the inevitable “but what if she was bumping and grinding? Exactly how sexily are women allowed to dance and still complain when they’re groped?? How am I supposed to know what women WANT???” debate.)

[cavalier1138]

I guess nice girls don’t dance, or something?

If "Dirty Dancing" and "Footloose" taught me anything, it was that nice girls don't dance.

And that nobody puts Baby in a corner.

[objctnyrhnr]

Have we gotten more confirmation than the atl article that the firing did, in fact, result from an unwanted grope.

If so, I suppose I am wondering if everybody who came to OP’s defense immediately are feeling a little silly right now?

More broadly and regardless of whether the offense was actually a grope (although I am now thinking it likely was), I think that the sentiment that somebody has to do something horrible egregious to be fired as a summer is the correct one, IMO. And from that, even without any confirmation as to what OP actually did, I’m just not sure that many things that a summer can do to warrant that sanction are particularly defensible.

(Cue the ‘innocent until proven guilty’-chanting folks who always seem to forget that this degree of benefit of the doubt is literally only a thing in a criminal trial)

[Anonymous User]

I was fired from an UNPAID summer legal internship in August 2016 (2-3 days before the conclusion of the internship) for much something much less awful than groping. Sh*t happens.

[objctnyrhnr]

I was fired from an UNPAID summer legal internship in August 2016 (2-3 days before the conclusion of the internship) for much something much less awful than groping. Sh*t happens.

I know your intention was to imply that the situation you are describing is analogous. Not sure if you’re in BL or anything, but based on my experience in like the amlaw50, I just don’t think I what you described (ie unpaid summer internship) is analogous tbh.

[cavalier1138]

I was fired from an UNPAID summer legal internship in August 2016 (2-3 days before the conclusion of the internship) for much something much less awful than groping. Sh*t happens.

I know your intention was to imply that the situation you are describing is analogous. Not sure if you’re in BL or anything, but based on my experience in like the amlaw50, I just don’t think I what you described (ie unpaid summer internship) is analogous tbh.

Yeah, the threshold for big firms firing summer associates has been established as ridiculously high. I'm sure the ACLU could fire an intern for being an incompetent mess, or just for not getting along with everyone. Getting fired from an SA position requires seriously bad conduct (like the stuff already discussed in this thread).

[pithypike]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

LMFAO any context for this? was it at a firm party or the youngish "fun" partners taking associates out for bottle service (I remember how "cool" some ppl in my class thought that was) and the SA thought her dancing with/kinda near him = invitation to get gropey? or did he just spot her by the copy machine and "grab 'em by the pussy" ??

Is one of those versions better than the other?

The implication seems to be that it's more "excusable" to grope someone at an after-hours party than during normal working hours in the copyroom, but it's flatly wrong. Attending a party while female does not remotely imply consent to being groped.

So glad to see someone else say this. The implication in the original question is just so insane to me. It’s just nuts that in 2019, a woman dancing at a party is still seen by some as somehow less “pristine” or “blameless” (for lack of a better word) than a woman working during normal office hours in a copyroom. I guess nice girls don’t dance, or something? Or maybe female summers are just supposed to stay off the dance floor if there are males on it, but the guys are free to dance without worrying about *the implications* of doing so? (Cue the inevitable “but what if she was bumping and grinding? Exactly how sexily are women allowed to dance and still complain when they’re groped?? How am I supposed to know what women WANT???” debate.)

That is a fair debate though. If two people are dancing, for example, and hands are already in play, the line is indeed blurred on what would constitute groping and what would constitute welcome escalation.

That's why you never, ever, ever initiate anything ever with anybody who is remotely tied to your professional environment.

anyway we're all assuming we know what OP did to precipitate this, which is wrong.

[cavalier1138]

That is a fair debate though. If two people are dancing, for example, and hands are already in play, the line is indeed blurred on what would constitute groping and what would constitute welcome escalation.

Please explain how dancing "escalates." Is the idea that if someone starts doing the Charleston that they're naturally up for doing a Lindy Hop? Is tango an escalation from salsa? Inquiring minds want to know!

[Halp]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

LMFAO any context for this? was it at a firm party or the youngish "fun" partners taking associates out for bottle service (I remember how "cool" some ppl in my class thought that was) and the SA thought her dancing with/kinda near him = invitation to get gropey? or did he just spot her by the copy machine and "grab 'em by the pussy" ??

Is one of those versions better than the other?

The implication seems to be that it's more "excusable" to grope someone at an after-hours party than during normal working hours in the copyroom, but it's flatly wrong. Attending a party while female does not remotely imply consent to being groped.

So glad to see someone else say this. The implication in the original question is just so insane to me. It’s just nuts that in 2019, a woman dancing at a party is still seen by some as somehow less “pristine” or “blameless” (for lack of a better word) than a woman working during normal office hours in a copyroom. I guess nice girls don’t dance, or something? Or maybe female summers are just supposed to stay off the dance floor if there are males on it, but the guys are free to dance without worrying about *the implications* of doing so? (Cue the inevitable “but what if she was bumping and grinding? Exactly how sexily are women allowed to dance and still complain when they’re groped?? How am I supposed to know what women WANT???” debate.)

That is a fair debate though. If two people are dancing, for example, and hands are already in play, the line is indeed blurred on what would constitute groping and what would constitute welcome escalation.

That's why you never, ever, ever initiate anything ever with anybody who is remotely tied to your professional environment.

anyway we're all assuming we know what OP did to precipitate this, which is wrong.

Here we go. I knew it.

What does “hands are already in play” mean? Whose hands? Where? For how long? Why does non-groping “hands” behavior at a work event justify an assumption of a person’s consent to groping? And where can I as a woman look up these intricate, intricate rules so I don’t accidentally trigger nonverbal consent that I didn’t mean to give but is somehow objectively binding? A girl’s gotta know!

How, exactly, is groping an appropriate “escalation” from dancing at an after party? Why is a woman’s dancing assumed to be sexual behavior? Even granting that, why is a woman’s sexual behavior assumed to be consent to sexual contact from others?

Here’s a good rule: nobody should touch others sexually without getting unequivocal consent. Not “it’s arguably consent” or “it’s a fair debate that it was consent.” I’ve yet to see a reason not to follow or *impose* this rule other than “but it makes my PP sad ”. If there is doubt, you shouldn’t do it. And if you are afraid that you cannot accurately read nonverbal cues, or that those saucy little vixens on the dance floor will FOOL YOU into nonconsensually groping them with their siren song, then apply the Mike Pence rule to the dance floor and just don’t dance with women. Idk this isn’t difficult.

[pithypike]

When dancing, hands often find their way onto a woman's waist. Movement down to hips is not atypical, but could be construed negatively by the recipient if the initiator has misread the situation.

There are gray areas in life, especially in the murkiness of socializing and early stages of romance. What one construes as groping could be construed by another as a typical step in escalating romance/intimacy.

This isn't really a big stretch.

I used to date a lot, and I never asked a woman for consent verbally, just read the cues and took the lead. No issues. I do agree with you that people who don't have this skillset should stay in their lane though; otherwise they may end up like this dude (assuming this is what happened).

[Anonymous User]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

I heard it was Baker Botts

[pithypike]

The word on the street is that a summer associate was fired from a V10 non-NYC office for fondling another summer.

I heard it was Baker Botts

I thought OP said biglaw?

[Halp]

When dancing, hands often find their way onto a woman's waist. Movement down to hips is not atypical, but could be construed negatively by the recipient if the initiator has misread the situation.

There are gray areas in life, especially in the murkiness of socializing and early stages of romance. What one construes as groping could be construed by another as a typical step in escalating romance/intimacy.

This isn't really a big stretch.

I used to date a lot, and I never asked a woman for consent verbally, just read the cues and took the lead. No issues. I do agree with you that people who don't have this skillset should stay in their lane though; otherwise they may end up like this dude (assuming this is what happened.)

What you’ve described is initiating groping, based on what you think is consent. Now, maybe you personally read signals right in the dating context, and maybe you don’t. I don’t know. But that’s beside the point I’m trying to make.

What I’m saying is that at a work after party, it’s not a dating context, and it’s just not okay to assume consent to put your hands anywhere on anyone else, no matter how much of a twinkle you think you see in a woman’s eye or how she’s dancing. I just don’t think this should be a controversial line to draw.