MASSACHUSETTS VERY IMPORTANT Forum

Discussions related to the bar exam are found in this forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
PreventPA

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2021 4:34 pm

MASSACHUSETTS VERY IMPORTANT

Post by PreventPA » Sun Dec 05, 2021 4:40 pm

(In 2020 the Board of Bar Examiners apparently had NOBODY in the position of Manager of Testing & Operation. Unreal!! Keeping that position filled would have been Executive Director Marilyn Wellington's job!) https://perma.cc/RU6Q-AYU3
📷
The following statements were made subsequent to the Massachusetts Bar Association's investigation into Ms. Wellington in 2008, shortly before Ms. Wellington was terminated from her Executive Director of the Massachusetts Bar Association (“MBA”) position, by the MBA for cause, and escorted from the building in 2008:
· “The budget put together and recommended by [Ms. Wellington] for Fiscal Year 2008 proposed a deficit of $850,000 and as such, was rejected by the MBA Executive Management Board. As a result, the Budget and Finance Committee then began to investigate and prepare a revised budget. When [the MBA President] delved into budget details, [Ms. Wellington] often refused to provide him with information and documents that he needed and requested”;
· “[The MBA] states that in open defiance of [the MBA President’s] request, [Ms. Wellington] withheld the contract of the controller who she had recently hired, and later when [the MBA President] was able to obtain that contract, [Ms. Wellington] lied about the circumstances surrounding the re-hiring of the controller”;
“[Ms. Wellington] lied about the circumstances surrounding the re-hiring of the controller. The controller had been a former employee who left and was rehired a few months later by [Ms. Wellington] at almost double his prior salary together with a bonus clause that rewarded the controller with additional money if he brought the actual budget in lower than the proposed budget. Due to the highly inflated nature of the proposed budget, this caused leadership concern, and raised a conflict issue regarding the contract terms that appeared to give the [Ms. Wellington] and/or the controller the ability to increase his compensation by manipulating proposed budgets”;
· “[Ms. Wellington] declared first that she was not required to have anyone review or approve such a contract. She then later stated that she had shown it to and discussed it with the MBA's general counsel in advance. Neither statement was true;”
· “[Ms. Wellington] stated she did not believe any of the conduct she had complained of at the MBA was due to any protected classification and that she did not believe that any of the conduct was sexual harassment. She confirmed that her claim against the MBA was solely for retaliation for what she believed was a suggestion of gender discrimination raised by her attorney during the contract negotiations that had ended March 2008. The investigation concluded that there was no basis for the [Ms. Wellington]'s assertions of retaliation or harassment”;
· “[The MBA] states that prior to, concurrent with and independent of the investigation, it received ongoing complaints about [Ms. Wellington]'s ability to do her job and conducted a thorough investigation”;
“[The MBA] states the four ‘unconflicted’ officers who had not been recused from the process [i.e., the MBA’s Treasurer, Secretary, and two Vice-Presidents] began to conduct their own investigation of the complaints they had been receiving from MBA staff and others concerning [Ms. Wellington], i.e., the working conditions created by [Ms. Wellington]; her poor performance; her attempts to manipulate opinion; her retaliatory treatment of staff if they did not concur with her position in her dispute with the MBA; her false statements and irresponsibility exhibited with regard to the budget and the controller's contract; and her refusal to communicate with the MBA's General Counsel. In addition, a number of employees resigned from the organization and their exit interviews were replete with stories about a dysfunctional organization and the poor leadership of [Ms. Wellington]. Those reports and interviews ultimately led to a long list of charges against [Ms. Wellington] with respect to her poor job performance. As a result, [the MBA] provided [Ms. Wellington] with a notice of intent to terminate on December 11, 2008 in accordance with her employment contract and discreetly but necessarily escorted her from the building”;
· “[The MBA] states that upon learning that [Ms. Wellington] might assert gender discrimination or harassment complaints, [the MBA] took prompt remedial action and in mid August 2008, engaged an independent law firm, Conn Kavanaugh Rosenthal Peisch & Ford, LLP; who completed a thorough and detailed investigation of her claims in November 25, 2008. [The MBA] states that the investigation concluded that there was no basis for [Ms. Wellington]'s assertions of retaliation or harassment but the investigation strongly suggested [Ms. Wellington] had interposed her complaints for the sole purpose of delaying and preemptively derailing what she believed to be her imminent termination for cause”; and
“[The MBA] states that prior to, concurrent with and independent of the Conn Kavanaugh investigation, [the MBA] had received ongoing complaints about [Ms. Wellington]'s ability to do her job, her divisiveness, her dishonesty, her refusal to provide important information to leadership, her responsibility for lack of staff morale and her attempts to retaliate against staff who [Ms. Wellington] believed to be unsupportive of her dispute.”
Members of the public are deeply concerned that Ms. Wellington, who seems to have a questionable character for honesty and truthfulness, has nevertheless been serving as the gatekeeper to the Massachusetts legal profession for more than ten years, in her capacity as Executive Director of the Massachusetts Board of Bar Examiners.
https://masslawyersweekly.com/wp-conten ... sition.pdf
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/tr ... 1f728ef6d7


Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”