Top Law Schools

Article: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/busi ... ation.html

Thoughts? The allegations in the complaint are pretty terrible. It's been pretty clear for a long time now that the Jones Day "black box" is just an excuse for below-market compensation, and likely other arbitrary abuses (such as withholding compensation to pregnant associates).

Would love to see the math on how six associates have 200 Million in damages. Can you get punitive in this context?

Regarding the merits of the complaint, the stuff about being discriminated against for having kids / being a woman generally seems a lot more likely to be true then the weird specifics they mentioned like the Carebear dancing. That just seems like something that needs a bit of context.

If some of the behavior by men described in this article is accurate...I am horrified that this exists in what should be a professional workplace.

Not at JD, but at my first law firm I watched an associate get pushed out because "she hasn't been here much" when she was a 6th year with two maternity leaves. TWO. It's not like she had had 6 kids and had constantly been on maternity leave. Two kids in 6 years is completely reasonable...except, apparently, to male law firm partners. I know they used it against her to pay her less, they refused to send her to meetings with clients or give her challenging work, that type of thing - they generally wanted her gone because she had had two kids. So yeah, I 100% believe this is happening at almost every firm, but when you throw in the black box compensation that JD (and other firms, especially lower vault ranked firms) has, it just makes compounds the issue because ultimately, the numbers don't lie.

Also, fun fact, at the same firm a female partner told me that in partner comp meetings they purposefully paid a female partner less than her male colleague with the same book of business because "she has a husband who is a partner at a law firm and he has a stay at home wife and 4 kids in private school" so the male partner needed the money more. Still waiting for the lawsuit to drop on that one...

Anonymous User wrote:Would love to see the math on how six associates have 200 Million in damages. Can you get punitive in this context?

Regarding the merits of the complaint, the stuff about being discriminated against for having kids / being a woman generally seems a lot more likely to be true then the weird specifics they mentioned like the Carebear dancing. That just seems like something that needs a bit of context.

What kind of context would make the Carebears thing normal?

JD associate here. I have never seen anything remotely close to the behaviors alleged in the complaint.

But JD has 40 offices. It’s not at all a surprise that one or two of them (esp smaller offices) could foster a toxic environment.

That said I hope firm management doesn’t sanction that shit.

nixy wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Would love to see the math on how six associates have 200 Million in damages. Can you get punitive in this context?

Regarding the merits of the complaint, the stuff about being discriminated against for having kids / being a woman generally seems a lot more likely to be true then the weird specifics they mentioned like the Carebear dancing. That just seems like something that needs a bit of context.

What kind of context would make the Carebears thing normal?

I dunno, maybe the song came on, he heard them talking about how they loved the song and danced to it when they were kids, and he made a joke about it? Suggesting a group of people dance to a silly song isn't a joke that's inherently creepy – it certainly can be, but it very much depends on context.

Anonymous User wrote:I am horrified that this exists in what should be a professional workplace.

lol biglaw attorneys aren’t immune from the shit that goes on most anywhere else. I had an of counsel call me into his office to show me a meme video of a “simp” complete with Homer Simpson drooling noises. Jokes about people’s ethnicities, jokes about women...it goes on.

Anonymous User wrote:

nixy wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Would love to see the math on how six associates have 200 Million in damages. Can you get punitive in this context?

Regarding the merits of the complaint, the stuff about being discriminated against for having kids / being a woman generally seems a lot more likely to be true then the weird specifics they mentioned like the Carebear dancing. That just seems like something that needs a bit of context.

What kind of context would make the Carebears thing normal?

I dunno, maybe the song came on, he heard them talking about how they loved the song and danced to it when they were kids, and he made a joke about it? Suggesting a group of people dance to a silly song isn't a joke that's inherently creepy – it certainly can be, but it very much depends on context.

I really don’t think people would put it in a complaint if the context meant it wasn’t weird. (When does a Carebears song come on in a legal setting?)

Edit: according to the complaint, https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... ocument/p1, the partner “demanded” that they sing and dance and they were videoed doing it.

nixy wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

nixy wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Would love to see the math on how six associates have 200 Million in damages. Can you get punitive in this context?

Regarding the merits of the complaint, the stuff about being discriminated against for having kids / being a woman generally seems a lot more likely to be true then the weird specifics they mentioned like the Carebear dancing. That just seems like something that needs a bit of context.

What kind of context would make the Carebears thing normal?

I dunno, maybe the song came on, he heard them talking about how they loved the song and danced to it when they were kids, and he made a joke about it? Suggesting a group of people dance to a silly song isn't a joke that's inherently creepy – it certainly can be, but it very much depends on context.

I really don’t think people would put it in a complaint if the context meant it wasn’t weird. (When does a Carebears song come on in a legal setting?)

Edit: according to the complaint, https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... ocument/p1, the partner “demanded” that they sing and dance and they were videoed doing it.

Original anon here: given the facts set out in the complaint, I agree with you, seems creepy and bad. I was just going on the NYT's summary. I don't agree with the general principle that people wouldn't misrepresent a situation like that in a complaint though. But yeah, that extra context makes it seem quite bad.

Anonymous User wrote:JD associate here. I have never seen anything remotely close to the behaviors alleged in the complaint.

But JD has 40 offices. It’s not at all a surprise that one or two of them (esp smaller offices) could foster a toxic environment.

That said I hope firm management doesn’t sanction that shit.

5/6 of the named plaintiffs were from one of the California offices (with 2 of those being from the Irvine office).

It'll be interesting to see how this case plays out. Plaintiffs allege that the conduct was indeed sanctioned by the firm.

Former JD NY summer that also summered elsewhere in NY: didn’t see anything as bad as incidents described in article. Some still kind of standard bro stuff that’s probably not okay but really nothing like what NYTimes described at presumably CA offices.

Anonymous User wrote:Would love to see the math on how six associates have 200 Million in damages. Can you get punitive in this context?

My five year old nephew is offering reading classes if you're interested.

The article clearly states that the damages are for all women employed, past, present, future.

Anonymous User wrote:Former JD NY summer that also summered elsewhere in NY: didn’t see anything as bad as incidents described in article. Some still kind of standard bro stuff that’s probably not okay but really nothing like what NYTimes described at presumably CA offices.

Good to know. 5 of the 6 plaintiffs are also not from the NY office.

Haven't read the complaint, but unsurprising that discrimination against pregnant women exists in the workplace. Anyone who's been an associate for more than 6 months knows that women basically have to make a career choice when deciding to have kids.

I mean, at my associate retreat, people were openly discussing plans to not tell partners they were pregnant until they absolutely had to in an effort to avoid different treatment. Would love to hear experiences from other people, though.

nixy wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

nixy wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Would love to see the math on how six associates have 200 Million in damages. Can you get punitive in this context?

Regarding the merits of the complaint, the stuff about being discriminated against for having kids / being a woman generally seems a lot more likely to be true then the weird specifics they mentioned like the Carebear dancing. That just seems like something that needs a bit of context.

What kind of context would make the Carebears thing normal?

I dunno, maybe the song came on, he heard them talking about how they loved the song and danced to it when they were kids, and he made a joke about it? Suggesting a group of people dance to a silly song isn't a joke that's inherently creepy – it certainly can be, but it very much depends on context.

I really don’t think people would put it in a complaint if the context meant it wasn’t weird. (When does a Carebears song come on in a legal setting?)

Edit: according to the complaint, https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... ocument/p1, the partner “demanded” that they sing and dance and they were videoed doing it.

"Partner Sullivan was the same Partner who, at a summer event, demanded that three female summer associates perform a Care Bears song and dance number in order to receive verbal offers to join the Firm as associates. Although the summer associates protested, Partner Sullivan insisted, and only when each had performed as demanded did she receive a verbal offer to join the Firm as an associate."

What do you think about the Jones Day gender discrimination lawsuit? Apparently it’s the second recent class-action against Jones Day for discrimination. Anyone have direct experience with the firm? I interviewed with their NY office back in the day but now I’m glad I didn’t take it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/busi ... ation.html