Sometimes, being FIRED can really build CHARACTER.

An elderly secretary with class and pluck.

Well done.

I'm sure that she has more spine than many associates who are weaseling and sniveling to partners in a futile quest to keep their jobs. She also has more spine and character than many of the partners out there.

Sadly, that's why she'll be fired.

Prove me wrong and stay classy, Bingham!

You had me at "character"...

This is Shakespearean compared to Eeekboy

Although I think she's mistaken, that a mill like BM has any character at all, I like her spirit. Her writing could use a little work, but it is not deserving of the derision above.

I'd hire her in a heartbeat. I hope they fire her. I can offer her a much better job at a much better organization.

Interesting article.

*takes a sip from $3 latte while talking on Blackberry and picking up a spare on Wii bowling*

If the Big Lebowski worked there he probably would have responded:

"What in God's holy name are you blathering about?"

good for her!
too bad she is right about corporate culture. she likely will not be employed there much longer.

8

If you have to use the Dude as your mouthpiece, then you have already failed in life.

Jesus sister, Scotch for lunch again?!?

too long, did not read

I wonder what the proximate cause of this was?

Show me the money bitch.

It was a bit meandering and for a little while I didn't see where she was going with the "character" thing, but she at least tied it together at the end.

The problem is that this smacks so much of the "stop whining, you make a lot of money" thing that people always throw at the middle class but never the rich. She is unwittingly a pawn of the uber-wealthy in their all-out war against everyone else. Will I live if I eat less sushi? Of course. Is that the point? Not even remotely. The point is that society is structured in such a way that even those of us who are supposed to "have it made" still get stuck being barely able to afford a comfortable lifestyle. And yet we're still considered "wealthy" to most when in reality we're solidly middle class (and in fact can't afford one of the most basic promises made to hard workers in America -- an honest-to-God home of our own).

So, no, lawyers aren't griping because we're worried we won't eat. But that doesn't mean our gripes are automatically illegitimate. Just because the system is unfair to poor people doesn't mean it isn't also unfair to us in different ways.

10, my God you are a moron, if I meant to quote the Dude I would have done so, you are completely out of your element here. I quoted the Big Lebowski, not the dude.

It's about time BigLaw employees (associates and staff alike) started to call out the leaders of this industry. A change in BigLaw practices is coming, and people like the writer of this email will be instrumental in bringing about that change. I am no longer at BigLaw (say what you will: couldn't hack it, not strong enough, not good enough, whatever - I left years ago and am much happier with my life), but I remember my time there. It was depressing. You give your life to these firms because you're expected to, not necessarily because you want to. And now, the firms can push associates and staff even harder and longer because of the "at least we have a job" mentality. Now, there's nothing wrong with being grateful you have a job, but to do so at the expense of you as a person is mindboggling. C'mon, people, insist on the change many of us want. The legal industry cannot survive as it has in the past, and the new crop needs to lead the charge for change.

And to anyone who bashes the staffer's writing ability, get over yourselves. We can't all be perfect.

She strikes me easily as a candidate for the Bene Gesserit. I can see her administering the gom jabbar to many Bingham associates.

5 nailed the quality of writing. This should be filed in the just because you think everyone else is thinking it doesn't mean you should be the one to say it file.

Love the "Eeeck" comment by ATL.

It's not her writing that's a problem (pretty good for a secretary!) but it's the fact that the piece lacks a POINT! Where's the call to action??

Disappointing. At least eekboy (you can't capitalize it, 5) had a numbered list for us.

I really wanted her to tell us how to have more character.... All I got was 'don't drink starbucks' and 'don't be an alien.' Humpf.

10, if you can't distinguish between The Dude and The Big Lebowski, then you have already failed in life.

"I realized I was older than my assignment."

Huh? Than her assignment, or the person giving her an assignment?

I just came all over Mystal's moobs.

Perhaps it will relieve her tension
and stress if I give her a good
old-fashioned neck massage.
Works every time.

Hah, now she won't be fired (at least temporarily) for fear of all the bad press that would result.

Clever girl...

23, "assignment" is how secretaries refer to the people to whom they are assigned to provide assistance. One associate is pretty much the same as any other, anyway, and they all leave.

Vapid and pointless litany of vaguely anti-materialist bromides. It was probably plagiariized in total from some televangelist.

Do I dare say that this is clearly the result of way too much ass pounding?

27 - Really? And the secretaries attack US for not treating them like human beings?

Only one way to avoid becoming a 'Stepford' Secretary, allowing your boss to pound you in your ass while you take dictation.

BOOM!

Reminds me of a Monty Python sketch:

Mum: He's had a hard day dear... his new play opens at the National Theatre tomorrow.

Ken: Oh that's good.

Dad: Good! good? What do you know about it?
What do you know about getting up at five o'clock in t'morning to fly to Paris... back at the Old Vic for drinks at twelve, sweating the day through press interviews, television interviews and getting back here at ten to wrestle with the problem of a homosexual nymphomaniac drug-addict involved in the ritual murder of a well known Scottish footballer. That's a full working day, lad, and don't you forget it!

Mum: Oh, don't shout at the boy, father.

Dad: Aye, 'ampstead wasn't good enough for you, was it? ... you had to go poncing off to Barnsley, you and yer coal-mining friends. (spits)

Ken: Coal-mining is a wonderful thing father, but it's something you'll never understand. Just look at you!

Mum: Oh Ken! Be careful! You know what he's like after a few novels.

Dad: Oh come on lad! Come on, out wi' it! What's wrong wi' me?... yet tit!

Ken: I'll tell you what's wrong with you. Your head's addled with novels and poems, you come home every evening reeling of Chateau La Tour...

Mum: Oh don't, don't.

Ken: And look what you've done to mother! She's worn out with meeting film stars, attending premieres and giving gala luncheons...

Dad: There's nowt wrong wi' gala luncheons, lad! I've had more gala luncheons than you've had hot dinners!

Mum: Oh please!

Not sure I understand the criticisms of the writing, except insofar as it's wandering. But like someone else says, it's far superior to eek-boy. Nor is this a firing offense. Eek-boy was a firing offense - criticizing your client with respect to the lawsuit your firm represents it in, and doing so in an email that was bound to be made public? Not even close to acceptable. Plus, he was a lawyer.

anyway, this is a pretty random email and if I were her supervisor I think I'd suggest that she keep such random ruminations to herself (or to smaller groups) in the future, but let's not get carried away and classify it with eek-boy.

23, "assignment" is how secretaries refer to the people to whom they are assigned to provide assistance. One associate is pretty much the same as any other, anyway, and they all leave.

Who cares about the Dude and Big Lebowski.

It was a stupid movie.

Get a life.

10 worked as the on-set fluffer for Logjammin'.

23, "assignment" is how secretaries refer to the people to whom they are assigned to provide assistance. One associate is pretty much the same as any other, anyway, and they all leave.

Where can you still get a latte for only $3?

talking about taking yourself too seriously. she inflicted this lengthy screed on hundreds of unsuspected recipients. and now ATL has victimized another 10-20 readers. we're all dumber for having read this.

Wow. It's like she just today discovered that there was an "All Firm" email list and decided to try it out.

I think the writer of this email needs to see a therapist.

looks like someone wants some unemployment benefits in their first few months of retirement...

10 worked as the on-set fluffer for Logjammin'.

I think this and eekboy's "rant" is a reflection of our times. Everyone thinks their opinion is important and should be heard. While I don't doubt this secretary has a beef on her mind, I believe she and eekboy have no concept of boundaries. This is part of the facebook/twitter/blog phenomenon where everyone thinks they can say WHATEVER they want, WHENEVER they want, WHEREVER they want.

She should've sent that to close friends and peer colleagues. Sending it to the entire firm is just selfish and egotistical.

My 0.02.

Yes, I enjoyed watching Randy Quaid's big fat head get mushed in the toilet by a couple of random guys looking for some papers and being told to watch the rug.

Watching Chris Farley go crazy as Walter was classic and Steve Buscemi's Jesus Quintana was creepy.

I think she needs to exercise with my Wii.... That'll make her feel better.

Yes, Charlize Theron was great in Logjammin.

Was the piece written by Susan Boyle?

What outrages me the most about this secretary's contemptuous behavior is the fact that she drafted and emailed this garbage on firm time. Furthermore, she exhibitted poor judgment by desseminating her misguided opinions and improperly using the firm's email system. She should be terminated, escorted out of the building, no recommendations and no severance for her insolent conduct.

Everyone, please refresh your browser immediately before posting a comment. That will give you the most current comment numbering.

I'd be interested to hear PE's views on this.

What would happen to this secretary at PE's firm (or one of its peer firms)?

Sam Elliott was great as Big Lebowski and Jeremy Piven was cool as the omniscient Stranger.

how many secretaries have half a clue about what the lawyers are doing?

Anybody who has watched the Big Lebowski and quotes John Goodman's Donny simply has no time to make partner.

Shut the fuck up, Donny.

"This is part of the facebook/twitter/blog phenomenon where everyone thinks they can say WHATEVER they want, WHENEVER they want, WHEREVER they want."

Funny, I thought that was more of an America/First Amendment/free republic phenomenon.

*shrug*

All those years in biglaw and still this dumb, huh? I understand that she is a paralegal but, come on, this is terrible judgment.

Is she HOT???

49 -

What outrages me is that you cannot spell "exhibited" and "disseminating."

Nice Star Wars reference, Darth MysTTTal.

Damn. Reminds me of the time I rambled nonsensically about the evils of my plight before blowing my brains out.

Oh, who am I kidding. This tops that. I've never seen or contemplated a train wreck this big. As Legal Fraternity Lothario said about the QE dude, I got nuthin'.

Bingham must not hire secretaries who graduated in the top 10% of their class.

How funny... when I saw this post, but before I read the content of the email, I actually did get up from my desk, walk over to the refrigerator to grab a beer and crack it open.

How could I do this? Oh yeah, I'm unemployed. QUALITY OF LIFE!!!

(Except I'm still surfing ATL at 5pm, just now, drinking beer.)

Hey PE,

You're a douche!

LOL @ 59. ZING!

(Mortal Kombat voice): Finish him!

Have no idea what she's talking about; otherwise seems no different from any other random email one might receive from a coworker.

44 is right.

PE is a douche.

End thread.

15 is the biggest fool here:

"The point is that society is structured in such a way that even those of us who are supposed to "have it made" still get stuck being barely able to afford a comfortable lifestyle. "

If you can't afford a comfortable lifestyle on a biglaw salary then the problem is you, not the salary. Not everyone is promised riches and wealth. You have to earn it, and you knew full well (or should have known) that entering the law would most likely earn you a middle class salary. Don't get upset when you didn't beat the odds.

8 and 10 ... stop blathering.

Another jackass move in these harsh economic times!

I like this secretary.

I like that she admits that she's not very good at her job.

I like that she felt that she things to say that other people needed to hear.

I like the fact that she will be shocked when she gets fired.

I like that despite being a crappy worker, arrogant enough to send firm-wide lectures, and dimwitted enough not to see how this will inevitably end, she will still consider herself to (A) be a person of great CHARACTER who stood up to the man, and (B) have been a victim of those terrible partners who don't have any CHARACTER despite their kindness in continuing to employ a bad worker for many years.

I like this person.

49 - way to show your true character. You're so full of yourself that anyone speaking up should be terminated with extreme prejudice.

Maybe she should be fired, but if so it should be a business decision and/or to set an example, not an angry decision made by an arrogant self-important spoiled brat (I'm speaking hypothetically and in the abstract, of course, not referring to anyone specifically...). Even if she should be fired, there's no reason to be punitive about it. I think it showed extremely poor judgment to send this to everyone, but what if e.g. it was a misclick?

My own gut reaction is a verbal or written (e-mail...) warning would in most cases (no prior problems, etc.) be sufficient, termination if past problems or the firm was looking to eliminate people anyway, maybe. For that matter, whoever leaked the e-mail to ATL did more to harm the firm than she did with her purely internal missive...

To pick your first so-called "point", you know she wrote this on firm time, how? Could it not have been e.g. while on lunch?

Notwithstanding her errors, she makes far fewer errors proportionally than you, which is a good mark of a secretary (it should be "contemptible", "exhibited" and "disseminating" - not what you wrote).

Maybe she should be terminated, I don't know what the terms of employment and her past behaviour have been (and what the applicable state law is) - BUT NEITHER DO YOU. There are also non-legal considerations, as an employer, would the law firm be harmed more by doing as you suggest (affect on morale, performance, behaviour, etc. of other employees, possible bad PR, etc.) than by keeping her with a warning? More to the point, any half-decent lawyer advising a client (let alone a less-than-half-decent lawyer, i.e. an indecent lawyer) should be aware of the risks of terminating with extreme prejudice. Does she have e.g. have an illness (mental illness?) that might fall within the rubric of the ADA, etc.

39, on the contrary. I'm not dumber for having read it, I now know what "cataleptic" means.

"Now in "these" trying times . . ."

Uhhh, I think you meant to put the quotations around "trying," not "these."

Score one for the sushi-eating, x-box playing, non-WW I combatant!! Booya.

73 - A "purely internal missive" - that went to hundreds (if not thousands) of employees....

If ATL didn't exist, this kind of thing would just get forwarded around by email. It would make the rounds inevitably. The Jonas Blank email scandal happened in the pre-ATL era.

Guys in my high school leaked documents to ATL all the time, it was no big deal.

In all of these email leaks, the worst person from the firm's POV is the leak. Sure maybe the secretary needs to be talked to or sent on extended leave, but the leak is the one who needs to be fired.

I don't get it - does she not understand that bigfirm people are losing jobs left and right and might indeed have something of which to be fearful? I mean, just cuz they're not in the coal mines doesn't mean it doesn't suck to get suddenly unemployed, with few prospects for getting reemployed anytime in the near future and bills to pay and the need for food and shelter

Congratulations! You just won the internet! Now we can all go home.

time to prepare the resume.

Why would you fire this secretary? I thought her comments were valid and representative of the times. Sometimes a veteran employee can (and should) provide her valuable insight and experienced vantage point. Plus, she's got some guts.

Dear 77,

To the contrary, the worst people are most likely the above-referenced unshowered attorneys.

She is a secretary from a pre-merger firm. She said something in her email that a Bingham person would not know.

"Sometimes a veteran employee can (and should) provide her valuable insight and experienced vantage point."

Do you think anyone in the SF office (or any other office) cares what a secretary in NYC thinks about anything? I don't care if she just drafted the magna carta, you don't copy people in offices you don't even know.

15 (and others that actually think what she/he said) - I am very surprised that people actually believe that a BigLaw salary (even for a first year associate!) makes you solidly middle class. It does not. You make more than 95% of the USA. Comments like that just make me realize how poor I grew up I suppose (unlike 99% of this board) and how badly people mismanage their finances.

If she wanted to be Jerry Maguire, she should’ve written a coherent statement with a point and gone to Kinko’s to the get the binders made. Now she won’t even have a chance to grab any fish when she gets escorted out the door by security.

Pure lunacy, that reflects poorly on BM. I don't want a loon sending my pleadings to court, thank you.

Why does Mystal conclude that the associate's email at Quinn Emanuel was a "rant," a "trainwreck," or the product of a"meltdown."

73 again. Is the problem people have (and to be clear, I AGREE the e-mail was a problem, just differ as to how serious it was) that it was sent and its contents, or that a "mere" secretary sent it? I strongly disagree with that arrogant attitude, but think there's a strong element of that here. A partner (or at least an equity partner) understandably and reasonably has a lot more "right" to send firm-wide e-mails than a secretary, but I don't see that what this secretary sent is any worse (and in fact, is much better than) some of the firm-wide e-mails that junior associates send with minor repurcussions, and those associates are pretty unimportant also. Indeed, a valuable secretary is a lot more valuable to a lawyer than almost any newly-minted associate.

I guess in some people's view a managing partner sending an e-mail about character is charming, an equity partner sending it is old-school professional, a non-equity partner is a wild-card, a senior associate is burned out, a junior associate is burning his bridges, a paralegal should be terminated with notice, a secretary should be terminated without notice...

"Why does Mystal conclude that the associate's email at Quinn Emanuel was a "rant," a "trainwreck," or the product of a"meltdown.""

It was definitely a trainwreck, I'm not sure I'd call it a rant (it was too unintelligible to even be ranting) and don't know the state of the guy's mind to conclude whether it was a meltdown.

I do know that guy has no business practicing law anywhere, and thanks to the bar exam that he can't pass he isn't.

89 - His email was perfectly intelligible to the literate. It might have taken a second read to fully appreciate, but good literature and some good court opinions often do And you can't really call it a train wreck if the associate was in control all the way through. The evidence indicates he was: he stood by his first email, in his second, and his most recent email to above the law suggests he had no regrets about the episode. "it's good story, but i'm biased."

This isn't Nam-there are rules.

90, stop defending morons that can't even pass the bar exam. The guy is a joke of a person, and he's not a lawyer.

88,

You are dead on. Double (or more) standards.

Something is okay if done by one class, but inappropriate if performed by another. What bs.

Mind if I do a J?

Paraphrase of 90:

Not admitted to the bar = moron

Not a lawyer = joke of a person

Paraphrase of 92:

Not admitted to the bar = moron

Not a lawyer = joke of a person

Paraphrase of 96:

We are Nihilists! We believe in nothing!

First!

FOR THE RECORD: She was fired today and she is hoping that unemployment does not deny her claim!

The rumor I heard about the Quinn guy was that his girlfriend gave up her toe in an attempt to save his job. And it had nail polish on it.

The real problem is that the email reads like somebody got my grandfather drunk and sat him down at a computer.

CHARACTER dagnabit!

lol @ 85 not understanding political economics.

Here's the basics: "middle class salary" is not the same as "median salary."

Carry on.

Just curious--who do you think would send this email to ABL: an attorney or staff member?

Typical secretary. Complete incompentence at performing even the simplest tasks, wastes countless hours on the internet, gets paid to basically do nothing, and then? Complains about how tough things are.

85:

Social classes tend to be defined on a bell curve, not a median scale. You're right that 160k gets us into the top 5%, but that does not put us into the "upper class" as you imply.

After reading your post, I was curious about what *did* qualify for the upper/middle class boundary. It varies based on the interpretation, but upper class is usually defined at about top 1%, which is above at least 750k to 1M. There's a chart here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_class#US_models

Top 5% in income has got to be upper class, unless you believe that someone in the fith percentil of income (bottom 5%) is "middle class"

106: wrong.

Top 5% in the United States has got to be something like top .0001% worldwide. That's not upper class?

The people who say that top 5 percent is not upper class are just upper class people (95th percentile) trying to pass themselves as poor, middle class.

QUINN REMAINS a more titillating source of entertaining internal e-mails

Fell asleep during it, just like that sports analogy piece. Can someone paraphrase it for me? Did she insult the firm? What did it say besides saying "Character is Good" and "Associates smell because they work a lot b/c they're scared of losing their jobs".

Biglaw attorneys are upper class people masquerading as "the middle class."

Just like lawyers to criticize the writing style and take nothing from the content! I amazed that you even are able to represent clients with your listening/reading skills!

Just like lawyers to criticize the writing style and take nothing from the content! I'm amazed that you even are able to represent clients with your listening/reading skills!

113-114 = frustrated paralegal. back to making binders now!

Luckily I no longer struggle in law firms. The email is not directing comments or opinions at any one specifically (on any level) or saying times are not tough all around. Just that we should all just be ourselves and be grateful but not be willing to sell our souls (shovel shit) in order to keep the jobs we have. We should be able to remain dignified.
One person says show mercy....if this person is Jerry Maguire who will be the Rod Tidwel? Jerry Maguire prevailed and had a fish. Last text I got this person was asked to leave the firm and escorted out of the building while BM decides what to do.. Is this a job you'd even want to go back to? And if the name gets out with all the mixed up crap people are making this into who would even hire her? It was simply about putting things in perspective and seeing everyone as an equal human being. That no one is better and we are all open to hard times and being fired. Maybe it was selfish to send a mass email but if you've ever work at a law firm you would know that there is no unbiased forum let alone a voice for a lowly secretary. I am sure the frustration just built up. Maybe BM will show class and mercy by letting this person burry their head in the sand until this blows over.

Luckily I no longer struggle in law firms. The email is not directing comments or opinions at any one specifically (on any level) or saying times are not tough all around. Just that we should all just be ourselves and be grateful but not be willing to sell our souls (shovel shit) in order to keep the jobs we have. We should be able to remain dignified.
One person says show mercy....if this person is Jerry Maguire who will be the Rod Tidwel? Jerry Maguire prevailed and had a fish. Last text I got this person was asked to leave the firm and escorted out of the building while BM decides what to do.. Is this a job you'd even want to go back to? And if the name gets out with all the mixed up crap people are making this into who would even hire her? It was simply about putting things in perspective and seeing everyone as an equal human being. That no one is better and we are all open to hard times and being fired. Maybe it was selfish to send a mass email but if you've ever work at a law firm you would know that there is no unbiased forum let alone a voice for a lowly secretary. I am sure the frustration just built up. Maybe BM will show class and mercy by letting this person burry their head in the sand until this blows over.

Luckily I no longer struggle in law firms. The email is not directing comments or opinions at any one specifically (on any level) or saying times are not tough all around. Just that we should all just be ourselves and be grateful but not be willing to sell our souls (shovel shit) in order to keep the jobs we have. We should be able to remain dignified.
One person says show mercy. If this person is Jerry Maguire who will be the Rod Tidwel? Jerry Maguire prevailed and had a fish. Last text I got this person was asked to leave the firm and escorted out of the building while BM decides what to do.. Is this a job you'd even want to go back to? And if the name gets out with all the mixed up crap people are making this into who would even hire her? It was simply about putting things in perspective and seeing everyone as an equal human being. That no one is better and we are all open to hard times and being fired. Maybe it was selfish to send a mass email but if you've ever work at a law firm you would know that there is no unbiased forum let alone a voice for a lowly secretary. I am sure the frustration just built up. Maybe BM will show class and mercy by letting this person burry their head in the sand until this blows over.

Luckily I no longer struggle in law firms. The email is not directing comments or opinions at any one specifically (on any level) or saying times are not tough all around. Just that we should all just be ourselves and be grateful but not be willing to sell our souls (shovel shit) in order to keep the jobs we have. We should be able to remain dignified.
One person says show mercy. If this person is Jerry Maguire who will be the Rod Tidwel? Jerry Maguire prevailed and had a fish. Last text I got this person was asked to leave the firm and escorted out of the building while BM decides what to do.. Is this a job you'd even want to go back to? And if the name gets out with all the mixed up crap people are making this into who would even hire her? It was simply about putting things in perspective and seeing everyone as an equal human being. That no one is better and we are all open to hard times and being fired. Maybe it was selfish to send a mass email but if you've ever work at a law firm you would know that there is no unbiased forum let alone a voice for a lowly secretary. I am sure the frustration just built up. Maybe BM will show class and mercy by letting this person burry their head in the sand until this blows over.

Why would they fire her over this? It's not like she said anything really bad about the firm.

Oh, I dream of a secretary what can string five words together... Please, once he or she is fired, move to DC. In the land of the incompetent staff, s/he who can successfuly use Outlook is hired. Seriously, NY, you folks are spoiled by literate secretaries.

At least she writes better than the Quinn dude. AND, she's not sh*&^ing on anyone's victory email. She's a secretary, no harm done. I vote for her to keep her job.

How funny is it that Elie that fat loser - whose writing is just as bad - seems to take such overweight relish in making fun of her? Way to be a fat monkey buddy...you suck even for you, and that ain't easy.

Clearly, this woman clearly is not that highly literate. Then again, she didn't go to HLS and manage to emerge an ignorant loser, but...

Sorry! What I'm trying to say is, if you overlook the flaws, what she's saying is kind of nice. Retarded, but nice. She sounds cool.

Elie (sorry I can't help myself), once you get over his horrible writing, often is saying shallow, repetitive bullshit.

So...way to prove that you are more than a retard. You are an asshole, Elie, and you are making fun of somebody who demonstrably has lots more CHARACTER than you. She's thinner than you too, I bet.

How funny is it that Elie that fat loser - whose writing is just as bad - seems to take such overweight relish in making fun of her? Way to be a fat monkey buddy...you suck even for you, and that ain't easy.

Clearly, this woman clearly is not that highly literate. Then again, she didn't go to HLS and manage to emerge an ignorant loser, but...

Sorry! What I'm trying to say is, if you overlook the flaws, what she's saying is kind of nice. Retarded, but nice. She sounds cool.

Elie (sorry I can't help myself), once you get over his horrible writing, often is saying shallow, repetitive bullshit.

So...way to prove that you are more than a retard. You are an asshole, Elie, and you are making fun of somebody who demonstrably has lots more CHARACTER than you. She's thinner than you too, I bet.

The nature of some of her writing errors make it seem pretty likely that English is not her first language.

Elie, what's your excuse? What was your mother tongue? Sizzler?

Well, at least she has a deep vocabulary going for her. We in the Midwest would love to have her working for us.

107-109 = law student.

Wait until you get out in the real world. If you live in one of the cities that's still uniformly paying on the 160 scale -- especially NY or SF -- a law firm salary (or two) does not make you "upper class." The banksters would get a kick out of that kind of uppitiness. When it takes you years to save up a down payment on a starter home and even then the monthly payments are a sizable chunk of your take-home income, you are not "upper class." There are some more senior partners who may have arrived there but last I heard lawyers were still priced out of Manhattan residential real estate.

You also seem to be leaving net worth completely out of the picture. Hint: when you graduate with six figures of debt and own no assets more valuable than (maybe) a car, salary income is not going to suddenly shoot you into a social class mostly inhabited by people who have had a lifetime of earnings (most of them largely through investment income) and their heirs.

100 -- it's not fair.

127,

The class of biglaw associates you refer to are pulling in 200,000-400,000/year. More if you are a partner. And many of these professionals have a second income from a spouse. What is the median income in New York City? $50,000 or so.

Try telling someone making even $75,000 that you are in the same class as they. You can't see that you are upper class because you are upper class and move in a world of other upper class people. it all seems normal, "average," to you.

It's not.

127,

The class of biglaw associates you refer to are pulling in 200,000-400,000/year. More if you are a partner. And many of these professionals have a second income from a spouse. What is the median income in New York City? $50,000 or so.

Try telling someone making even $75,000 that you are in the same class as they. You can't see that you are upper class because you are upper class and move in a world of other upper class people. it all seems normal, "average," to you.

It's not.

58:

No.

PE: I thought I told you to STFU.

You turned an actual suicide into a schtick. No one cares what you have to say, and no one's laughing with (or even at) you. They're just disgusted.

All of you saying she should keep her job based on whether you agree, don't agree, are offended, not offended with what she wrote are missing the picture.

It shows HORRIBLE judgment to send ANYTHING to everyone in the firm. Not to mention the fact its something like that. And talk about entitlement.

I just don't get the harsh comments. Yes, she was probably wrong to send this to the entire law firm, and she also should have assumed that the email would leak out as well. However, what part of what she says is factually wrong? Biglaw is full of drones, and if you weren't one, then you are either out by your 2nd-3rd year or you devolve into one.

Comment removed by moderator.

I just don't get the harsh comments. Yes, she was probably wrong to send this to the entire law firm, and she should have assumed that the email would leak out as well. However, what part of what she says is factually wrong? Biglaw is full of drones, and if you weren't one going in, then you are either out by your 2nd-3rd year or you devolve into one.

I just don't get the harsh comments. Yes, she was probably wrong to send this to the entire law firm, and she should have assumed that the email would leak out as well. However, what part of what she says is factually wrong? Biglaw is full of drones, and if you weren't one going in, then you are either out by your 2nd-3rd year or you devolve into one.

129 - the top tier of associates on the NY-160 payscale make $280k, not $400k. They may have made $400k with bonus in 2007, but that was with the special bonus that was, as we continue to see, a total blip.

If you're going to lob self-righteous criticisms at others, at least get your facts straight.

138,

With bonus (but not special), it is closer to $400K than the $280K you cite. So, my number is in any more accurate than yours, particularly if we include counsel.

What these email authors must not got is that these firmwide emails are, almost invariably, shockingly arrogant. Everyone else is lost in life, but you, enlightened you, are going to clear it all up with a single "reply all"? F.U.

What these email authors must not got is that these firmwide emails are, almost invariably, shockingly arrogant. Everyone else is lost in life, but you, enlightened you, are going to clear it all up with a single "reply all"? F.U.

What these email authors must not got is that these firmwide emails are, almost invariably, shockingly arrogant. Everyone else is lost in life, but you, enlightened you, are going to clear it all up with a single "reply all"? F.U.

134-137: does your post REALLY warrant FOUR submissions?

REALLY?

REALLY?

Would a client be willing take a "character" lecture from a law firm if it was engaged in dubious behavior? That law firm would be fired. Consequently, this secretary will also be fired (if she hasn't already).

Right or wrong, if you blast an email to the entire firm with this type of "here's a lesson you should learn" tone, you had better be the managing partner or you're asking to get fired. Partners wouldn't take this from associates, associates wouldn't take this from staff, and staff wouldn't take this from the temp help. Regardless of whether her beliefs are valid, you can't spout off to everyone and anyone and not expect consequences. My guess is that she wanted to get fired and wanted to vent in the process (unless I give too much credit to her intelligence).

Would a client be willing take a "character" lecture from a law firm if it was engaged in dubious behavior? That law firm would be fired. Consequently, this secretary will also be fired (if she hasn't already).

Right or wrong, if you blast an email to the entire firm with this type of "here's a lesson you should learn" tone, you had better be the managing partner or you're asking to get fired. Partners wouldn't take this from associates, associates wouldn't take this from staff, and staff wouldn't take this from the temp help. Regardless of whether her beliefs are valid, you can't spout off to everyone and anyone and not expect consequences. My guess is that she wanted to get fired and wanted to vent in the process (unless I give too much credit to her intelligence).

Who gives a fuck, 130/139? Having a relatively high current income does not equal "being upper class." If I had over a million in the bank or in home equity, then maybe you'd have a point. But instead I have law school debt and modest six-figure savings. Roughly $200k in net worth, more than half of which is tied up in retirement accounts. That's not "upper class."

Look at the chart 105 linked to. (1) "upper class" is top 1%; (2) and that's top 1% by *net worth* -- not by one year's salary. And top 1% of net worth means over $1M easily. No law firm associate is there on the basis of his/her lawyer job, I promise.

Also keep in mind that the large majority of biglaw associates will not make partner and will instead take a sizable paycut to go in-house, to a smaller firm, or to the government. So you can't even project that a given law firm associate *will be* "upper class" at some later point in life.

poorly constructed, rambling, distracted and lame, frankly. what was the point? if she wanted to get canned, there are more creative ways to go about it.

yawner.

Comment removed by moderator.

73/88 Again.

Not to pick on Partner Emeritus - I'm sure his attitude is shared by many - but I was looking at posts about that associate who sent a firm-wide e-mail criticizing the firm being involved with the "Redskins" matter which in my view was much, much worse (denigrating the firm's work on a specific file for a specific client and implicitly accusing it of being racist):

#57 on the second comment page page http://abovethelaw.com/2009/05/quinn_emanuel_associate_fired.php?show=comments#comments

"For some reason, I am feeling a soft spot for the terminated chap. His email, although entirely inappropriate, was witty, concise and made a point. The lack of grammar throughout his email was a sarcastic ruse which only few folks would understand..."

Elie is even more deserving of criticism, in his original post about the Redskins "associate" he was much more sympathetic to the post by the guy because he was a lawyer (actually, no he wasn't, he failed the bar...) and the stated reason by the firm for his termination was his failing the bar, i.e. they did not, presumably, have him escorted out by security.

So even a non-lawyer "associate" who can't pass the bar who essentially considers his firm and/or its client racist and e-mails the entire firm is fine, a secretary who compliments the firm that employs her but warns about the importance of character and makes the mistake of e-mailing the entire firm is pilloried.

At least the reactions here help give me some insight into why female lawyers I've worked with made such a point of dressing much better than they "needed" to, even on casual Fridays, because they said they hated being mistaken for secretaries. I thought they were being pretentious and arrogant, perhaps the problem was more how secretaries get treated at law firms...

Comment removed by moderator.

Comment removed by moderator.

149, eekboy got destroyed for being a pompous trust-fund ass in that thread if i recall. not "fine" as you would put it.

I think she cost the firm a fair amount of wasted billable time by those individuals reading her email. I don't work at BM (great name by the way,) though I would have read her email just to make sure I wasn't missing a total meltdown moment.

When you go firmwide with something like this, make it good damnit. Otherwise, you've wasted five minutes of my life that I'll never get back.

That said, I vote to forgive her. She should not lose her job.

149 - you suck as a human being.

1. You pick one (of few) sympathetic comment as the example for the Redskins thread, but you choose to ignore all of the support Secretary has been getting in this thread. Or do you mean to say that PE is the person we should all be listening to here?

2. You claim that eekboy "emails the entire firm" and Secretary "makes the mistake of e-mailing the entire firm." Typical "spin" from someone trying to hide an agenda.

Eekboy was fired and now so is Secretary. I think that's fair.

Comment removed by moderator.

Not being a lawyer, she obviously is unaware of the significance of Section 90 of the Restatement (Second) to her "character" issue.

Having relied on the firm's character position, she would be entitled to bring suit under a promissory estoppel theory, requiring the firm to continue to demonstrate character. Elementary, really.

Y'know, I have seen this from time to time, where partners will get into a "humorous" email dialogue, hitting "reply all" each time, not realizing that the "all personel" distribution list is in the cc field. Eventually some twit will chime in and say "please stop". Fired. Our firm limits use of "all personel" distribution lists to management only. Problem solved - well, certainly reduces the risk.

15, That deserves post of the day.

"The point is that society is structured in such a way that even those of us who are supposed to "have it made" still get stuck being barely able to afford a comfortable lifestyle. And yet we're still considered "wealthy" to most when in reality we're solidly middle class (and in fact can't afford one of the most basic promises made to hard workers in America -- an honest-to-God home of our own).

So, no, lawyers aren't griping because we're worried we won't eat. But that doesn't mean our gripes are automatically illegitimate. Just because the system is unfair to poor people doesn't mean it isn't also unfair to us in different ways."

21: Pretty good writing for a secretary? Do you really think you are a better writer than all secretaries? I very much doubt it. A high school dropout with no college, I worked as a legal secretary for years. At my last secretarial job, for a name partner in a good firm, it didn't take long before I was re-writing the associates' memoranda and briefs at the request of my boss. He paid for me to take the LSATs, which I aced, recommended me for a top ten law school, which accepted me. I made law review on grades, graduated with high honors, and clerked for a judge on a federal court of appeals, who never changed a single word of any of my draft opinions. Secretaries can't write? Patronizing baloney.

159, so you're a good writer for a secretary. What is it that you want?

Also, because you're one example of an intelligent secretary means....you're ONE example of an intelligent secretary (who doesn't seem to understand that one example does not equal a sample set).

159 - How did you go to law school with "no college" . . . ?

Don't tell me you took a break from being a legal secretary, went to college, then went back to being a legal secretary. You're full of shit.

natural selection

Well, at least it was a little entertainment and made the day go by faster.

I thought it was interesting, if rambling.

It was also totally foolish. No non-partner should ever email the entire firm ever under any circumstance unless the goal is to go out flaming while entertaining the audience. Then it's cool and I appreciate the effort.

And, let me guess....the secretary author is in the midst of menopause.

I think she is projecting or, at least, protesting too much. As a former legal secretary and a current paralegal, she seems to be the "queen bee" personality of older legal secretary. She's been there a long time, she's seen a lot, and she doesn't think she's getting the recognition that she deserves. Plus she's worried about being ushered out the door because of her higher salary (relative to the newer secretaries). I think she's on the verge of a breakdown -- otherwise, why would she embarrass herself like this? She needs a few days off. (And, by the way, did she ever actually define "character"? There are all kinds of characters in the world. I wish she would have been more precise. Also, I don't get the reference to "stepford secretary"; she's obviously well beyond the age where anyone would consider her a "stepford" (you know, pretty, young, compliant).

Above the law is disgusting and this is merely case in point. It is self congratulatory and pathetically snide and so are many of the comments most of the time. The chronic fixation on rank and status of a bunch of ugly, insecure dweebs is too much to swallow. They should flush themselves down their TTT toilets. How boring. This lady has ever right to voice her opinion without this pathetic website's mockery. Yeah you all are better than this woman because you are lawyers and shes just a sad secretary.

Above the law is disgusting and this is merely case in point. It is self congratulatory and pathetically snide and so are many of the comments most of the time. The chronic fixation on rank and status of a bunch of ugly, insecure dweebs is too much to swallow. They should flush themselves down their TTT toilets. How boring. This lady has ever right to voice her opinion without this pathetic website's mockery. Yeah you all are better than this woman because you are lawyers and shes just a sad secretary.

Comment removed by moderator.

So ATL....keep us updated on what happens to this very smart secretary! We really need to know what the outcome of this is.

If anyone has friends at BM, get the scoop and report back to us. Please let us know.

I

That's because the American people are fucking stupid.

Half of them don't vote, period. The remainder vote on the basis of social issues that, in the scheme of things, are trivial (gay marriage? who cares?).

In the meantime, the banking and political class are raping us all.

152,

The Quinn Emanuel associate was hardly destroyed. He was the victor.

146,

While you may not feel rich, consider that you may be rich relatively speaking. Where does that $200M net put you amid your countrymen, or the world. I would also aver that in considering your "wealth," we should take into account your law degree, bar membership, and future earning potential. After all, that is how we measure the value of your investment accounts.

And, just because there are a handful (relatively speaking) of people who are wealthier than you, does not mean you are also not very wealthy or that you are in the "middle."

Although there are grains of logic to it, a good part of her rant's logic is faulty. The problem isn't one less sushi per week--it is that if we are laid off, no more sushi at all. It is Ok for coal miners to sweat about losing their low-paying carcinogenic jobs that they would be better off without and could replace more easily (not a shot at them as people, but it is a really shitty job) but we can't sweat about losing a 165k+ spot? I think I kind of respect what she is trying to say, which when you cut away the rambling is (I think) a general mix of "don't stress so much," "things aren't as bad as they look" and "you guys rock!" Her intentions were good, but her execution was misguided.

I hope Bingham takes it easy on her. The old folks get wound up sometimes. Give her a good knock in the head for acting up, make her take a few sick days as mental health days to let her get her bearings, chalk the incident up to general stress and move on.

Send in the meds! This seems borderline schizophrenic.

For every legal secretary who got discouraged and left his/her creative field and ended up in biglaw, this email should be a crystal ball into the future. When the layoffs come 'round, they may provide the opportunity to return to your dream because this could be you (me).
For some reason, we as legal secretaries are foolish enough to get so comfortable, that we forget that there is no career advancement in a law firm, that there is a reason we are referred to as NON-LEGAL SUPPORT STAFF, and that we are never in the inner circle of knowledge, no matter how many times we have stopped by our partners' condo after work to drop off some docs./material.
This poor woman just announced firmwide, how inactive her desk is, how unconscious she is, and how unaware she is of her place in biglaw. It ain't about us and it never will be. There is neither character nor democracy in biglaw -- only billable hours for attys. and OT for us. And since both of these are now running a deficit, allow me to be preachy here, it is time for us to really figure out how we traded in our aspirations for biglaw.

"The Quinn Emanuel associate was hardly destroyed. He was the victor."

Victor of failing the bar exam twice?

If there is truly a victor in failing, he did it.

Quinn Emanuel? Hahaha.... we eat those losers for lunch and then purge and then eat them again. By far the most overrated firm around.

17 - You are pathetic. Go back to your TTT hole and shut your pie hole. Change sucks.

Give this chick some slack...she made me laugh and many of you too. So, she gets fired or not...it's a freaking job...nothing more. If some of you people don't start disconnecting your self-worth from your job you're in for a big let down. If you can pay for a place to sleep each night and can help others each day...then you have it made. Whether you do that for a big firm or as a street sweeper is all beside the point. Don't take yourselves so seriously....geezus....most of you suck at being lawyers anyway and your panic about job security just makes it that much more obvious.

172 - I aver that you mean $200k, not $200M.

Perspective is a difficult thing to find in this economy. I am in a 10-person firm, and we work all the time on trying to find and keep perspective. In my biglaw days, it always seemed a more precious commodity. Sure the world has better writers and more politic secretaries, but observations about perspective -- in this case, what is there of value in what we do? -- should always be welcome if they are well-intended. These thoughts are. They should be appreciated.

Our culture really lacks compassion. I am a relative of this person and I work in a large HR department. Not in law. She tried to reach me the other day for guidance but I was unavailable. Should she have sent the email? No. For years I have been suggesting that she file an internal complaint. She is not a model employee. That is in terms of lateness and time off. Like many of us she has health issues, childcare concerns, a young son that had some major early health issues and a commute at the mercy of the LIRR and subways. Here’s the thing: the email rambles and is so random because of all she did not say. First that she came back to find that friends who once had intelligent opinions, and a voice were silent (stepford reference). Second, like an abusive relationship the NYHR department has finally broken her mentally and emotionally. Albeit her side of the stories, I have previously reviewed her firm’s handbook policies to get a clearer view on things. Mostly I am always shocked at how daring that department is. Boy if walls could talk. For years now behind those closed doors they violate not only laws but misrepresent and apply policy as they see fit. And from what I understand this is not the case in other offices. She told me that when she returned from surgery it was clear to her HR was annoyed that she was out. On day one there was a meeting to discuss the past year and a half and her time management. She has barely been back a month now and as luck would have it got ill with bronchitis. She has been making her way in to the office. Her voicemail to me Monday late afternoon was after another meeting when she was shown a copy of an email party invitation she had sent and told it was unprofessional and too cute. I think the kicker was being told not to discuss that she did not receive a bonus with anyone and that it was none of there business. FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Similar instances have occurred for years. She admits that she became over emotional but this drove her into an anxiety attack which led to an asthma attack. Embarrassed and sobbing at her desk she left early for the day. No she did not write the email on job time. She forwarded it to me for comment but again I was unavailable and did not see it before she blundered. You need a thick skin for certain professions. Sure some therapy and medication couldn’t hurt (any of us for that matter). All of you making it personal or about attorneys or a particular class need to stop. She was just saying that people around us in corporate America are fearful and struggling but most not sick or dying. Middle class is used because generally a lower income individual does not work in and make a corporate America salary. All the historical references basically just mean pull your heads out of your asses and be grateful for what we do have. AND STOP WHINING and sucking up. Stop dissecting it already. No desire to go out blazing or adversely affect the firm. When the smoke clears she will beat herself up enough for the damage she has done. This is mostly to her and the profession she will no longer be welcome in. Scoop you wanted. She’s a mess at the moment so find a heart and back off.

unfortunately 182 -

you did one further by actually providing even more information than was appropriate ... you just made this person look even more emotionally unstable...way to go...now stop trying to "help"

Clearly 183 you are an ignorant, unhappy and lonely person. She should not be judged by what little or nothing you poeple think you know or have read. The person who forwarded her email to this site should be. Thanks to that person years of experience and quality work will be wasted. Go find a rock to crawl under.

Please delete 182 before more people get to the office. ATL is read by people at Bingham too and it isn't like we don't know who sent the email. I'm sure the sender would be even more of a mess knowing that everyone at work knows her personal business now. Honestly, I feel like I just read someone's diary and I'm feeling a little guilty.

why so aggressive, 184? 183 said nothing about the email sender at all.

"female lawyers I've worked with made such a point of dressing much better than they "needed" to, even on casual Fridays, because they said they hated being mistaken for secretaries."

---never once have I heard of this happening. I'm sure it's happened in the history of the world, especially >25 years ago, but I've never seen it or heard of it.

this is 183-

my point exactly.
182 just added kerosene to the fire. If you are lucky that post will be removed.

and for your little message at 184 - no question you also have no business working in HR.

I am amazed by the type of senior people i find working in HR - the one place where there SHOULD be the complete observance and practice of decorum - also happens to be the place where you will find people who practice it the LEAST in their own dealings with people!

Ack! Delete 182 -- wayyy too much information. It makes the person immediately identifiable to anyone in that office, I'm sure, and then piles personal information I'm sure she wouldn't have wanted everyone to know (or worse, if the info isn't true!)

The attorneys and other people who posted negative, vicious remarks are spending too much time on ATL and not enough time defending or representing their clients/doing their jobs. Go to the gym or sign up for Afghanistan or Iraq.

The person from Bingham who sent this unfortunate communique to ATL is bitter--why, I'd like to know.

That's the real story here.

Someone this immature as s/he, who would attempt to besmirch those providing their bread and butter via submission of this woman's email, instead of quitting and getting a job they appreciate, is a coward.

Yes, I work in BigLaw, and I'm compassionate.

in 182's post - because of a "helpful" relative in another HR department - we know that this employee is not a "model" employee because of time off and lateness. That she has discussed the "shock" inducing activities of a law firms HR policies towards her with someone else. That she has a young son. That she is an emotional wreck because of all of this....That she has health issues requirinf time off. Please continue to "HELP" this relative 182....clearly someone should have told YOU not to send out this message...the same way the secretary should not have sent hers. Now please show some "compassion" and common sense to her and stop posting personal details about this woman.

VALID 191. There will be no more posts from me. 182

Um, I think 182 might have been a joke? A send up of the meandering, self serving nonsense in the original post? Please? It was a joke, right? If not, this entire family has major problems that should not be aired on ATL.

Hey 115 -- don't laugh. You, too, may be making binders soon. Oh, shoot, I forgot. If you are a first through third year in BigLaw NY, you already do.

189 - the person sent an email to the entire firm - I'm pretty sure they have already identified her.

And 190 - Bingham sucks. Biglaw sucks. Get over yourself. Maybe the person is bitter because they know they could lose their job tomorrow without warning and there is no where else to go right now (except perhaps Iraq or Afghanistan).

Yours,
Laid-off (former) Bingham associate

182 missed the "maintaining confidences" session in his/her's HR and relative training

Wow, as bad as the original email is, 182 makes the whole thing much worse. Stop airing personal details in large forums!

What really bothers me is, as I was reading the email, I was nodding my head, like "Tell it, sister!" But then she lost all credibility when she claims that she "was not alive during some of humanities more troubled times, plagues, WWI, WWII, including the Holocaust or The Great Depression" but goes on to say that "What little I do know about these times has been from documentaries or stories told from elders who gathered for card games on cardboard boxes by candlelight." When is the last time people gathered for card games on cardboard boxes by candlelight? 1940? Except for hobos; they probably still do. Maybe she's a hobo. If she is, then I really am impressed by her writing.

159 - do you really think that all secretaries write as well as you? You may be an exceptional example, but I still stand by my statement, which, btw, did not say that no secretaries can write well. Are you sure you took the LSAT? This is simple logic.

199,

159 must have aced the LSAT to get into law school without a college degree.

So, a top lawyer at a 160 scale makes 280 at the end of the year. I am a 1L (and never stepped into a law firm), so pardon my ignorance, but how exactly does this bonus thing work?

Is there a set bonus that you get regardless of your performance, and then there is a special bonus for those who meet the billing hour req. or something? Can someone take a min to explain?

It is rough to go to work and not know if your employment is stable. It is also rough to hear about cutbacks and layoffs throughout the country. I really think her email did more harm to her than any good. She is on the radar to be "offed."

ATL has a policy of deleting posts that attempt to/go close to outing someone by revealing personal information even without the person's name. So delete 182. Or is that yet another double-standard, lawyers have their identity and privacy protected but not secretaries?

Or if 182 is false, it is arguably defamatory and should be deleted...

As for 154, if expressing sympathy for this secretary and suggesting that her treatment was unfair compared to the "Redskins" putative associate (he never passed the bar...) and criticizing a representative pseudonymous identity on this board makes me "suck as a human being", then you must have a really warped worldview.

Please, please make 182 go away.

1) Clearly, her diatribe is rambling, draws no clear points and has little focus. It is a rant of someone on the edge. It is sad that she felt she had to write this, much less send it to all offices of BM. Also, it is wholly unfair. There are many Big Law firms, who this poster cannot name, who are blatantly abusive to their non-legal staff and who relish that treatment. I have direct experience in being employed by them. I would not put BM in the same category at all.

2) As to her relative in #182, commuting problems and child care issues are many people's problems. That's a poor defense. No one wanted a scoop, she created it herself and badly. Since you are her relative, you might mention BM/HR was more than understanding of her problems and cumulative time out, but when the problems hinge on everyday performance, and lengthy time out, you, as an HR person, should know that it can't go on.. If becoming a "pod person" is upsetting to her, well, it's upsetting to many of us who work in corporate America, but doesn't warrant a page and half rant/attack against coworkers and her firm. Moreover, why did she expect a bonus? She wasn't working. Everyone who isn't born into privilege would like to be paid for staying home.

3) To poster #195 - I feel for you. Being laid off suddenly is horrible but unfortunately it happens in every company and law firm.

4) For those posters who are denigrating secretaries, shame on you. Her rambling harangue does not represent all, any or most secretaries, least of all our writing abilities and the skills we put forth every day to assist attorneys in making the Big Law business operate. Nor does holding this position make the person unintelligent. I've met my share of Harvard graduate attorneys who are anything but intelligent and have no social skills or manners. Those attorneys or other posters who were haughty enough to write such remarks about secretaries are just the reason why working for attorneys is difficult from our perspective.

1) Clearly, her diatribe is rambling, draws no clear points and has little focus. It is a rant of someone on the edge. It is sad that she felt she had to write this, much less send it to all offices of BM. Also, it is wholly unfair. There are many Big Law firms, who this poster cannot name, who are blatantly abusive to their non-legal staff and who relish that treatment. I have direct experience in being employed by them. I would not put BM in the same category at all.

2) As to her relative in #182, commuting problems and child care issues are many people's problems. That's a poor defense. No one wanted a scoop, she created it herself and badly. Since you are her relative, you might mention BM/HR was more than understanding of her problems and cumulative time out, but when the problems hinge on everyday performance, and lengthy time out, you, as an HR person, should know that it can't go on.. If becoming a "pod person" is upsetting to her, well, it's upsetting to many of us who work in corporate America, but doesn't warrant a page and half rant/attack against coworkers and her firm. Moreover, why did she expect a bonus? She wasn't working. Everyone who isn't born into privilege would like to be paid for staying home.

3) To poster #195 - I feel for you. Being laid off suddenly is horrible but unfortunately it happens in every company and law firm.

4) For those posters who are denigrating secretaries, shame on you. Her rambling harangue does not represent all, any or most secretaries, least of all our writing abilities and the skills we put forth every day to assist attorneys in making the Big Law business operate. Nor does holding this position make the person unintelligent. I've met my share of Harvard graduate attorneys who are anything but intelligent and have no social skills or manners. Those attorneys or other posters who were haughty enough to write such remarks about secretaries are just the reason why working for attorneys is difficult from our perspective.

1) Clearly, her diatribe is rambling, draws no clear points and has little focus. It is a rant of someone on the edge. It is sad that she felt she had to write this, much less send it to all offices of BM. Also, it is wholly unfair. There are many Big Law firms, who this poster cannot name, who are blatantly abusive to their non-legal staff and who relish that treatment. I have direct experience in being employed by them. I would not put BM in the same category at all.

2) As to her relative in #182, commuting problems and child care issues are many people's problems. That's a poor defense. No one wanted a scoop, she created it herself and badly. Since you are her relative, you might mention BM/HR was more than understanding of her problems and cumulative time out, but when the problems hinge on everyday performance, and lengthy time out, you, as an HR person, should know that it can't go on.. If becoming a "pod person" is upsetting to her, well, it's upsetting to many of us who work in corporate America, but doesn't warrant a page and half rant/attack against coworkers and her firm. Moreover, why did she expect a bonus? She wasn't working. Everyone who isn't born into privilege would like to be paid for staying home.

3) To poster #195 - I feel for you. Being laid off suddenly is horrible but unfortunately it happens in every company and law firm.

4) For those posters who are denigrating secretaries, shame on you. Her rambling harangue does not represent all, any or most secretaries, least of all our writing abilities and the skills we put forth every day to assist attorneys in making the Big Law business operate. Nor does holding this position make the person unintelligent. I've met my share of Harvard graduate attorneys who are anything but intelligent and have no social skills or manners. Those attorneys or other posters who were haughty enough to write such remarks about secretaries are just the reason why working for attorneys is difficult from our perspective.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD delete 182. Delete the email and the entire post. I have never seen anything like this and want to stop hearing about it. Bingham is a good company and so are it's people. Nothing is perfect. Stop attacking and making more trouble. Just leave it alone. PLEASE
Me, the crazy sec-chic from Bingham. Attack me all you want but stop the other crap. I care about those people and yes there may be some internal issues but those are our issues and we'll deal with them inhouse. I apologize for 182 but appreciate the show of love and support. Please just delete 182.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD delete 182. Delete the email and the entire post. I have never seen anything like this and want to stop hearing about it. Bingham is a good company and so are it's people. Nothing is perfect. Stop attacking and making more trouble. Just leave it alone. PLEASE
Me, the crazy sec-chic from Bingham. Attack me all you want but stop the other crap. I care about those people and yes there may be some internal issues but those are our issues and we'll deal with them inhouse. I apologize for 182 but appreciate the show of love and support. Please just delete 182.

@201 - it depends. There are firms with a minimum hours requirement, firms with no minimum hours requirement (who give everyone they aren't firing the same bonus by class year), firms with clearly-stated tiers of bonuses based on different hours targets, and firms with convoluted, discretionary bonus scales (sometimes parsed as a bonus for meeting an hours minimum plus a discretionary bonus for work above and beyond that). Look through the ATL archives - there are many, many, many posts about different firms' bonus offerings for various years. It's getting more and more firm-specific these days, so stating a general "how it works" rule isn't very helpful.

You'll see reference to the "special" bonuses of 2007. In 2007, many of the lockstep, NY-based firms gave everyone the same bonuses as they gave in 2006 (the "regular" bonus) and another "special" bonus on top of that. The special bonuses ranged from $10k for the class of 2006 to $50k for the class of 2000. For 2008, Skadden ditched the special but maintained 2006 levels, while pretty much everyone else in the top tier followed Cravath in ditching the special and cutting 2006 numbers in half. Who knows what will happen in 2009.

Hope that's helpful - as I said, your best bet to seeing how it works is to look through the ATL archives for bonus memos.

"ALL I WANT TO KNOW IS WHO'S COMING WITH ME!"
stepford secretary

delete 182. long time reader of atl, and hate when things are taken down, put personal identification info and this sort of personal information should be remored

I liked it. She had a good point.

I think we all got the email writer's message.

I thought only Kirkland & Ellis employed Stepford's finest! The secretary is correct today's threat of layoffs has everyone afraid to speak out -- especially staff. Associates are also afraid to speak out on their secretary’s behalf. Some are in angst over the departure of staff they depended upon. Then there are attorneys, like those responding here, which hardened their hearts in an attempt to remain above the law of character!

To the Bingham Emailer -- I want to say that I hope all goes well for you!

To 182 suposedly her sister -- I know you meant well. I hope your sister realizes it too. Good luck to you both.

As a co-worker of this employee, I have to say that i agree 100% with EVERYTHING she said. I too feel the exact same way but i have not voiced my true feelings and opinions due to the fear of being on their sh%t list which would eventually lead to being fired and of course then being "black balled" from the legal world. I feel horrible that I cannot speak out and support her but i have a family to support, live check to check like alot of people in today's society and cannot afford to loose my job. I wish i could let my voice be heard while keeping my job but then the final result would be that they would make me miserable and who wants to wake up dreading work each day. I am so sorry my co-worker had to be the sacrifical lamb.

As a co-worker of this employee, I have to say that i agree 100% with EVERYTHING she said. I too feel the exact same way but i have not voiced my true feelings and opinions due to the fear of being on their sh%t list which would eventually lead to being fired and of course then being "black balled" from the legal world. I feel horrible that I cannot speak out and support her but i have a family to support, live check to check like alot of people in today's society and cannot afford to loose my job. I wish i could let my voice be heard while keeping my job but then the final result would be that they would make me miserable and who wants to wake up dreading work each day. I am so sorry my co-worker had to be the sacrifical lamb.

As a co-worker of this employee, I have to say that i agree 100% with EVERYTHING she said. I too feel the exact same way but i have not voiced my true feelings and opinions due to the fear of being on their sh%t list which would eventually lead to being fired and of course then being "black balled" from the legal world. I feel horrible that I cannot speak out and support her but i have a family to support, live check to check like alot of people in today's society and cannot afford to loose my job. I wish i could let my voice be heard while keeping my job but then the final result would be that they would make me miserable and who wants to wake up dreading work each day. I am so sorry my co-worker had to be the sacrifical lamb.

As a co-worker of this employee, I have to say that i agree 100% with EVERYTHING she said. I too feel the exact same way but i have not voiced my true feelings and opinions due to the fear of being on their sh%t list which would eventually lead to being fired and of course then being "black balled" from the legal world. I feel horrible that I cannot speak out and support her but i have a family to support, live check to check like alot of people in today's society and cannot afford to loose my job. I wish i could let my voice be heard while keeping my job but then the final result would be that they would make me miserable and who wants to wake up dreading work each day. I am so sorry my co-worker had to be the sacrifical lamb.

This woman is single, in her late forties, says Daily Affirmations into the mirror every day, has a tattoo of some random goddess on her ankle, dresses bizarrely, keeps a shitload of crystals and totems on her desk, and considers herself more spiritual and enlightened than everyone around her. The other secretaries can't stand her, but she doesn't care because she's above all of that pettiness . . . except when she's spreading rumors herself. And her work is generally good, but the main reason she's still employed is because one very powerful partner likes her, and she knows it, which is why she's constantly coming in late and leaving early and taking more sick and vacation days than anyone else. Am I close?

#219 -- You don't know what you are taking about -- you are so far off base, it isn't even funny.

#214 -- the relative is not her sister, she is not even a relative, she is a close friend.

Wow 208 is totally unstable. Are you a relative of 182 and the original secretary too? What's up with these women.

182, you're a complete asshole. Seriously. You claim to be a friend of the email's author, but this is either a really disgusting passive-aggressive betrayal or you're just dumb as dirt. Thanks to your post, the following are now true: this secretary has effectively discussed not receiving a bonus with EVERYONE at Bingham after being told not to discuss it with ANYONE; her various beefs with Bingham's HR department that she's refused to take up through the proper channels are now public (and your accusations of illegality are dancing on the line of libel); the fact that she's already been warned about inappropriate emails makes her look like a wack job for sending this one; and HR is now aware that she apparently gave a copy of Bingham's confidential handbook to someone outside of the firm. I suppose there's an outside chance that you meant well, but I'm sorry: you fucked her over. You must have known that Bingham people, from senior management to HR to the associates, would be able to read what you wrote. How was any of that supposed to make this situation better for her?

220, I'm assuming you're the author of the original email. You need to stop messing around on here and start doing damage control back at Bingham; start by telling your "friends" to stop "helping" you.

Just a note to all the attorneys who were offended by this lady's use of the word "assignment" - this is a term commonly used by HR depts in law firms, which she probably picked up from hearing it so often.

They call to tell us about "our new assignment" or to say, "there's a change in your assignment" (which hopefully means the biggest dick we work for was fired) Get it?

so don't use this as validation for treating your secretary as "the help" all these years, Ok massuh? we knows you treats us like dat cuz you jes can't helps yer sefs!

we din' git no fancy book lernin like you'uns did . dats why we's so's illerites ! shucks! we's jes da lowly help is all.

Hope to see you all working in Starbucks soon.

#219- This person is a very close friend of mine and has been for many years so i can tell you that your assumption of her is totally inaccurate. She is an amazing wife and mother, a great friend to have and is a very LOYAL person. The problem is that people mistake loyalty for weakness and take advantage of it. We all have our breaking point and this was hers. A human being can only take so much. It is so sad to see that so many people loose touch with humanity, sympathy and compassion. I understand that it all comes down to money in corporate america but how can bosses be so apathetic about people's misfortune and thrive on it? Since when does being sick or having a sick baby get an employer so mad that it justifies antagonizing an employee? I cannot believe how apathetic and out of touch with reality some people are. Thank god many of you have not had a string of unfortunate things happen to you but believe me- it is not something others should thrive on. It seems to me like alot of people were getting off on her problems. Thank god she and her family are fine and will continue to be fine but how dare others judge her or resent her for the time off she had to take due to medical issues. She is not a lonely single woman with tatoo's who worships good luck charms and crystals as some idiot on here stated. She has a very full and content life. It is because of this that she is able to express and stand up for herself. She has LOTS of family and friends that love and support her and at the end of the day that is all that matters. I feel that alot of you who are getting so worked up have no other purpose in life and nothing else to do with your time after work. Mabey you have nothing to come home to so you jump on the bandwagon and comment on something you know nothing about. It sounds to me like alot of the negetive people on here are cowards who are just annonomously bashing her because god knows most of you have zero backbone to have said it to her face. For years she has said so many wonderful things about alot of people who have worked with her and now all of a sudden everyone has a problem with her e-mail and now all of a siudden she is a bad person? I am taking the time out to post on this because while i am no longer in corporate america anymore (thank god)- i know what it is like to have to balance it all while having health issues, a baby, crazy commute, etc. Mabey that is why i understand where she is comming from so well- because i have been there. I once had a serious life threatening illness, worked my ass off and still got betrayed by bosses and co-workers. All i ask is that some of you take a minute and remember we are human and have emotions. We are not robots. I guess all these negetive posts are obviously by people who drank the kool-aid.

223: the use of massuh was mildly amusing and made your point. The rest was cringe-worthy. You're an ass, and a bitter one, too. You're defensive because you're insecure and resent that someone who actually worked hard to get an education earned a job that puts him in a position in which YOU are assigned to him. So, no matter what he does, you'll interpret everything as a slight, further evidence that he is getting high & mighty, lording his education over you. I've heard it all. You project your pathetic insecurities onto your "assignments." And you actually take pleasure in the idea of a young lawyer -- who probably incurred over $100K in debt to achieve what he did -- losing his job. I can assure you, I never heard any of the young associates with whom I worked relishing the idea of a legal assistant or paralegal getting axed. Sick.

225 I think you missed the point of 223. The education comment was in response to the many replies on this thread that imply that all secretaries are stupid, useless and uneducated. If you read an article several months ago on this site about staff being laid off at another big law firm, there were several comments from lawyers basically saying they deserved it. You seem very defensive, indeed. Yea, young lawyers incur lots of debt to get their degree. They also make a lot of money working in BigLaw and if they lived frugally for a few years they could have paid all or most of the debt off. I think that was also part of the original crazy-email secy's point about people today with their huge homes, fancy cars, shoes and bags, traveling all over the place and spending money like there is no tomorrow and then complaining and worrying so much about losing all their material things that they are afraid to speak out or defend their friends and colleagues. I don't think most secretaries resent attorneys who know how to treat people who are "below" them with a little respect. Unfortunately there are too many who act like the people below them are beneath them , which is clearly displayed in the comments on this thread.

and this my friends is wonderful world of law.

GET OUT WHILE YOU CAN!

225 I think you missed the point of 223. The education comment was in response to the many replies on this thread that imply that all secretaries are stupid, useless and uneducated. If you read an article several months ago on this site about staff being laid off at another big law firm, there were several comments from lawyers basically saying they deserved it. You seem very defensive, indeed. Yea, young lawyers incur lots of debt to get their degree. They also make a lot of money working in BigLaw and if they lived frugally for a few years they could have paid all or most of the debt off. I think that was also part of the original crazy-email secy's point about people today with their huge homes, fancy cars, shoes and bags, traveling all over the place and spending money like there is no tomorrow and then complaining and worrying so much about losing all their material things that they are afraid to speak out or defend their friends and colleagues. I don't think most secretaries resent attorneys who know how to treat people who are "below" them with a little respect. Unfortunately there are too many who act like the people below them are beneath them , which is clearly displayed in the comments on this thread.

It irritates me when people who decided not to be ambitiious or didnt have any dreams or passions worth pursuing like to rationalize their paycheck to paycheck existence that was based on being minimally sufficient to satisfactory by assuming that we who decided we had dreams and goals and pursued them and put hard work and deferred fun and lazy time and acted with focus are somehow people without real joy in their lives or loved ones or friends or personalities....UM NO. But if you need to believe that to make yourself feel better go right ahead. We went to school, did well, pushed ourselves to do things that was sometimes fun and more times not fun to achieve something greater while you decided to just go with the flow and not put any serious focus or effort into anything. Sure we wanted more and better for ourselves so we decided to work and strategize for it. If you feel insecure about someone deciding they just didnt want to get by in life thats on you not on MASSAH.

-former below povery level child, avid reader and dreamer top school graduate educated attorney who is looking beyond the law on how to live a fulfilled life.

How is it that somebody who can not spell or use grammar correctly can be a legal secretary? isn't it important to have legal documents typed up correctly?

This person can not even think coherently.

How on earth did she get and keep this job?

The same questions apply to her co-worker who is afraid she will "loose" her job.

How is it that somebody who can not spell or use grammar correctly can be a legal secretary? isn't it important to have legal documents typed up correctly?

This person can not even think coherently.

How on earth did she get and keep this job?

The same questions apply to her co-worker who is afraid she will "loose" her job.

How is it that somebody who can not spell or use grammar correctly can be a legal secretary? isn't it important to have legal documents typed up correctly?

This person can not even think coherently.

How on earth did she get and keep this job?

The same questions apply to her co-worker who is afraid she will "loose" her job.

How is it that somebody who can not spell or use grammar correctly can be a legal secretary? isn't it important to have legal documents typed up correctly?

This person can not even think coherently.

How on earth did she get and keep this job?

The same questions apply to her co-worker who is afraid she will "loose" her job.

#229 congrats on your success, but please do not assume that anyone who did not follow your path and anyone who lives paycheck to paycheck is lazy and lives without dreams or passions. That's judging a whole lotta people who you know nothing about. Sure there are some people who are lazy and envious of people who are doing well --but it goes both ways-- It irriates me when people who are doing well look down on those who aren't doing as well and assume its their own fault and they are just lazy and/or stupid.

- former lower class child, current lower-middle class adult from alcoholic/drug addicted family, sexual assault victim, avid reader, daydreamer and also looking beyond the law to having a more fulfilled life, trying to put self through school while working full time, living paycheck to paycheck and incurring lots of debt on the way.

good luck to us both

#233 Cannot is one word.

229 completely nails the general attitude of the legal staff who comment on ATL. In their minds, most attorneys are assholes who delight in belittling those "below" them while most staff are the righteous keepers of integrity and morals. Give it a rest.

I understand where it comes from because I'm only a lowly associate to the partners at the firm (and so I tend to think partners are not as good people as we worker bee associates), but I (and most associates) at least know that even most partners are generally normal people - they're someone's spouse, father, mother, child.

229 completely nails the general attitude of the legal staff who comment on ATL. In their minds, most attorneys are assholes who delight in belittling those "below" them while most staff are the righteous keepers of integrity and morals. Give it a rest.

I understand where it comes from because I'm only a lowly associate to the partners at the firm (and so I tend to think partners are not as good people as we worker bee associates), but I (and most associates) at least know that even most partners are generally normal people - they're someone's spouse, father, mother, child.

Sorry 191 but 222 is an ass
Of course she did not give me your actually precious handbook. She copied a couple of pages on "make-up" time for my interpretation. Seems you have a policy but instead of rewarding those that don't use it, you internally reslaughter those that do.
As for her emails get a grip and some actual knowledge of your systems. Restrict group access on lists and you wont even have these issues. Oh but that's right---you wouldn't have these issues.
As to proper channels NYHR makes these staffers so miserable they are not only afraid to loose their jobs but moreso like an earlier post said afraid to wake up miserable for work (as provided by NYHR). I believe she was finally ready to go "proper channels" and requested the information only days before all of this.
Yeah, so I'm a friend of hers and I work in HR. I see the employees as people first and do my job with my head held high.

Lastly and I am truly finished with this garbage how can you tell an employee not to discuss say over lunch in a casual conversation that she did not get a bonus? Only if you are worried about your appearance because most others know she was a hard and valuable worker. And yes she was working during that time.

Get a life!

Bemused Londoner (-:

229 here - no i did not mean all paycheck to paycheck people are incompetent or were lazy. It was a one sided rant that didnt cover those who work hard and try to do a good job and go home and live paycheck to paycheck. Ive worked with some incredibly smart and capable people, a few who were secretaries. one who was older and black and should have been pulling 3x her salary and should have had the executive secretary status and pay but BECAUSE she was black was passed over for it continually despite managing life and business of a completely disorganized advertising managing director and his brand team all while baking the most delicious bakeries for the team to share - all while being paid a measly 37K with over 20 years experience. her other co-secretary who was no where near as industrious, with only 6 years experience with a worse attitude but a college degree making 2x the pay with the executive level status for less work and hassle.

BUT there is definite envy about how we must have SOLD our souls and are bitter unhappy people because we decided we wanted more for ourselves and actually worked for it and are (or were) pulling 160K-300K more.

I just want to know if I'm getting 222...so you agree that she did not get a bonus because they viewed her as simply not working? Even though I read earlier it was for surgery, "disability". If there is any evidence of this I smell a lawsuit.

should have said 207 but is clearly same as 222

I didn't think the email was really a big deal, though it reinforces that anyone who uses the allfirm list for something other than pure info is probably going to say something annoying/stupid. Initially the comments were funny (see, e.g., #31). But now it's devolved into class warfare/Jerry Springer banter. Boring.

So,

what do legal secretaries do in big law these days? And how many attornies do they support? In house we have four to five attorneys sharing an admin, who mainly handle bill payment and files. hard to sit around all day being bored with nothing to do -- worried about layoffs, then dealing with utterly stressed out prima donnas equally worried about their jobs.

The email was a massive cry for help --. in our company we'd make an EAP mental health referral, but even so i must say -- as a client -- i certainly would not want this individual anywhere near confidential data or privileged communications. That's based on the original email, not on anything on here.

As to secretaries, I've always sought out the brightest of secretaries, often women looking for health care benefits while they raise kids, perhaps single mothers. Over time, besides being great assistants, they have (variously) gone to law school, gone to college, become legal assistants or run administrative groups. One of the best became hiring coordinator for a major DC firm, had kids and decided she liked being a secretary better.

It's perceived as an entry level job, but its not necessarily a position occupied by entry level personnel. if this thread accomplishes anything, maybe some on this group could benefit from that thought. Not everyone had the same opportunities we did.

I can't believe she sent this out. She'll have a rude awakening when she gets back from her vacation. I'll miss you on those smoke breaks :(

242/243, 182/238, 222 here: I'm not Bingham HR, you fucking idiots. 182/238, you may be the dumbest person I've ever encountered on these boards, and that is a significant accomplishment. If you thought I was Bingham HR and you're not supposed to have the handbook AT ALL, again, I ask you how you're helping your friend to tell me that she gave you part of it instead of all of it?

Also, law firms tend not to restrict access to the firmwide email distribution list; instead, they treat their employees like adults and put in place policies LIMITING WHAT PEOPLE ARE SUPPOSED TO USE THE LIST FOR (blogging about your fucking feelings is generally not on that list at any law firm; if Bingham encourages it, well, color me shocked), but if there's an emergency, everyone should be able to let everyone know ASAP. Jesus tapdancing Christ!

I think that all of you Bingham people need to stop blogging on this website or you'll all find yourselves on the other side of the Starbucks counter (but not at the one next to your office building). To those who understood and agreed with the writer's initial email, I'm both amused and flabbergasted. Her intentions may have been heartfelt but who in heavens name was able to even decipher what this woman was trying to convey from the rambling blather of misspelled words and disconnected sentences that she wrote? And why in heavens name would anyone, ANYONE, send their unsolicited personal opinions to everyone in the entire law firm? Bingham, like any other organization, may have its faults or warts but for heavensakes, WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?

Seriously - the young lawyers in this group need to get over themselves. Partners don't like it when you think poorly of the secretaries. You'll soon find, young lawyers, that the secretaries can make (and sometimes break) your career. And they know it.

Signed,
Former legal secretary

Co-sign on 247 and 248. I don't care who you are, partner emeritus or apprentice toilet cleaner; I don't know you, this is your work email, not open mic night, and I have to put up with enough at work without having to deal with the pseudo-spiritual ramblings of complete strangers in my inbox. Take those tired "Chicken Soup For the Soul" stylings on the road and keep that shit there.

Bingham McCutchen should have just left this go. Everyone working in a suffocating, stepfordlike job needs to blow off a little steam from time to time. Give the secretary back her job!

Yeah 247 on 9/11 that's just what everyone did use mass email to say run for your life.

When's the last time you saw an email that said oh there's a fire under your ass. That 's what those loud sirens and blinking lights are for genious.

This secretary sounds cool. Fuck Bingham for firing her.

Fink 182.

#251 -- totally agreed but you blow off steam on your own time. This secretary couldn't put two sentences together if she tried and didn't have the sense God gave her to use some judgment - any judgment. If this is what passes for legal secretaries today, well, I dunno. Perhaps there is a better fit for her out there somewhere. Clearly, it isn't a law firm.

#251 -- totally agreed but you blow off steam on your own time. This secretary couldn't put two sentences together if she tried and didn't have the sense God gave her to use some judgment - any judgment. If this is what passes for legal secretaries today, well, I dunno. Perhaps there is a better fit for her out there somewhere. Clearly, it isn't a law firm.

So it looks like she got fired:

http://abovethelaw.com/2009/06/bingham_mccutchen_staffer_does.php

"the secretaries can make (and sometimes break) your career"

I am so SO sick of this attitude. 249 thinks the "young lawyers" need to get over themselves? The sad truth is that every group in Biglaw (associates, secretaries, paralegals, partners) needs to get over themselves. Each of these groups has a different flavor of the same shitty, self-absorbed attitude - that *they* are the ones who "really" make things happen in the firm and everyone else are worthless idiots whose sense of self-worth is gratuitously overinflated. Barf.

Aaahh!! 6 months since I left the practice of law for a nice, cushy, do-nothing job in the Federal government. Life is good. I'm sure not going to miss self-righteous, angry, sexually frustrated old hags in the secretarial pool, nor the over-pampered Tracy Flick-like female attorneys. Life is good!!!!!

So, Number 6 -- Did you get in touch with her and offer a damn job!!!

260,

Eh. I got laid off so I'm not in any position to do anyone any favors right now.

260

To #182:

I'm a recently laid-off legal secretary with over 25 years of experience. I really appreciated your comment. Although I'm in LA, if your firm has an LA office I'd like to submit my resume for any open positions.

My experience is in litigation and transactional work.
And yes, I'm a hard worker who appreciates working.

To #182:

I'm a recently laid-off legal secretary with over 25 years of experience. I really appreciated your comment. Although I'm in LA, if your firm has an LA office I'd like to submit my resume for any open positions.

My experience is in litigation and transactional work.
And yes, I'm a hard worker who appreciates working.

OBVIOUSLY,
you all have too much time on your hands
why don't all you do something more productive with your time....

Which one #6? I know many unemployed yet fabulously talented and hard working legal secretaries.

#1 - you're an idiot.

28, you took the words right out of my mouth

164. You will be a terrific future partner at biglaw, and an even better defendant when your " middle of menopause" associate/assistant/hr person sues you.

267: you're probably an ugly old fart ass partner working in BigLaw who'd dream of the day you could get that middle of menopause assistant in the sack while you don't even qualify as a double bagger yourself.

Double bagger means one for you in case hers falls off. (or is that his?) Oh, and I bet it would require Hefty handle ties to the waste!

OMG. Are all of you commentors attorneys? Amazing. I think all of these comments are unbelieveably crude. I've been a legal secretary probably as long as this lady and I've seen this field change dramatically. There was a time when attorneys did have integrity and ethics and treated staff with respect. Now, we're no more than clerks and servants. I've been screamed at and humiliated and insulted regularly by "big important partners" and arrogant, pretentious newbies, and it's not right. But, I take it all, keep quiet, and keep trucking. I cannot wait to retire and I would love to speak to all of you when you're pushing 60. Believe me ... it gets very old taking crap from people. I totally understand why people "go postal".

Character? Most of you are reading this crap and commenting on 'company' time.

Character? Most of you are reading this crap and commenting on 'company' time.

258: Your statement "the secretaries can make (and sometimes break) your career" means you obviously have no clue! Pray that a legal secretary does not find out who you are. I have been in legal for over 25 years and I have seen associates brutalized by a legal secretary to their partners and eventually the partner's mind is tainted. It is real! Never piss off a partner secretary it is job suicide!