Bingham McCutchen’s ‘Stepford Secretary’ Has Left The Building
A couple of days ago, we brought you the story of a Bingham McCutchen secretary who believed that her firm had great “CHARACTER,” despite these tough economic times. She closed her remarks with this:
So, although I am grateful for my job and middle class life, I realize that living daily in fear and conforming to play a Stepford role will not ensure either. Besides, I value and respect too many of the people at Bingham. I’ll stick with good old CHARACTER.
As we — and many others — anticipated, that secretary is no longer employed at Bingham.
The firm would not comment about its internal decision, but multiple sources independently tell us that she has been let go. As we understand it, she was fired on Wednesday.
One of our commenters had this insightful response to the Stepford Secretary’s situation:
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.
But it could be that the secretary had more to say.
Details after the jump.
Obviously, we can’t always tell who is who in our anonymous comment thread. But it’s not impossible that this comment was left by the (former) Bingham secretary:
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.
To be fair, her note was not a total slam job on Bingham McCutchen. Of course, it was also ridiculously unreasonable to expect that the her thoughts would remain in-house after she sent it to every employee at the firm.
What was comment 182, you ask? Here’s an excerpt:
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.
Quite frankly, despite all the commenters who suggested it, I don’t think that anything here is a class issue or has anything to do with being an associate, a secretary, or some other staff member. Put simply: people flip out. It’s always happened, and the general uncertainty during this recession probably means that it will continue to happen.
These are tough times, and most people are just trying to hang on and get through these times without saying or doing anything they will regret.
But that is a tough needle to thread, and not everybody is going to succeed.
Earlier: Bingham McCutchen Staffer Doesn’t Want to be a ‘Stepford’ Secretary
(171) 
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
I motion that the editors of this site adopt a policy of deleting all "first!" postings so as to safeguard what little remains of our profession's aura of intellectual respectability.
Also, could someone with more context please summarize in one sentence the overall theme the secretary's email? I honestly would like to know.
Hope you feel good about this.
WHAT THE F*** did she think was going to happen. Ranting while drunk should be a crime!
"This is part of the facebook/twitter/blog phenomenon where everyone thinks they can say WHATEVER they want, WHENEVER they want, WHEREVER they want. "
Whatever. The powers that be in my firm send out meaningless emails on a regular basis. Any argument based on preserving the sanctity and usefulness of corporate email is doomed to failure. She is guilty of, at worse, forgetting she worked at a place that was all too happy to take retribution against a secretary that they never would against a partner.
Repeating from the other thread, from a client perspective its tough -- if not impossible -- to entrust confidential material to people this lacking in discretion.
What happened to Danny Bonaduce? Commenters are saying he died today?
What happened to all the first posts?
"The powers that be in my firm"
That's the key point, they are the powers that be. I'm as anti-big firm as anybody but this isn't unique to the legal industry. Its one thing for Ballmer at MSFT to send an e-mail about something to the whole company (even if some employees find it meaningless), its another for a 22-year old just out of college to do the same thing. I agree completely with the the poster's point, that today's younger generation have difficulty understanding proper channels, whether its due to new technology, crappy parenting, or something else I don't know.
I do know if this happened 10 years ago and ATL was around, no one would be defending the secretary and "eekboy."
6--close, but no cigar.
1--what a waste of FIRST. I hope the next legal assistant you boss around slaps you.
Shame on Bingham. She shouldn't have been let go for sending the letter. Reprimanded, yes, but not fired.
My sympathy is with the ‘secretary ass pounding’ guy, who will now have to fill his late mornings with another pastime.
What if the secretary thought that her advice would be taken and that the firm would change its ways? Planning on this result, what if she went out the day of the email and picked out some great bone-colored business cards to promote herself as a self-help guru at great expense? Section 90?
11, I think it's actually a gal.
9 - the problem is shared. In part, *your* generation - I'm assuming you're somewhere near 40 - has actively squelched any opportunity for congenial corporate enterprise. We may be young and arrogant, but you, after all, parented us, and you, after all, raised the bar for our performance while simultaneously lowering the bar for your own competence, reliability, integrity, honesty and performance. If you haven't noticed your generation has, by your own hands, dismantled the firms you revere.
The secretary is reckless and should have been terminated. We agree on that.
However, your post is a weak effort to extend her failure - she probably isn't even from the "facebook generation" - to our generation, and is emblematic of the routine failure of your generation to understand that you have failed. Yours is a generation built of capricious and selfish management. Ours is your victim.
This...is a bummer, man.
4- you are a retard- it's about knowing your place and your role- the powers that be have the power and can do whatever they want. crap like twitter and blogging gives people a false sense of importance and makes them forget how inconsequential they are
11, I think it is actually Jamie Lee Curtis.
Moderator, please delete comment 2.
Nice to see the this firm stands behind its people. The poor woman is ill and only needs to see a therapist. She has a child for christs sakes.
Congrats, you guys at ATL probably got this woman who appears to be a single mom with health problems fired.
At my firm rambling e-mails like this sometimes get sent, and the normal response is a reprimand, which in the extreme cases like this is sent by a partner in a follow up firm-wide e-mail.
Nobody has ever been fired. This happens once or twice a year.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
8, 16-- If the secretary is so insignificant, why not just delete the email and move on, just like I have to dozens of times a day? Your argument seems to rest on the proposition that she's significant enough that sending out an email is so dangerous that she should be immediately terminated, but she's so unimportant she doesn't have the right to use email in the same manner it is used by others every day.
I'm suspicious of the "Career Center" posting about at which firms vacation time is safe. And we can't comment on it? Did the firms pay for these survey results? Really - your vacation is safe at Weil? I had more vacations there cancelled than not and watched a partner tell his secretary that she also needed to cancel her vacation.
14=eekboy, trying to hide behind capitalization.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
I feel sorry for her since she will have a hell of a time finding another job after that departure, doubly so in this economy, but really? What did she think would happen? Nobody ever got in trouble for keeping their negative personal opinions of their employeer to themselves. Work e-mail is not Facebook and actions have consequences. If things were so awful for her there, she could have quietly left with her reputation intact rather than become untouchable.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
I feel sorry for her since she will have a hell of a time finding another job after that departure, doubly so in this economy, but really? What did she think would happen? Nobody ever got in trouble for keeping their negative personal opinions of their employeer to themselves. Work e-mail is not Facebook and actions have consequences. If things were so awful for her there, she could have quietly left with her reputation intact rather than become untouchable.
Clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. This thing has whistleblower protection written all over it.
14/4, I'm 35, not even a practicing attorney anymore, made it clear that I'm anti-firm (apparently you don't pay attention well), and trust me, the baby boom generation is screwing me just as much as its screwing you, if not more so.
I've just learned to act like a responsible adult, why generation whiners haven't accepted this responsibility is beyond me. The presumptiveness in your post is indicative of your maturity. Stop being petulant.
-9
Thank you, that is much better.
-2
Separately, I hate to see anyone break down. It makes me worried that it might happen to me or someone I know. But one thing being a corporate attorney has taught me is to try not to worry about something I'm not in a position to immediately do anything about. It's a good safeguard against breaking down.
May we all move to San Diego one day and watch every sunset.
As a first year student, I just wanted to ask everyone a question about this whole firms fiing people for speaking out thing. Isn't it a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act to terminate someone's employment in retaliation for their complaining about the company? or is there some element of an FLSA claim that is missing in these situations?
Does anyone know if this is clearly a wrongful termination cause of action? Does it have whistleblower protection written all over it?
What would this 'older than my assignment' secretary do if we didn't have email. Would she have sent this to all associates and partners an interoffice memo? If the interoffice memo sounds like a dumb idea, so is the email. Just becuase you have technology at your fingertips, behaviors in businesses don't change. The 'holier than thou' and 'older than my assignment' should have known this. If something feels like it is a screw up.. it most probably is.
Why isn't anyone mentioning wrongful termination/ whistleblower protection?
Rumor has it David Carradine sent out a similar email right before hanging himself in Thailand.
I wonder if this is clearly a wrongful termination cause of action. Maybe this thing has whisteblower protection written all over it?
Rumor has it David Carradine sent out a similar email right before hanging himself in Thailand.
As a first year student, I just wanted to ask everyone a question about this whole firms fiing people for speaking out thing. Isn't it a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act to terminate someone's employment in retaliation for their complaining about the company? or is there some element of an FLSA claim that is missing in these situations?
Poor old bird. Still, I don't know how she thought this was a good idea, especially when even those able to keep their meltdowns private are struggling to hang onto their jobs.
Bingham has rescinded incoming associate offers. Why nothing on this yet?
At my old firm they'd hire a bunch of college kids for the summer who were the spoiled, moronic children of partners at another firm--the 2 firms would swap idiots with each other. One of the young men decided it would be a good idea, since he was getting Chipotle, to email the entire firm to ask if anyone wanted anything. He didn't get fired, probably because his dad was rich, but he did get a lot of "don't ever do that again" emails back. And he never did, so lesson learned. The best, however, was one person who wrote back and said "don't ever do that again. But, while you're at it, get me a chicken burrito." Couldn't they have just told her "don't do it again....but while you're at it, get us all chicken burritos." Is this really that big of a deal? Get over yourselves, Bingham.
Mastah sure showed her good.
Mystal, your moobs are mine! Prepare for the protein, bitch!
Congratulations to ATL for getting a staffer fired and letting the whole legal community know about it. Way to keep the boom-time douchiness of law school classes of '04 through '07 alive.
I wonder how you people live with yourselves.
ELLEN? Is this ELLEN BARSHEVSKY?
She's been known to write rants and use CAPS quite often.
I think ELLEN just got canned. Maybe this will leave her more time for her blawgggg.
Rescinded incoming Associate offers? More details
What the hell are moobs?
Comment deletion is truly a slippery slope. I applauded ATL's previous "hands-off" policy when it came to comments. Nonetheless, I understood when the comment police began removing extremely offensive comments. This recent development of removing "FIRST"s and grammar corrections makes no sense. When do you draw the line? How long will it be until ATL devolves into some Orwellian nightmare where comments must first be approved before dissemination? What makes the ass pounding comments more deserving of an audience than the FIRSTers? I hope this doesn't get out of hand.
59th! And please remove 58.
here's the video that bingham shows all of its attorneys during orientation regarding the hiring/firing policies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_moia-oVI
sounds like she could have seen this coming.
54 - don't be stupid. She sent the email to everyone in the firm, including the partners that ended up firing her. Same thing for eekboy, god rest his soul.
@58 - I find your words offensive. How can you possibly compare FIRSTers to asspounders?
50 is lying.
This story should serve as a cautionary tale to any staff person or associate who feels entitled to vent out their feelings while utilizing firmwide email. You are here to work, not vent or rant. You can go seek professional help for your mental maladies. I am not here to counsel you or to recommend you taking a mental health day. If you feel you are breaking down, take this as a sign that you are not cut out for this profession. Seek a less stressful job where your input is important. At my firm, your input should only be given when solicited. Keep your unsolicited opinions to yourself lest you want a hero's laurels to adorn thy brow in your permanent professional slumber.
14 -- awesome math skills. I am an "almost 40" (36, actually) attorney, and I actually can't really be the parent of any of you whippersnappers. I just was not giving birth in my teens. And in fact, most successful biglaw attorneys I know were not giving birth in their teens. I know, everyone over 25 must seem *so old* to you that we all must seem like your parents, and we all must be baby boomers, even those of us born 20 years after the boom.
Good lord.
Moderator--please delete all posts prior to this one, but leave this one so I can say...
FIRST!!
PE: I thought I told you to shut up. You tried to do schtick on a suicide. Just disappear.
This is my BOOMSTICK!
65: If you were born 20 years after the boom, you'd be in your 20s.
i think this secretary has a great claim. wrongful termination maybe. additionally, the firm likely implied that it would never take negative action towards a secretary for blowing the whistle, imposing a type of contract... having just taken contracts, i'm pretty sure it was in section 90 of the restatement...
If she was experienced as she says she was, then I don't really feel sorry for her because she should know better. The firing is kind of harsh. But right now firms have itchy trigger fingers, especially when it comes to staff. So she missed that cue too. Overall, not very bright.
68 -
Excellent Army of Darkness reference.
Are all men from the future loud mouth braggarts such as yourself?
Shop smart, shop S-Mart.
I wonder if Mystal blogs topless.
Shame on Bingham. Weak. Very weak.
Opinions are like a-holes; everyone has one. Firm e-mail is not twitter or a place to post your personal feelings. Some secretaries forget that they are just that, a secretary, nothing more. I consantantly here snob nosed secretaries that go around ranting about who they work for - they forget the key words - "work for". I'm glad she got fired.
BTW, I am a secretary that just does my job and doesn't rant and rave about what I do or who I work for.
Isn't this the firm that puts viagra in the water coolers or something?
You made me nostalgic.
Alright you Primitive Screwheads, listen up! You see this? This... is my boomstick! The twelve-gauge double-barreled Remington. S-Mart's top of the line. You can find this in the sporting goods department. That's right, this sweet baby was made in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Retails for about a hundred and nine, ninety five. It's got a walnut stock, cobalt blue steel, and a hair trigger. That's right. Shop smart. Shop S-Mart. You got that?
Serious question here:
Why exactly are some people so disturbed by that 182 comment from the last post? Explain it to me - I must be missing something. The person identified themselves to the entire firm by sending this message and revealed lots of personal details in it. Clearly they knew they were opening themselves up to this sort of thing. And why was the there no similar outrage over the distribution and publication of the Quinn Emmanuel email on ATL? They are almost identical.
Is it just that the Bingham PR and HR people come here more often to troll in the comments?
Opinions are like a-holes; everyone has one. Firm e-mail is not twitter or a place to post your personal feelings. Some secretaries forget that they are just that, a secretary, nothing more. I consantantly here snob nosed secretaries that go around ranting about who they work for - they forget the key words - "work for". I'm glad she got fired.
BTW, I am a secretary that just does my job and doesn't rant and rave about what I do or who I work for.
69, when do you think the "baby boom" began? 1985? So you're either a troll or a moron.
63 & 56: No BS. I know someone who got the word a couple of weeks ago. Seems it was under the radar or an isolated incident.
42/44/46 = epic win.
Er, just what was she blowing the whistle on? I'm not aware of any regs or statute requiring law firm employees to have CHARACTER. And according to her own friend's/relative's/alter ego's stupid-ass tell-all posts in the other thread (which are, IMHO, far more likely to have contributed to her termination than the email itself), this woman clearly had one foot on the steps of the guillotine before she even sent the email. Why she then sent it is beyond me, but anyone suggesting that she got fired based on sending the email alone is likely dead wrong.
excellent, elie, you just got the poor woman fired. sure, she's a bonehead for having written the email, but absent your putting it on ATL, do you really think she would have gotten canned? and, by posting it you've essentially made her unemployable by any law firm. when you pick on partners, that's one thing, but to crush a secretary for a few laughs in a 15-min "news" cycle is pretty shameful. nice work
73 beat me to it. Well done.
FIRST!!! OMG -- FIRST!!!
Join the fucking club lady. There's alot of us here.
Yours truly,
Laid-off (former) Bingham Associate
P.S. - Bingham sucks. There was very little CHARACTER to begin with (at least where I was).
The baby boom was from 1946-1964. 69 is a moron.
You gotta be kidding me! This woman did NOT lose her job because ATL republished an e-mail she had already sent to HER ENTIRE FIRM!!! Please, let's use more than 1% of our brains, people.
Posting this person's email/meltdown on your blog is just incredibly sleazy. You stink.
Opinions are like secretaries' assholes. Pound them.
89 is spot on.
90 is a moron. Sounds like a Bingham partner.
SO, even after tons of people ask that comment 182 be deleted, it still is there. Why?
91 is spot on.
I do not understand comment 182.
I don't know if this is because it was poorly written, taken out of context, or if I am retarded. Either way, could someone provide an explanation?
Please delete Section 90. It has no relevance to this post.
Please delete Bingham. It has no relevance to the world.
Please delete the word delete. It has no relevance to anything. And I just took this joke too far.
Please delete the word delete. It has no relevance to anything. And I just took this joke too far.
84 and everyone else on that particular train, fuck off. You are absurd. If she got fired, she got fired for sending the email in the first place PLUS the absenteeism PLUS the tardiness PLUS the HR issues PLUS giving out sections of the handbook PLUS the previous inappropriate email PLUS the whatever the hell else she'd been doing. Unless she sent the email to ATL (which, based on one of the posts she left on the boards, I'm not sure she didn't), it's not her fault that it ended up on here, and its being on here didn't do Bingham any harm; the only thing it said about the firm was that it had a wack job in its secretarial pool, and what law firm doesn't? Bingham doesn't need a lawsuit, and if she'd had a spotless record, she'd have gotten a reprimand for sending the email and embarrassed for having it on ATL. Obviously there's a lot more going on here any of us knows about, but only a complete douchebag would blame her termination on the publication of this letter on ATL.
clearly, Bingham is just "living our values."
57 -- http://lmgtfy.com/?q=moobs
100--do you really think she would have been fired without the posting on ATL? really? and, before you get all holier-than-thou about her poor judgment, do you think your job would be secure if ATL were to post some of your indiscreet emails? (and your response that you would be so dumb as to send it to your whole firm is meaningless--remember the chunger?) please
14 = nailed it
LAYOFFS RISE
SECRETARIES DEPART
QUINN'S CHARACTER REMAINS
4, it's called having a sense of place. Partners send boring, stupid, pointless firmwides all the time at my firm, but it's always about cases, clients, policy, or something RELATED TO THE FIRM. None of them are sending out long rambling personal emails. If you work at a place where partners are regularly sending out crap like what that secretary sent, I suggest that you get a job at a real firm, because you're apparently at one of those TTTs that sells itself as "one big family" and your partners have bought into their own bullshit.
I'm sorry she lost her job but everybody at a big firm should have the sense not to send an email to "all." No matter how many stupid emails everyone gets a day full of urban legends and unfunny jokes and pictures, even if from staff members they know, people get all kinds of pissed off at firmwide emails, especially from staff members. Even if, as in this case, they were modestly relevant to work.
My ex is a paralegal at a big firm. We used to joke hypothetically about me getting fake email addresses and sending stupid annoying emails to "all@****.com" or "partners@****.com" or "NYpartners@***.com" and the like.
In fact, you could probably troll a whole lot of firms using similar email addresses . . .
72 -
Nope. Just me baby...just me.
"This wouldn't have happened if the firm was run by Latinas!"
-- SotomayOR!
Still don't see how she deserved to be canned. The email was strange, but that's about it.
When am I going to stop clicking on that stupid Rick Astley video link???
65 says: I am an "almost 40" (36, actually) attorney; we all must be baby boomers, even those of us born 20 years after the boom
69 says: 65: If you were born 20 years after the boom, you'd be in your 20s.
81 says: 69, when do you think the "baby boom" began? 1985? So you're either a troll or a moron.
89 says: The baby boom was from 1946-1964. 69 is a moron.
Jesus! No wonder none of the lawyers that make it to managing partner can make effective business decisions. None of you can do basic math! Did you give up the math and sciences exclusively for liberal arts? Amazing that you can calculate your bonuses!
If someone was born 20 years after the boom, he would indeed be in his mid 20's, as 1964 + 20 = 1984... his BIRTH year. 2009 - 1984 = ???? TA DA! 25!
69 Wins: Go manage a mega-firm, 69! DLA maybe - clearly they need help with math!
The others should buy a friggin calculator.
- ex DLA staffer gone one, no... MANY, better
111 -
Here is a video showing how to tweak your browser settings so that the videos won't play until you ask them to
http://tinyurl.com/2w4apm
Dammit, 113!!!
I suspected as much, but I just HAD to know...
&$#*($&*#&!!!!
103, you've clearly got a hard-on for the idea that Elie got her fired; far be it from me to stop you from stroking it. And I think I will get holier-than-thou about her poor judgment, thanks very much. The email wasn't as stupid as Peter Chung's by a long shot, but it was damned stupid, especially for someone who'd already been warned about inappropriate emails. Then you have to consider the fact that wacky firmwides are fair game for ATL, always have been, always will be, and there's a fair chance that she was aware of the existence of ATL. So I'm saying she should have figured there was a chance her madness would end up on here, I'm saying it's her own fault she got fired because she shouldn't have sent the damn thing in the first place, and I'm saying take your martyrdom butthurt somewhere else.
Reality check: Firms are looking for any excuse to fire staff and associates to thin the ranks and stop bleeding. Thus, logic would dictate that one should avoid any behavior that can serve as an excuse for firing. This woman either was 1) really drunk when she sent that or 2) really stupid to not expect to be fired after sending that.
Also, all the griping here is pathetic. This woman made it abundantly clear that she cares more about "character" than continuing to receive a paycheck. He e-mail basically said "I am an annoying non-conformist that is unprofessional and care more about my own opinions than my job." I.e., she raised a big banner reading: I'd rather be fired than stop being "me."
As evidenced by post 182, her employer obviously did not like "her" and was demanding a change in attitude/behavior at work. Her firm simply called her to the carpet and made her put her (now lack of) money where her mouth was.
I agree--14 IS Eekboy. That annoying usage is very distinct.
I agree--14 IS Eekboy. That annoying usage is very distinct.
If she was a good employee who just made this one error in judgment, she probably would have came through this Ok. But as her friend pointed out, her employment has been troubled for a while. This doesn't sound like it was a good employee that was just having a bad day or a momentary lapse. She probably pulled other stunts we didn't hear about. Its never pleasant to hear about someone getting fired and people throw that concept around too easily, but sometimes people just don't work out.
Bingham knows that all your base belong to us.
The truth will some day rise to the surface and all may be revealed. The person who sent the email to ATL and the bad seeds of the company. Hopefully BM is keeping in mind that those pointing the finger, scrambling and placing the blame are the ones to be looking at. 182 should definetly be removed aleady. But those of you like 16....woman, blacks, gays and secretaries. Some day you will not be as high on the food chain.
If eekboy had gone straight to the police, this would never have happened.
Damn it 53, you owe me a new keyboard
Ancient Chinese Proverb:
Nail that sticks up gets hammered down.
New Chinese Proverb:
Something to do with a secretary, ass pounding and a Hummer.
She got what she deserved - sad, but true. Nobody gives a shit, much less wants to suffer reading, a secretary's take on life and a firm.
WTF? there was a time when this blog was for lawyers. now it's dominated by secretaries, paralegals and law students.
126 -- I get the impression that this blog is mostly pouplated by law students and first/second year associates (clueless).
126 -- I get the impression that this blog is mostly poplated by law students and first/second year associates (clueless).
101 - dictators have no values...except the stepford kind.
126 - i get the impression that this blog is also "poplated" by those who may be more seasoned practitioners perhaps but still can't spell (ignorant).
126 - i get the impression that this blog is also "poplated" by those who may be more seasoned practitioners perhaps but still can't spell (ignorant).
126 - i get the impression that this blog is also "poplated" by those who may be more seasoned practitioners perhaps but still can't spell (ignorant).
126 - i get the impression that this blog is also "poplated" by those who may be more seasoned practitioners perhaps but still can't spell (ignorant).
After 20 years in law firms (17 in BIGLAW), I'd prefer the social company of a good secretary to an associate any day. Most corporate associates subsume their identities while shameless pandering to the partners; secretaries are often if not usually The Real Thing.
#134: "shameless" = "shamelessLY"
126: maybe it has something to do with the topic...duh
121: your writing style is eerily similar to that of the secretary in question.
Non-legal support staff: there was a lesson in this. Although her actions are indefensible, what drove her to take such actions is a measure for pause. Never forget what level you stand on in biglaw.
Gosh, I guess I dodged that bullet. I interviewed at Bingham once.
Fink 182
I wonder: Was she fired because of the email, or because it was sent to ATL? It certainly raises ethical questions: What is the responsibility of the editors to choose topics that won't hurt their sources? Most media outlets try to protect their sources, while the blogosphere seems to take a great pleasure in raking people through the coals. I understand that this is a legal tabloid, but honestly, I hope that ATL really considers the ramifications of posts like this. Someone lost their job, while ATL gained ad revenue. Nice. Real nice.
139, what in the hell are you talking about? Should CNN not report on something if it will create publicity that might end up in someone losing their job? And ATL is a "Legal Tabloid" not nearly on the level of a real news authority. Should ATL not reported on Acela Bob because it might cost him his job? Should we ATL never report any summer misadventures?
An "ethical question" my ass - stupid bleeding heart liberal with no sense of how things really are.
One more thing 139, "sources" refers to the people who pass along the story, not the subject of the story. Using that logic, you should be advocating for protecting the person who forwarded the email to ATL.
Sure, ATL has just gotten some admittedly foolish single mom thrown jobless out into the street in the middle of the Great Recession.
But what does anybody expect? ATL has no ethics.
This is, after all, a site that encourages suicide posts and refuses to take down homicide threats against people at identifiable firms.
It's really sick.
Someone please get the secretaries off of this site. Paralegals are at least intelligent enough to not post "you will rue this day because you don't understand how special we are" bullshit. Secretaries are not special. Neither are associates. But 95% of associates are much more useful to a firm than any secretary and that is why associates don't sympathize with secretaries when both associates and secretaries are losing their jobs.
Personally, I think secretaries are generally nice people, but the ones who post here don't seem to realize that technology has made them mostly obselete.
Someone please get the secretaries off of this site. Paralegals are at least intelligent enough to not post "you will rue this day because you don't understand how special we are" bullshit. Secretaries are not special. Neither are associates. But 95% of associates are much more useful to a firm than any secretary and that is why associates don't sympathize with secretaries when both associates and secretaries are losing their jobs.
Personally, I think secretaries are generally nice people, but the ones who post here don't seem to realize that technology has made them mostly obselete.
143, 144: ... technology has made them mostly obsolete.
That's rich from someone who posted the same message twice.
Notice how secretaries only comment when the story is about support staff? Hmm... I believe your request to ATL should be to narrow the scope of its topics to attorneys only. That's not your call. We will stay out of "your" threads (topics) and you stay out of ours. Acknowledged and agreed to?
I'm 139, and I'm neither a secretary nor an attorney. I'm a human being. I wish more of the commenters on this site would act like humans, too.
Can't we just all agree that Bingham blows and their logo sucks?
She didn't get fired because of what she said in her email, or because she sent it to the entire firm, or because it ended up on ATL. It likely had very little to do with her. She got fired to stop the NEXT person from doing anything close to what she did.
She will be just fine. She has an amazingly supportive husband, beautiful child and i am sure this is a blessing in disguise for her- for she will now have a much happier life. She is not an "old secretary" in fact far from it and has her whole life ahead of her. There are so many other things she can do and has tons of other credentials. I know her personally and she has a very warm heart. She will have good karma. It makes me so sad to see that while she never said anything hateful or horrible about the people she works with- they still have to post on here over and over lies and nasty remarks. If we were all to be judge on stupid mistakes we have made during an emotional time then none of us would ever leave our house for the rest of our life! The difference is that they wanted to target her and make an example out of her to prove their position of power. I mean c'mon who really cares? What was so bad about this e-mail anyway? Mabey we should all just take a moment and reflect on what has become of humanity. Things are rough and sometimes you need an outlet to express what you feel. Opps- it was poor judgement to send it to the entire firm but was it really that big of a deal? I think sometimes people do need a reality check. It truly disapoints me that people are enjoying the bashing of a person who didn't even do anything bad. As the wife of a criminal attorney- I have seen and heard of many horrible people that deserve to be ripped apart so why don't you negetive posters put your energy towards someone who really deserves it because she is not one of them. As for these "inside sources"- they don't have a clue about her personal life and cannot comment on her. I on the other hand can tell you she is NOT crazy and has a very complete life that i admire. She has accomplished alot in her life and is not "just a crazy secretary". We all have had our bad emotional days- the difference is that her's was exploited. Everyone move on- even she already has!
Well said, 149.
This is crazy sec-chic. Yes comment 208 on the prior was me and yes comment 121 on this was me (unsettling 136 how you seem to know me and have it in for me). There are good people at Bingham right now suffering. I ask that Bingham not go on a witch hunt and to especially recognize that there are puppets and puppet masters. However do track the pesron who sent to ATL because it was not me and I am afraid and nervous of a suit. I assure the powers that be that there was no favoritism for me. If anything is the fact that Bingham as a whole can be very fair, understanding and flexible to all of it's employees. Any issues and frustration that caused my great lapse in judgment were solely related to one specific area. Any meetings about emails etc. were not "unprofessional" in that sense (violating laws and protacal etc) but petty for wording things simply and simple because I write like I talk ("chunk of money" or "let's get this party started"). Those things were considered unprofessional and offensive to some (the few without character). And before some ass says it, yes I'm English and ok my speech is as bad as my writing. You are correct I do not have a higher education so I do not write eloquently or proper. There are sensitive issues with emailing and I do believe that structure could easily be adjusted but also agree that I lacked good judgment in my need to desperately be heard for the underdogs (selfish, arrogant and stupid). As I said in my email, Bingham does have good top tier management. I can assure you that most of those people recognize all classes of people and are very fair minded. They have souls in an industry where so many people don't. Bingham is also a firm with people from the cleaning crew to upper tier that are quality people. Most firms, hell most work places cannot say that.
To my friends, I love you guys but I need to ask you to stop posting on this site. It's funny how 99% of us were clueless to the existence of these sites. I personally thought this kind of smut is reserved for Britney Spears on television. For those of you who wish to attack me say what you will but know that I did myself enough damage. After years of a good career I lack credibility and worth now. To ATL please delete 182. Law is a small world and my name was on the email distribution to my entire firm. Leave it to the crewl hearted to burry me. Please don't help them by offering more personal information about me. To clients or those of you worried about trusting Bingham with personal and confidential information because of a possible secretary like me....we are the ones you want. It's the lower class. less educated, hard core who scratched and crawled and were not afforded certain options that truly understand loyalty and confidentiality. We respect confidentially. Any client of Bingham is lucky. I love you guys. You know who you are. What a truly classy group of people (one and all). Let's all get back to living and do ourselves a favor by staying off this site and giving it ammunition to exist.
Regards,
crazy sec-chic
For those who know me...it's me. I'll leave you with The Tiger, Ms. Daisy, Double B and Big Red so that you know. Keep smiling. XO
I still don't get the people (presumably Bingham people) who are angry at ATL for publishing this story and trying to blame the firing on that. What an absolute crock. An organization that actually values its employees and has any sense of decency would not fire her and blame it on ATL. The firing makes Bingham as a firm look worse than anything else here. The e-mail itself is no doubt very strange but it isn't quite bad enough to justify termination, IMHO. Her worst offense was just not having the good judgment to know how widely distributed the e-mail would be and how silly it would make her look. Isn't the embarassment of the whole situation bad enough for her? If Bingham is so concerned about the very public view this situation came into, wouldn't the "classy" thing to do from a PR standpoint to make a statement saying that they support this employee, are trying to help her work through her problems, and have given her (and the whole firm) a stern warning about the proper use of firm e-mail (again, the embarassment of the situation should be enough of a warning for everyone.)
Seriously, how does blaming this blog make any sense? Do you people understand how the internet works and how information is disseminated in the 21st century?
ex-Bingham
151: Proof that support staff in general is incapable of linear thought and logical analysis. Its no wonder I have to re-edit my assistant's edits when people do not even have a basic command of th english language
Let's cut to the chase:
Was she hot?
Did she have nice breasts?
Did she wear tight skirts and pants with revealing and tantalizing tops?
if not, then she should've been shown the door a long time ago. I'm tired of these fat, disgusting, sloppy secretaries. As mentioned a few posts ago, their jobs are pretty much needless except for taking phone messages (which voicemail could more than account for). If you're going to be collecting a paycheck for basically doing squat then I suggest you look around and realize that firms are downsizing and using any excuse to let people go. Make yourself more visually enticing.
154 - You are disgusting.
154 - You are disgusting.
It's a crewl world.
I am pretty sure #154 is an ugly pig who has zero social life, is uneducated, sucks at his job and never gets laid (unless if he scores with the cheap $25 a blow job hooker). This is the only way he can secretly indulge in his guilty sick pleasure- by posting immature stupid remarks. This is the guy at work who would give his right testicle to just be acknowleged by the sexy secretaries all while he pushes his little mail cart around. This is also the kind of person who seems like he would one day snap and show up to work with an m-16. Not only have you proven to be a pig but you also have a temper my friend :)
I am pretty sure #154 is an ugly pig who has zero social life, is uneducated, sucks at his job and never gets laid (unless if he scores with the cheap $25 a blow job hooker). This is the only way he can secretly indulge in his guilty sick pleasure- by posting immature stupid remarks. This is the guy at work who would give his right testicle to just be acknowleged by the sexy secretaries all while he pushes his little mail cart around. This is also the kind of person who seems like he would one day snap and show up to work with an m-16. Not only have you proven to be a pig but you also have a temper my friend :)
I am pretty sure #154 is an ugly pig who has zero social life, is uneducated, sucks at his job and never gets laid (unless if he scores with the cheap $25 a blow job hooker). This is the only way he can secretly indulge in his guilty sick pleasure- by posting immature stupid remarks. This is the guy at work who would give his right testicle to just be acknowleged by the sexy secretaries all while he pushes his little mail cart around. This is also the kind of person who seems like he would one day snap and show up to work with an m-16. Not only have you proven to be a pig but you also have a temper my friend :)
I am pretty sure #154 is an ugly pig who has zero social life, is uneducated, sucks at his job and never gets laid (unless if he scores with the cheap $25 a blow job hooker). This is the only way he can secretly indulge in his guilty sick pleasure- by posting immature stupid remarks. This is the guy at work who would give his right testicle to just be acknowleged by the sexy secretaries all while he pushes his little mail cart around. This is also the kind of person who seems like he would one day snap and show up to work with an m-16. Not only have you proven to be a pig but you also have a temper my friend :)
I am pretty sure #154 is an ugly pig who has zero social life, is uneducated, sucks at his job and never gets laid (unless if he scores with the cheap $25 a blow job hooker). This is the only way he can secretly indulge in his guilty sick pleasure- by posting immature stupid remarks. This is the guy at work who would give his right testicle to just be acknowleged by the sexy secretaries all while he pushes his little mail cart around. This is also the kind of person who seems like he would one day snap and show up to work with an m-16. Not only have you proven to be a pig but you also have a temper my friend :)
I am pretty sure #154 is an ugly pig who has zero social life, is uneducated, sucks at his job and never gets laid (unless if he scores with the cheap $25 a blow job hooker). This is the only way he can secretly indulge in his guilty sick pleasure- by posting immature stupid remarks. This is the guy at work who would give his right testicle to just be acknowleged by the sexy secretaries all while he pushes his little mail cart around. This is also the kind of person who seems like he would one day snap and show up to work with an m-16. Not only have you proven to be a pig but you also have a temper my friend :)
I am pretty sure #154 is an ugly pig who has zero social life, is uneducated, sucks at his job and never gets laid (unless if he scores with the cheap $25 a blow job hooker). This is the only way he can secretly indulge in his guilty sick pleasure- by posting immature stupid remarks. This is the guy at work who would give his right testicle to just be acknowleged by the sexy secretaries all while he pushes his little mail cart around. This is also the kind of person who seems like he would one day snap and show up to work with an m-16. Not only have you proven to be a pig but you also have a temper my friend :)
154 - I have told you to stop acting out our disagreements with your subordinates. Now bring your hairy ass and the flavored lube into my office, immediately. I feel like strapping on "the Girlmaker" and ignoring your cries.
Love, Mom
Wow! After reading the posts, East Coast Bingham sounds WAY different than West Coast Bingham. Two totally different work environments. Folks on the West Coast, for the most part, just deleted the email without reading it. Just more junk to wade through. And NYHR is not respresentative of the company as a whole.
136 Here. I don't have it in for you 151. I am a non-legal support staff. I learned a long time ago that (i) you do not share your opinions with the likes of 153/154; (ii) partners only care about PPP and clients; and (iii) HR has nothing to do with policy and only act as the Praetorian guard per the whims of the attys.
The way things are jumping off in BigLaw, you will not be remembered in a week so don't worry. However, you sound like you need some R&R. Get it before you go to your next salt mine, I mean law firm. But, remember: its about the paycheck and the OT therein. Anything and everything else from where we stand irrelevant.
Crazy sec-chic - for godsakes buy yourself a dictionary on your way to R&R. I'm sure you're a good person, however bad your judgment may have been. But for godsakes, learn how to put a sentence together with coherent thought!
166 - That's because the West Coast is still McCutchen at heart. Something that Bingham Boston loathes by the way. The control thing is still illusive.
That holds true for most merger firms. Boston has cut value people who provided value resources in order to stay on top. Seems fair to say that Emailer was a causality too. Bad judgment sure but she had original spirit.
That holds true for most merger firms. Boston has cut valueable (Woosy) people who provided valueable resources in order to stay on top. Seems fair to say that Emailer was a causality too. Bad judgment sure but she had original spirit.