Last week we wrote about an upcoming panel discussion, sponsored by the New York State Bar Association’s Committee on Women in the Law, that generated some controversy. The panel, entitled “Their Point of View: Tips from the Other Side,” was going to feature “[a] distinguished panel of gentlemen from the legal field,” who would opine on “the strengths and weaknesses of women in the areas of communication, negotiation, mediation, arbitration, organization, and women’s overall management of their legal work.”
After some negative reactions, including calls for a boycott, the NYSBA revised the panel title and description. We noted this in an update to our post (added on Friday at 6 PM before the holiday weekend, so some of you may have missed it).
The revised panel, according to the NYSBA, will feature both women and men. The new description of the event led Professor Bridget Crawford to rescind her call for a boycott.
But at least two “distinguished gentlemen” will not be participating in the new and improved panel. Details — plus a READER POLL, and highlighted comments from our last post — after the jump.
Ed. note: Above the Law is a bit estrogen-deprived this week, with both Kash and Marin on vacation. So your above-signed writer, who is more in touch with his feminine side than Elie, was called up for duty. He apologizes for not being able to do justice to this subject. UPDATE (6 PM): The New York State Bar Association has changed the title and description of the panel in question. Details after the jump.
Women in the law: you’ve come a long way, babies. Many of you are partners, even managing partners, at top law firms. Some of you are professors, even deans, at leading law schools. One if you is the Solicitrix General; two of you sit on the Supreme Court.
But maybe you still need some advice for navigating the mean, cutthroat, male-dominated world of the legal profession. Ideally these tips should come from, you know…. MEN.
At the upcoming annual meeting of the New York State Bar Association, the Committee on Women in the Law is sponsoring a program called “Weathering Tough Times: Strategic Planning for Your Practice.” It includes this panel:
So, how do you think women lawyers reacted to the prospect of enlightenment from a “distinguished panel of gentlemen”?
You don’t have to take our word for it. Just attend “Backpack Awareness Day” at Georgetown:
Backpack Awareness Day Join us in the Chapel Area 1:30-3:30 p.m. September 20th
Tips to Prevent Back Problems:
- Wear both straps to distribute the weight evenly
- Wear the backpack resting evenly over the middle of the back. The backpack should not extend below the low back
- Adjust the straps so they are not too loose but still allow for free arm movement and ease in putting on and taking off the backpack
- Carry only those items needed for the day with the heaviest items closest to the back
- When selecting a backpack, choose one with
- A padded back - Hip and chest belts - Multiple compartments - Reflective material to enhance visibility at night
Who knew that wearing a backpack could be so hard?
As weird Georgetown Law events go, Backpack Awareness Day isn’t as much fun as GULC’s yearly 1L moustache contest. That competition, which “renders the male 1L population even more unattractive than usual during finals period,” features “a dog show-style competition, kegs, professors judging, drunk spectators, 2L interlopers, and a Burt Reynolds commemorative plate for winner.”
But if you’re desperate for a way to procrastinate, perhaps Backpack Awareness Day will do the trick. Moustache Law [official website]
Greedy law firm associates view ATL as a helpful resource. But what about Biglaw partners? They’re greedy too, y’know.
Well, here’s something for all you partners out there. A tipster alerted us to this audio conference, taking place later this month:
We’re up in New York right now for a symposium on legal writing at New York Law School. Topics to be covered include both legal academic writing, for student-run law reviews, as well as writing about legal affairs for a lay audience (e.g., through legal journalism and blogging).
The comfortable, well-lit classroom that we’re in right now has excellent wireless internet access. So we will be blogging, both about the conference and non-conference subjects, throughout the day.
P.S. We think this conference will be very worthwhile. We’re only applying the “Dubious Conferences” tag because we’re quite proud of it, and don’t get to use it enough. Writing About the Law: From Bluebook to Blogs and Beyond [New York Law School]
The former, actually. But when it shows up in next year’s Yale Law School course catalog, don’t say we didn’t warn you.
Personally we find beer kinda gross — bitter and foul-tasting. But for those of you who enjoy this beverage, check out this conference, taking place later today at the University of Oregon law school:
It’s not all malt and hops – Oregon’s brewers face an array of legal issues from intellectual property law to fundamental constitutional questions.
The 2006 Law of Beer Symposium features panelists from Oregon’s Rogue Ales and the former director of Oregon Brewer’s Guild.
It takes place on Thursday, November 16 at 7:00 P.M. in Room 110, Knight Law Center, 1515 Agate Street in Eugene. The event is sponsored by the Law and Entrepreneurship Student Association.
The IP angle we can understand, but we’re not sure about the Con Law perspective. Granholm v. Heald was about the interstate shipment of wine, not beer. South Dakota v. Dole isn’t really about beer, but about the drinking age more generally (and the spending power). And we don’t think the wheat being grown in Wickard v. Fillburn was destined to be turned into hefeweizen.
But we haven’t thought a lot about this or researched the subject. Please feel free to enlighten us as to the “fundamental constitutional questions” implicated by chugging an ice-cold Heineken. The Law of Beer [University of Oregon School of Law] Beer Symposium Today at Oregon [TaxProf Blog]
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past six years. You can reach them by email: [email protected].
Since late last year, things have been booming in Hong Kong / China in cap markets, especially Hong Kong IPOs. M&A deal flow has recently been getting a bit stronger as well. Although one can’t predict such things with any certainty, all signs are pointing to a banner entire 2014 for the top end US corporate and cap markets practices in Hong Kong / China. This is not really new news, as its been the feeling most in the market have had for a few months now and things continue to look good.
The head of our Asia practice, Evan Jowers, has been in Hong Kong for about 10 days a month (with trips every other month to both Shanghai and Bejing) for the past 7 months, and spending most of his time there meeting with senior US hiring partners at just about all the major US and UK firms there, as well as prospective candidates at all associate levels and partner levels, and when in the US, Evan works Asia hours and is regularly on the phone with such persons, as our the other members of our Asia team. Our Yuliya Vinokurova is in Hong Kong every other month and Robert is there about 5 times a year as well. While we have a solid Asia team of recruiters, Evan Jowers will spend at least some time with all of our candidates for Asia position. We have had long standing relationships, and good friendships in some cases, with hiring partners and other senior US partners in Asia for 8 years now.
The evolution of relationships between the genders continues. Currently, in law firms, there is an interesting conundrum; balancing the desire for a gender-blind workplace where “the best lawyer gets the work and advances” and the reality of navigating the complicated maze created by the fact that, in general, men and women do possess differences in their work styles. These variations impact who they work with, how they work, how they build professional connections and how organizations ultimately leverage, reward and recognize the talents of all.
Henry Ford sat on his workbench and sighed. A year earlier, he had personally built 13,000 Model Ts with his own hands. Fashioning lugnuts and tie rods by hand, Ford was loath to ask for help. Sure, there were things about the car that he didn’t quite understand. This explains the lack of reliable navigation systems in the Model T. But Ford persevered because he knew that unless he did everything, he could not reliably call these cars his own.
“Unless my own personal toil is responsible for it, it may as well be called a Hyundai,” Ford remarked at the time.
The preceding may sound unfamiliar because it is categorically untrue. And also monumentally stupid. Henry Ford didn’t build all those cars by hand. He had help and plenty of it. Almost exactly one hundred years ago, Henry Ford opened up the most technologically advanced assembly line the world had ever seen. Built on the premise that work can be chopped up into digestible pieces and completed by many men better than one, the line ushered in an age of unparalleled productivity.
Today, an attorney refers business because he can’t do everything the client asks of him.
There are three reasons why this is way dumber than a made-up Henry Ford story…