Listen… mandatory arbitration agreements are garbage. They invariably favor established parties with entrenched power. That’s why — even before Disney’s shady attempt to use one in a wrongful death case made headlines — the fight against them has been a focus of progressive politics.
The practice of mandatory arbitration agreements in Biglaw has also had its moment in the spotlight. Back in 2018, Munger Tolles was called out on social media for the practice . That firm changed their policy as a result, and other firms voluntarily did away with the practice . The People’s Parity Project — an activist group for law students and new attorneys — has kept the pressure on the industry. And their tactics have proven successful . Of course, there have been some firms that have held fast , despite complaints.
But mandatory arbitration employment agreements are still controversial in the legal industry. Above the Law received information that a high-profile boutique recently made the decision to implement mandatory arbitration. The Elias Law Group, the firm founded in 2021 by Democrat election lawyer Marc Elias to advance Democratic and liberal causes, told employees on December 19th about the change in policy (which includes a class action waiver and non-disclosure agreement), and only gave folks through December 30th — over the holidays when most employees are taking a well-deserved break — to sign the agreement.
How… awkward. The firm that bills itself as the one to “help progressives make change,” doing something so distinctly regressive. Not to mention that firm clients have introduced legislation to ban mandatory arbitration. Maybe the Elias Law Group has more in common with Republicans than they think.
And the attorneys at the firm agree. The associates and counsel at the firm sent a letter to firm leadership in response to the policy change, noting their objection to the policy and particularly to the timing.
According to an insider at the firm, the request for a meeting with leadership about the agreements was “coldly refused.” The firm went another route, per a tipster: “Adopting a common union-busting tactic, management rebuffed the request for a group-wide conversation and began calling individual attorneys to ask who was organizing the resistance and to pin down who would refuse to sign the agreement.”
The initial deadline to sign the arbitration agreement has passed, and management extended the deadline to January 10th. But insiders say the firm is playing hardball to get associates and counsel on board.
Our annual seniority-based salary step-up is conditioned on signing the arbitration agreement. Attorneys are paid once a month at the end of the month, so we can still get our January raise if we sign by Jan 10. Staff are paid twice a month however, so anyone who did not sign by the beginning of January forfeit their raise for the first January paycheck.
Insiders at the firm report sinking morale and a deep suspicion the move will motivate attorneys who want to use their law degree to advance progressive ideals to leave the firm. Just goes to show, just because the firm gets paid to fight the good fight it doesn’t mean those are the values they manage with.
The Jabot podcast , and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer . AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1 or Mastodon @Kathryn1@mastodon.social.
No comments:
Post a Comment