Life at Corrs. Your Career is a Big Deal. Visit our seasonal clerk and graduates website.
If you click on the link, you’ll be taken to another website which shows that — unlike cross-town rival Mallesons who have turned to “The Face Book” — Corrs have taken a novel approach by registering a very fancy web address (www.makingcareersense.com) in its grad recruitment drive. Grads visiting this website can find info on all sorts of questions – it looks tremendously helpful, actually. But we especially liked the video entitled “What sort of law will I practice?“. The tasteful video, which contains cartoon images of men and women in flamboyant orange business suits, gives a tantalising insight into working life at Corrs. After profiling the firm’s various practice groups, it concludes by hypothesising:
you never know, wine law might prove more to your taste.
Wine law? No one on the FS team was familiar with that area of practice, but it is great that Corrs is able to entice a grads with an interesting mix of tastes and is so transparent about its graduate offering.
Or is it? One thing which we couldn’t find, no matter how hard we looked, was any mention of the ugly spat unfolding between the firm and a 2009 graduate named Louise Burgess.
We received the following tips from anonymous Corrs spies:
Spy 1
Corrs is being sued by an ex-graduate: Federal Magistrates Court – Federal Law File: BRG417/2011
Spy 2
Corrs in court: Ex staffer (trainee solicitor/grad) sues Corrs this week. Federal Magistrates jurisdiction (Brisbane) following complaint terminated in the AHRC. See Federal Magistrates Court file BRG417/2011 (use e-search)… Corrs no doubt will have their media guns in spin mode asap – they have an image to protect – being such a highly awarded firm when it comes to employer of choice/HR awards.)
To save you all the hassle of the FMC e-search, click here. You’ll find the following case-log:
Federal Magistrates Court – Federal Law File: BRG417/2011
Title: Louise Elizabeth Burgess v Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Court: Federal Magistrates Court – Federal Law, Brisbane Registry
Filing Date: 26-May-2011
Ms Burgess’ application alleges unlawful dsicrimination and the first return date is 22 June 2011 before Federal Magistrate Burnett. According to her lawyers, Susan Moriarty & Associates, Burgess alleges that she was subjected to workplace bullying by a Corrs HR manager. Following an incident of such alleged bullying, Ms Burgess went on stress leave. Whilst on stress leave Ms Burgess alleges she received a settlement offer from the firm and was allegedly advised not to return to work. She alleges this amounted to a constructive termination of her employment in contravention of workplace laws. Since that time, Ms Burgess decided to commence proceedings against her former employer and Ms Moriarty advised that:
Corrs “had ample opportunity to confidentially settle the matter at conciliation” but that a settlement could not be reached.
Ms Moriarty also advised that Ms Burgess is seeking over $500,000 in damages, the majority of which is comprised of damages for loss of opportunity that we expect is related to a career at Corrs or more broadly in the law that now may never eventuate. Ms Burgess did not complete her graduate year at Corrs and is not admitted as a solicitor.
The case calls to mind the bitter feud between Clayton Utz and former staff Bridgette Styles, as well as health issues in the law more generally and the high price paid by juniors in top-tier firms.
Send the Firm Spy your news and views!
Loading...
A bullying case against a member of HR? Sounds odd. Normally one only has contact with HR if they are being performance managed or on a talent program.
Or in a grad program…
I am glad to see that someone finally had the guts to speak out about Corrs and their treatment of junior lawyers.
Working at Corrs was the worst experience of my life, and the most traumatic one!!!!
or if their concerns are not being addresses by their partners / other supervisors…
Bringing a case like this is a career ender. No wonder she wants $500k
Very common scenario. HR are just a bunch of bullying stooges themselves, toing the company line to advance their own limited professional opportunities. I have NEVER heard of HR standing up for those bullied, harrassed or discriminated against. Its a BIG MISTAKE to go to HR with a genuine grievance. You will almost certainly be performance managed out. Sad but true fact of life. I wish this graduate all the best.
“Carl or Lenny” and “Anonymous”, you both sound like you work at Corrs, somewhere near the top.
“Carl or Lenny”, I think Iggy’s post is right on the mark.
“Anonymous”, the bullying she was subjected to at Corrs’ has obviously had a long-term psychological impact which ruined her prospects of a career in law – that’s probably why she bought the case.
Attitudes like these are the reason this case has come to fruition.
“Daisy” perhaps it was a lack of abilty and application that ruined her prospects of a career in law and now she is just looking for an easy payday and a little bit of attention
“Realist” perhaps you just don’t know what you are talking about
I am not saying one way or the other. Just saying perhaps that is the case. Everyone of these stories has 2 sides. There are plently legitimate claims and plent ridiculous ones.
If her claims are valid then best of luck to her.
I have worked at Corrs for a while and never had any troubles, but as i say, if she has a legitimate claim then I hope she wins.
??
“Realist” you are backtracking perhaps you should re-read your original post (where your views weren’t quite so balanced). What do you mean by ‘easy pay day’? Do you know something from working at CCW that we don’t, i.e. has there been a settlement? Claims don’t get paid out simply because someone brings an action, they must be proven in court. If performance was an issue, CCW can say so (although ‘realistically’ if it involved something that obvious they could have already diffused the case).
If (as you suggest) it is easy to bring a baseless claim and have it paid out by a large firm, this case would not be so unusual. I am a litigator and to my mind there are very few ‘easy’ claims and even fewer easy pay days. I can appreciate your cynicism but your comments are overly simplistic.
Max – I am not backtracking, merely playing Devil’s advocate in the first instance and clarifying my stance in the second.
I know nothing you don’t but one would assume, that if the matter has progressed to where it has, no settlement was reached. Would you not agree?
As for my “overly simplistic” comments, I trust you can appreciate the forum in which the comments are made does not require much more than “simplistic”, given it is a website for speculation and gossip.
This case goes to mediation in December 2011