Please bear with us as we wait for the return of all our affiliate firm spies from annual leave and the like. We expect to be running again at 100% in mid to late February. Of course, check us periodically between now and then for all your corporate gossip needs.

Apologies to the spies who have sent us tips and gossip which we are yet to publish. We will do so in due course, once we have the personnel to work through the considerable back-log.

And please, continue to send us your gossip!

Get a cup of coffee, brush past a reprehensible colleague, listen to the ranting partners talk of their European jaunts and get angry.

Then, tell us about it!

We’re back. We’re not happy to be back at work and we’re looking forward to doing what little we can to brighten your miserable corporate lives.

But of course, we need your help. So drop us a line, anonymously if you so choose.

Some excellent gossip has filtered through over the break which we will post over the course of this week. Please stay tuned.

Firm Spy

Goofball former Australian Idol Judge Mark Holden was yesterday reported (by News) to be a fully fledged barrister!

We reported a few months ago that:

the carnation lover and talent agent is studying for a law degree …It’s quite a change of pace following the hustle and bustle of the Channel 10 talent competition from which he was dropped in favour of an easier-for-viewers-to-digest three-judge panel. Holden has said he wants to work on the legal side of the music industry.

Well, those long hours of study will now see Holden in front of real life legal judges, not a pack of mulleted/wigged boffins adjudicating the merits of a litany of pop-star wannabees.

Holden, 55, signed up as a barrister last month and now works with mentor William Lye in Melbourne… “law is a complete change, but it will call on everything I’ve learnt in life. I feel like it’s something I can grow old doing. The music and television business is unforgiving of older people.”

As excellently reported by our friends at Lawyers Weekly:

Holden’s career has included acting (he was an original cast member of soap opera The Young Doctors), pop singing (with top ten hits including Lady Soul and Look What You Started), and he has played a key role in developing the musical careers of other artists including film star Milla Jovovich, former Baywatch star David Hasselhoff and Australian singer Vanessa Amorosi.

He also holds the honour of having being named “Wanker of the Year” by Ralph Magazine in 2003. After being given the title, Holden famously started a petition on his website to get Ralph magazine to present him with a trophy so he could show off his new title, and Ralph considered having the award officially named after him.

Good luck Mark!

Send the Firm Spy your news and views!

Just when female lawyers across the country thought that the dark-old “glass ceiling” days were over comes news that a lawyer was allegedly sacked over her pregnancy:

will pregnancy stall your career?

As reported by The Age, former Kelly Hazell Quill lawyer Kate Hynes:

…is to launch legal action against her former employer claiming she was dismissed for being pregnant and for making complaints about conditions at her work… Ms Hynes - who was sacked in late September from boutique firm Kelly Hazell Quill Lawyers - is alleging she was told by director David Kelly that another director at the firm ”might be a bit funny” about her pregnancy. She said she went from being discussed as a director of the firm and having a bright future before the pregnancy to the ”bottom of the pile” after it was announced. All claims have been denied by Kelly Hazell Quill, which said Ms Hynes was ”solely” terminated due to ”behavioural problems” over a long period… Ms Hynes, who is 21 weeks pregnant and had extensive morning sickness, said the sacking had been ”devastating” to her and came after the recent death of a close friend in the Jakarta bombings. The relationship with the father of her unborn child had also broken down in July.

…Sex Discrimination Commissioner Elizabeth Broderick, who was not commenting on this case, said pregnancy discrimination is ”alive and well” and that complaints around sex discrimination had risen 20 per cent in the past year. She said that may be due to greater awareness due to changes to industrial laws while the economic downturn could also be a factor.

Does your firm possess modern views on pregnancy and female career progression?

Send the Firm Spy your news and views!

Following on from our coverage of the case against alleged facebook stalker, ex-Clayton Utz lawyer Michael Mitchell, the Firm Spy has now had an opportunity to read the transcript (available here), and brings you the following incredible gems:

Mr Mitchell alleges that Mr Williams, Mr Taylor, Ms Goumenis, Ms Best and Mr Robinson, all employees of Clayton Utz, sexually harassed him. ??With respect to Mr Williams, it is alleged that:

(a) In June 2007, Mr Williams informed Mr Mitchell that changing his clothes underneath a trench coat in his office would ‘probably not be regarded well if management found out’. Mr Williams agrees that he spoke to Mr Mitchell about the inappropriateness of getting changed in his office.

(b) After Mr Mitchell told Mr Williams that he changed his clothes underneath his overcoat, Mr Williams went to Mr Taylor’s office and was laughing and looking at Mr Mitchell. He says they were making jokes about him ‘articulating the association between trench coats and deviant and illegal sexual behaviour and referring to him as a ‘flasher’ and as ‘trench’. Mr Williams denies these allegations.

(c) Mr Mitchell received emails sent between Mr Taylor, Mr Williams and Mr Ho that ‘continued to make fun’ of him.  Clayton Utz denies the allegation.

(d) Mr Williams continued to refer to him as ‘trench’ and/or continued to make fun of him for having changed in his office. He claims that this continued to ‘articulate the associations between overcoats and deviant sexual behaviour.’ Mr Williams denies the allegation.

 (e) On one occasion, Mr Williams ‘explained to the applicant how solicitors could take paralegals home for sex’.[emphasis added]. Mr Williams denies the allegation.

With respect to Mr Taylor, it is alleged that: 

 (a) Mr Taylor spoke with Mr Williams (see above).

(b) Mr Mitchell received emails that ‘continued to make fun’ of him. Mr Taylor denies the allegation.

(c) Mr Taylor continued to refer to him as ‘trench’ and/or continued to make fun of him for having changed in his office. He claims that this continued to ‘articulate the associations between overcoats and deviant sexual behaviour.’ Mr Taylor denies the allegation.

 (d) One Friday evening Mr Taylor went into Mr Mitchell’s office, took his coat, put it on and ran up and down the hallway calling out ‘trench, trench, trench’. He then went into the office of Mr Ho and continued to make fun of Mr Mitchell. Mr Taylor agrees that he put Mr Mitchell’s coat on and walked several metres down the hall, saying ‘trench-coat’ several times in a sing-song voice.

(e) Mr Taylor continued to refer to the fact that Mr Mitchell had changed in his office underneath his overcoat and that that was basically what a flasher did.

With respect to Ms Goumenis, Mr Mitchell alleges that:

(a) she called out ‘trench’ to get him to come over and answer a question;

(b) she referred to Mr Mitchell as ‘trench’ as a way of ‘getting his attention’;

(c) she said in a sarcastic tone - ‘Yeah, he changes underneath his trench coat next door to me’ to which Mr Mitchell responded it was not true and then said to her ‘no, you just fantasize about me changing in my office’. Ms Goumenis says she has no recollection of the alleged incidents.

Mr Mitchell says that Mr Robinson is a partner of Clayton Utz and that he was aware that he was being called ‘trench’ and did nothing to stop the conduct. Mr Mitchell makes no allegation of sexually harassing conduct against Mr Robinson personally. According to Mr Mitchell, Mr Robinson derived ‘maximum enjoyment’ out of the comment. Mr Robinson denies the allegation. 

Submissions. Being teased, bullied or the subject of jokes does not constitute sexual harassment unless the conduct is “of a sexual nature” and the other elements of s 22A are satisfied. The conduct which Mr Mitchell says was of a sexual nature included being called ‘trench’ and ‘flasher’, being the subject of jokes about changing in his office and receiving emails making fun of him. This conduct, he says, articulated ‘the associations between overcoats and deviant sexual behaviour.’ Clayton Utz submitted that there was nothing inherently sexual about the words ‘trench’ or ‘trench coat’ and that being called that name does not amount to conduct of a sexual nature. In particular it was submitted that there was no evidence of any connection between the words ‘trench coat’ or ‘trench’ and deviant sexual behaviour. 

?Trench/trench coat. I accept Clayton Utz’ submission that conduct involving the use of the words ‘trench’ or ‘trench coat’, by themselves, does not constitute conduct of a sexual nature. There is nothing ‘sexual’ about those terms. Since the allegations against Ms Goumenis and Ms Best were that they merely called him those names, those complaints lack substance and leave is refused for them to proceed. Similarly, other incidents where it is alleged that Williams or Mr Taylor called Mr Mitchell ‘trench’ or ‘trench coat’, with no accompanying conduct of a sexual nature, lack substance and leave for those aspects of the complaints to proceed is refused. 

?Flasher. The word ‘flasher’ is defined in the Macquarie Dictionary (3rd edition, The Macquarie Library) as ‘Colloquial one who briefly exposes themselves in public’. It is arguable that referring to Mr Mitchell by that name constitutes conduct of a sexual nature. Mr Mitchell says that the conduct was unwelcome and we accept that evidence for the purpose of these proceedings. It is also arguable that a reasonable person, having regard to all the circumstances, would have anticipated that Mr Mitchell would be offended, humiliated or intimidated by being referred to as a ‘flasher’. Consequently leave is given for Mr Mitchell’s complaint to proceed to the extent that it involves allegations that Mr Taylor or Mr Williams referred to him as a ‘flasher’.?

?Being made fun of by conduct or email communication and being the subject of jokes for changing in his office. These allegations may constitute conduct of a sexual nature depending on whether Mr Mitchell can establish that the behaviour ‘articulated the associations between overcoats and deviant sexual behaviours’. Leave is granted for these aspects of his complaints against Mr Williams and Mr Taylor to proceed. ??

Taking para-legals home for sex. The alleged comment about how ‘solicitors could take paralegals home for sex’ is not conduct of a sexual nature in relation to Mr Mitchell. If it was said, it was a comment about the situation as Mr Williams understood it, rather than conduct of a sexual nature in relation to Mr Mitchell. ?

?Conclusion. Leave is granted for the complaints of sexual harassment against Mr Williams and Mr Taylor personally and against Clayton Utz as their employer to proceed except for the allegations that Mr Williams or Mr Taylor called Mr Mitchell ‘trench’ or ‘trench coat’. Since there is no allegation that Mr Robinson engaged in any conduct of a sexual nature as defined in s 22A, nor any other basis on which Mr Mitchell submitted that Mr Robinson could be liable under the AD Act, leave is refused for the complaint of sexual harassment against him to proceed. 

Anyone keen to bonk a trenchcoat-wearing paralegal?

 Send the Firm Spy your news and views!

In conjuction with our friends at Lawyers Weakly, the Firm Spy is proudly throwing its support behind an initiative pioneered by our friends at Legal Monkey; an anonymous remuneration survey.

less than one billable unit

The survey is available at this link.

This excellently constructed survey is completely anonymous and is a reference that the Firm Spy will be able to use to better inform our stories. Many people across many firms are anxious to know how competitive their salary truly is, rather than relying on statistics compiled by allegedly independent recruitment agencies (who have recently watched their referral fees evaporate and now, perhaps more than ever, have self-interested reasons to cook the books) who privately pass those details to partners.

Are you sick of relying solely on the integrity of partners and recruitment agencies to deliver you a competitve salary?

Please take a few minutes out of your day to help get this initiative off the ground.

To those visiting from the Big4 accounting firms, please also feel free to add your details too.

Send the Firm Spy your news and views!

We have edited the following post to protect the identity of the anonymous spy. Thanks very much to the spy for sharing your thoughts and good luck with your recovery.

I’m writing a response in regards to a “Blake Dawson; A Depressing Reflection on the Legal Industry?”. While I do not work at a legal firm, I do work at [Big4 Accounting Firm] having started as a graduate two months ago. I have suffered depression for a few years now, but recently had a severe depressive episode which resulted in me having to go to hospital and take extensive time off work. Given job stability in the current state of the economy, coupled with the fact that I have not passed the probationary period, I was unsure of how this would affect my career. However, the firm’s response surprised me. I was not only contacted by my manager after being dischared from hospital, HR later contacted me to discuss how they could be of assistance and support. They stressed that my wellbeing was of utmost importance (which is contrary to how you’d expect a big firm to usually operate!) and gave me as much time off as required to get better along with the option of returning to work gradually through working part-time. This surprised me because busy season in my division is just about to hit. Plus, being under the probationary period, I have such little experience that they could’ve easily dismissed me. I am writing this, because I am deeply impressed by the support that I have been given. As an avid reader of firmspy, I know there is a lot of coporate bashing, but I hope to give a balanced opinion in regards to the issue of depression in professional services firms. NB: I am sharing my story on my own accord and by no means am representing [Big4 Accounting Firm]…

Send the Firm Spy your news and views!

We reported in June the rumour that top-tier firm Blake Dawson was using cagey means to avoid announcing a firm-wide pay freeze. A Blakes spokesperson said at the time:

Blakes will ‘recognise exceptional performances but in a more focused way than in previous years.’

The new ‘focus’, it has emerged (through our friends at Lawyers Weekly), meant that 30% of staff received pay rises this year. The Blakes team have apparently adopted a pay-rise-pay-freeze remuneration model this year and for the other 70% of Blakes staff, this means you’re out of focus!

a Blakes partner enjoys excellent focus

In the article, Blakes deputy managing partner Helen McKenzie admitted that overall there has been an average drop of 10 to 12 per cent in compensation across the board.

McKenzie says there has been no discernable impact at Blake Dawson… “Our workplace is picking up and I think there is a reasonably resilient and confident mood around”.

No discernable impact? Obviously McKenzie forgot about the recent hijacking of Blake Dawson’s Wikipedia page.

McKenzie’s interview, however, offered a refreshingly candid insight into the machinations which apparently lead to decisions about the implementation of a pay freeze:

“We were pretty upfront about what our approach would be and we told everybody that there would not be a salary freeze and that there would be increases and bonuses for our high-performing people. …Retention is still important, but we’re not facing the same pressure from competitors.”

Reading between the lines, it seems that when competitive pressure re-emerges and people can find jobs elsewhere, the 70% of Blake Dawson staff presently subject to a pay freeze can look forward to a pay rise.

Good focus or good f**k-us? Send the Firm Spy your news and views!

Hat tip to The New Lawyer for reporting the revelation that the son of a prominent Darwin barrister has been charged for attacking a bouncer outside a Darwin nightclub.

Max Tippett, son of Jon Tippett QC, is reported to have pleaded guilty to unlawfully causing serious harm to an acquaintance outside a nightclub.

In other news, prominent WA barrister Lloyd Rayney has commenced legal proceedings against the West Australian government for defamation. Rayney claims he was defamed by the state because:

police called him a “prime suspect” in the unsolved murder of his wife Corryn… Mr Rayney’s case against the state was lodged last year and centres on a press conference held by Detective Sergeant Jack Lee in September 2007 during which he called Mr Rayney a prime suspect.

Send the Firm Spy your news and views!

With our friends at Lawyers Weakly giving some timely advice to aspiring seasonal clerks earlier in the week, we thought it would be a fantastic idea to publish our favorite advice for prospective clerks. Back in 2007, Gadens Managing Partner Michael Bradley had the following advice for aspiring seasonal clerks:

Dear Summer Clerkship-Desiring Desperado,

As you prepare yourself mentally and emotionally for the next few months of horror, in which you will:

* try to make yourself sound interesting, enterprising, broad-minded, life-experienced, mature, clever and

imagine me in my underwear!

just a little bit wacky in your application form;

* agonise over whether to include a photo of yourself looking gorgeous/cute/professional/drunk or just hope that your name sounds good-looking;

* debate with your friends over which firms should be applied to based on the hopelessly inadequate and entirely incorrect gossip you’ve heard about them;

* sit glumly in the front window at home waiting for the post that never comes;

* sit glumly in the common room at law school while people you hate (more than you used to) discuss their interviews in loud voices;

* try to find ways to describe yourself in interviews that will make you stand out more than a teapot and less than an axe-murderer;

* contemplate whether you could pass for an 18 year old once more and go to Schoolies instead of all this crap,

spare a thought for the poor law firms! There are a thousand eager beavers just like you, all dedicated with a single mind to the holy grail of a summer clerkship with, who cares, any firm. And you’re all equally fabulous and we have no idea which one of you will turn out to be an al Qaeda sleeper (actually they make quite good clerks), or who will be the most fun at the Christmas party.

All I can say is I’m glad, again, that I’m not you. Three and a half years of uni and they make you go through this torture to get one of a small number of summer jobs that are considerably less fun than a week in Amsterdam, it’s just not fair. If you miss out, trust me it won’t be your fault. Unless you believe in karma, in which case it is your fault.

So, how to get through this awfulness with your sanity intact? I have three suggestions:

1. Do something to catch the casual job application reader’s attention. If you have a personality, put it on the page in some way. If you don’t, borrow someone else’s.

2. Buy a very nice suit. Polish your shoes. Learn how to tie a tie properly. Put your skirt on the right way round. Don’t wear your father’s clothes. Stay away from smoky pubs until the interviews are over.

3. Imagine every interviewer in their underwear. Try not to laugh out loud when you do.

Clerkship applications will close on 3 August 2007.

Good luck.

Michael Bradley
Managing Partner

We would also like to wish all prospective clerks the very best of luck. Send the Firm Spy your news and views!