Author: National Law Forum

A group of in-house attorneys developed the National Law Review on-line edition to create an easy to use resource to capture legal trends and news as they first start to emerge. We were looking for a better way to organize, vet and easily retrieve all the updates that were being sent to us on a daily basis.In the process, we’ve become one of the highest volume business law websites in the U.S. Today, the National Law Review’s seasoned editors screen and classify breaking news and analysis authored by recognized legal professionals and our own journalists. There is no log in to access the database and new articles are added hourly. The National Law Review revolutionized legal publication in 1888 and this cutting-edge tradition continues today.

Not Ship Shape: SEC Sues Retired Chief Petty Officer for Fraudulent Offerings to Navy-Related Victims

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Office of Investor Education and Advocacy (“OIEA”), which dates from last century, is concerned with explaining aspects of the capital markets for “Main Street” investors and warning them against potential risks and fraud schemes. On Sept. 25, 2017, the Commission announced the formation of the Retail Strategy Task Force (“RSTF”) in its Division of Enforcement. Its purpose is to consider and implement “strategies to address misconduct that victimizes retail investors,” according to the SEC Press Release issued that day. A primary focus area of the OIEA and RSTF is so-called “affinity investments,” i.e., investment offerings aimed at groups such as churches, ethnic communities, college alumni groups, etc.

On Wednesday, July 27, 2022, the SEC filed suit in the Federal Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, against Robert F. Murray, 42, a retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer residing in North Canton, Ohio, for conducting an unregistered offering of securities in Deep Dive Strategies, LLC, an Ohio private pooled investment fund (the “Fund”). Murray controlled the Fund and acted as investment adviser, telling investors the fund would invest in publicly traded securities. Murray marketed the offering through a Facebook group “with over 3500 active duty, reservists and veterans of the U.S. Navy who shared an interest in investing,” according to the Complaint. Most certainly an “affinity” group. Murray also created “a channel on the Discord social media platform where he live-streamed his trading activity and posted trading advice with a focus on options.”

The Fund was organized in September 2020 and solicited investors through February 2021. Although Murray told investors they could change their minds within 15 days and get their money back, in fact he “almost immediately began spending Fund money on personal expenses.” He transferred monies to his personal checking account and even withdrew cash from the Fund, so by February 2021, $148,000, or approximately 42% of the $355,000 invested by the unsuspecting “Goats” (a nickname for the Navy affinity group), had been “misappropriated” (i.e., stolen) by Murray. By March 2021 he had ceased regular communication with the Goats and failed to respond to requests to redeem “invested” dollars. Some of that misappropriated money was lost gambling at casinos in Cleveland and elsewhere in the Midwest.

Murray provided potential investors with both a Disclosure Statement and a copy of the Fund’s Operating Agreement, and the Complaint identifies several material misstatements and omissions in the two documents. In addition, Murray made oral material misstatements and omitted material information when speaking with potential and actual investors. In fact, Murray lost most of the Fund’s brokerage account on Jan. 13, 2021, when GameStop options purchased in the account saw their value plummet. In that connection see my Feb. 2, 2021, Blog “Rupture Rapture: Should the GameStop?” When the SEC began investigating Murray and the Fund, he asserted his Fifth Amendment rights and declined to answer questions.

In the Complaint, the Commission charges Murray with seven different securities law violations, each set out in a separate Count as follows:

  1. Violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder by using devices, making untrue statements, and misleading omissions, and engaging in a business which operate as a fraud on securities purchasers.
  2. Violation of Section 17(a)(1) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “33 Act”), by offering and selling securities by means of interstate commerce using devices to defraud.  Violations of the 33 Act can be proven without the need to prove scienter (broadly, intent).
  3. Violation of Section 17(a)(2) of the 33 Act by obtaining money or property in connection with the sale of securities by means of untrue statements of material facts and making misleading omissions, engaging in transactions which operate as a fraud on the purchaser, where Murray was at least negligent in engaging in these activities.
  4. Violation of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the 33 Act by selling securities without the offering being registered (or exempt from registration), and with the use of a prospectus where the offering was not registered.
  5. Violation of Section 206(1) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the “40 Act”) by acting as an investment adviser using devices to defraud clients and prospective clients.
  6. Violation of Section 206(2) of the 40 Act by acting as an investment adviser engaging in transactions which operate as a fraud on clients and prospective clients.
  7. Violation of Section 206(4) of the 40 Act and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder by acting as an investment adviser to a pooled investment vehicle, making untrue statements of material fact and making misleading omissions and engaging in acts that are fraudulent with respect to investors in the pooled investment vehicle.

The SEC seeks entry of findings by the Court of the facts cited in the Complaint and of conclusions of law that concur with the Commission’s assertions of violations. In addition, the SEC seeks entry of a permanent injunction against future violations of the cited securities laws; an order requiring disgorgement of all Murray’s ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest; an order imposing a civil penalty of $1,065,000; and an order barring Murray from serving as an officer or director of any public company.

Murray preyed on his fellow Naval servicemen in violation of the unspoken understandings of the “Goats,” that a fellow Navy NCO would not seek to take financial advantage of them. That is why the SEC’s July 28, 2022, Press Release reporting this matter includes an express warning from the OIEA and the RSTF not to make “investment decisions based solely on common ties with someone recommending or selling the investment.” One wonders whether, if the Goats were to catch up with Murray, he would be keelhauled.

Article By Peter D. Hutcheon of Norris McLaughlin P.A.

For more securities and SEC legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

©2022 Norris McLaughlin P.A., All Rights Reserved

EPA’s Contaminant List Includes All PFAS

We previously reported on the EPA’s announcement for its Draft Fifth Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 5), which contemplated listing all PFAS as an entire class on the Contaminant List. On October 28, 2022, the EPA issued its prepublication version of the final CCL 5 rule. The EPA’s contaminant list final version is the first step in the Safe Drinking Water Act regulatory process, which will allow the EPA to begin its assessment into any of the over 12,000 PFAS as to whether they should be included in a drinking water enforceable limit. Such a move would build upon the EPA’s current progress towards regulating PFOA and PFOS with an enforceable drinking water limit, and open the door to significant future enforcement action and litigation.

EPA’s Contaminant List and PFAS

On October 28, 2022, the EPA announced its Final Fifth Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 5). The CCL is a list of contaminants that are currently not subject to any proposed or promulgated national primary drinking water regulations, but are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems. Contaminants listed on the CCL may require future regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). On the CCL 5 are 66 individual chemicals, but notably PFAS as an entire class are also listed on the CCL 5. Simply because PFAS are listed on the CCL 5 does not guarantee that regulation will occur; however, it does open doors to research that are not otherwise available without the listing on the CCL.

The EPA’s contaminant list rule is not the only step the agency has taken with respect to PFAS and drinking water, but developing the CCL is the first step under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) in potentially regulating drinking water contaminants. SDWA requires EPA to publish a list of currently unregulated contaminants that are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems and that may require regulation. EPA must publish a CCL every five years. The CCL does not create or impose regulatory burden on public water systems or state, local, or Tribal governments. EPA has completed four rounds of CCLs since 1996. The last cycle of CCL, CCL 4, was published in November 2016. EPA began the development of the CCL 5 in 2018 by asking the public to nominate chemicals, microbes, or other materials for consideration for the CCL 5.

Impact On Businesses and Litigation

Many companies assume that any regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act will not impact them, as virtually no industries, aside from water utilities, have any direct impact on drinking water. However, this belief provides a false sense of security that must immediately be dispelled. There are three specific ways that drinking water limits for PFAS will trigger scrutiny on environmental practices of businesses: (1) elffluent discharges into water sources; (2) waste sent to landfills that may leach into drinking water sources; and (3) properties abutting or in the vicinity of water sources.

Direct industry effluent discharges into water sources (which may not be drinking water sources, but may feed into drinking water sources) will be the low-hanging fruit target for local environmental agencies at the state level. Companies must ensure that they have all permitting in order, and it is advisable that the permitting specifically encompasses PFAS. Failing to do so will cause issues down the line when local environmental regulatory bodies look to determine, even retroactively, who PFAS water polluters are or were, as those agencies seek to hold businesses responsible for the costs associated with cleaning up PFAS in drinking water.

Companies that send their industrial waste to landfills are also well advised to do a full compliance check. While many companies do not use PFAS directly in their own manufacturing processes, do the parts or other raw materials used in the manufacturing process have PFAS contamination issues? If so, a company could unknowingly send PFAS-laden industrial waste products to landfills, and so these are questions that companies must get answers to. Over time, it is possible that the PFAS may leach out of the landfill and find their way into local water sources. Environmental regulatory agencies will look to these sites, the owners of the sites, and potentially companies sending waste to the sites as responsible parties for PFAS contamination in waterways.

Finally, even businesses having nothing to do with PFAS or manufacturing from which PFAS could be a contaminant need to follow news regarding PFAS regulations. For example, has the property on which your business sits ever had fires that have required a local fire department to extinguish flames using foam (historically, a PFAS containing product)? What did the owner of the site prior to you use the site for? Were there possible PFAS contamination issues stemming from that prior business? Did your due diligence reports and tests when purchasing the property take PFAS into consideration? If PFAS were a contaminant on the land on which your business now operates, local environmental agencies will pursue cleanup costs from any such business regardless of knowledge or intent, and regardless of whether the PFAS issues were the result of a prior company on the site. These investigations and remediations can be extremely expensive and disruptive to businesses.

Should the EPA broaden its regulations for PFAS in drinking water to include more than PFOA and PFOS, this will trigger considerable enforcement action at the state level to identify responsible parties and ensure that the parties pay for remediation costs. Historically, this has also led to civil litigation, as companies identified as responsible parties litigate the percent allocation that they are responsible for the alleged pollution, and look to bring in additional companies to reduce allocation shares for remediation costs.

Conclusion

Future regulatory steps for certain PFAS under the Safe Drinking Water Act will require states to act (and some states may still enact stronger regulations than the EPA). Both the federal and the state level regulations will impact businesses and industries of many kinds, even if their contribution to drinking water contamination issues may seem on the surface to be de minimus. In states that already have PFAS drinking water standards enacted, businesses and property owners have already seen local environmental agencies scrutinize possible sources of PFAS pollution much more closely than ever before, which has resulted in unexpected costs. Companies absolutely must begin preparing now for regulatory actions that will have significant financial impacts down the road.

Article By John Gardella of CMBG3 Law

For more environmental legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

©2022 CMBG3 Law, LLC. All rights reserved.

An Updated Federal Overtime Rule: When’s It Coming?

Twice a year (in the spring and the fall), each federal agency publishes a “Regulatory Agenda” that discloses the proposal and final rules it has recently issued, together with those that it plans to issue.  Back in the fall of 2021, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division noted in the agenda that it was reviewing the regulations for exemption of executive, administrative, and professional (“EAP”) employees from the Fair Labor Standards Act’s minimum wage and overtime requirements codified in 29 C.F.R. Part 541.

One of the “primary goals” of the planned rulemaking is to update the minimum salary level requirement for employees who, by virtue of their duties, would qualify for an EAP exemption under section 13(a)(1) of the FLSA.  You may recall that in May 2016, the Obama DOL issued a new overtime rule, to take effect on December 1 of that year, that would have—among other things—required the DOL to update (i.e., increase) the salary threshold for EAP exemptions every three years.  In November 2019, before it could take effect, a federal judge in Texas enjoined the new overtime rule on a nationwide basis, declaring it “unlawful.”

In September 2019, the Trump DOL issued a new overtime rule, which took effect on January 1, 2020, raising the weekly minimum salary for EAP exemptions from $455 per week ($23,660 per year) to $684 per week ($35,568 per year).  The increase was the first in 15 years, but nowhere near the boost the Obama administration tried to roll out in 2016 (to $913 per week, or $47,476 per year).

Cut to the Biden administration.  The DOL noted in the fall 2021 Regulatory Agenda that “[r]egular updates [to the minimum salary for EAP exemption] promote greater stability, avoid disruptive salary level increases that can result from lengthy gaps between updates and provide appropriate wage protection.”  The agency listed a timetable for issuance of a proposed overtime rule update (a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, or NPRM) as April 4, 2022.  Seven months later, we’ve seen no proposed rule.

If and when issued, the public will have the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule.  (Back in 2016, the Obama DOL received more than 293,000 comments to its proposed overtime rule.)  Stay tuned.

Article By Allan S Bloom of Proskauer Rose LLP

For more labor and employment legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

© 2022 Proskauer Rose LLP.

Five Data Quality Nightmares That Haunt Marketers and How Avoid Them

In this spooky season of vampires, witches and scary clowns, we’d like to add one more to the mix – data quality nightmares – which can be more frightful than a marathon of Freddy Kreuger movies to some of us.

We need data about our clients and prospects in order to create strategic programs that can lead to new business and increased visibility, but maintaining that data on an ongoing basis can quickly turn into a nightmare without the right resources.

Having good quality data is important for success in so many areas of your organization, including:

  • Communicating effectively with core constituencies
  • Successfully planning and executing events
  • Segmenting your target markets, clients or customers
  • Providing superior customer service
  • Understanding the needs of clients or customers
  • Effectively developing new business
  • Improving delivery and reducing costs of postal mailings

The reality is that your data will never be perfect, but there are ways you can address and improve it. The longer you wait to improve your data management, the scarier it will become. Here are some of the most common data quality nightmares we see and how to avoid them:

Data Quality Nightmare 1: Duplicate data

Is your CRM a graveyard for thousands of duplicate company and individual contacts? Data comes from all directions, so it’s important to ensure that data isn’t being duplicated. Dupes make it difficult to coordinate efforts and activities. Duplicate data occurs when customer information appears more than once in the database, or multiple variations of the same individual appear.

Secondly, duplicate data can damage your brand image. It is unlikely that a contact who receives the same information twice will be happy about it. This is an easy way to frustrate customers and prospects and can make your business appear disorganized.

Data Quality Nightmare 2: Missing or incomplete data

Are your contact details ‘ghosting you’? Without good data you can’t target or segment, and your communications and invitations won’t reach the right audiences.

Similar to inaccurate data, incomplete data can also have a negative impact on your business performance.

One way that organizations can help control this data quality nightmare, is by making certain form fields a required entry. That way, data entries will be more consistent and complete.

Data Quality Nightmare 3: Incorrect or inconsistent data

Does incorrect or inconsistent data give you nightmares? Bad CRM data leads to missed opportunities for new customers, and it could create issues for your sales cycle. There is almost no point in engaging with contacts in your database if the information is incorrect.

There are multiple ways to encourage good data habits, depending on your system and method of contact entry. If your firm relies on manual data entry, implement a firmwide Data Standards Guide to inform users how data should be entered (e.g., does your firm spell out or abbreviate job titles?). It can also be helpful to use system validation rules wherever possible to require certain information in new records such as last name, city and email address to ensure your contacts are relevant.

Data Quality Nightmare 4: Too much data

Are you in the ‘zombie zone’ trying blindly to figure out what to do with too much data and/or disparate data from disconnected systems?

Having too much data can be overwhelming – and unnecessary. It’s important to set parameters on what information you truly need about your clients and prospects, and then maintain only that information going forward. This will streamline the process and make everyone’s jobs easier by avoiding data quality nightmares.

Data Quality Nightmare 5: Lack of data quality resources

Does your team run screaming from data quality projects leaving you with a data disaster?

To encourage ongoing system adoption and utilization, data quality and maintenance must be top priorities. Resources must be dedicated – including time, money and people. Processes and procedures need to be put in place to maintain ongoing quality. Most importantly, training and communication are essential to ensure that end users don’t create unnecessary duplicates or introduce more bad data into the system.

Data Quality Doesn’t Have to Be Scary

While it’s easy to become scared by nightmare data, it’s important to put it in perspective. Focus on discreet data and projects that yield real ROI such as:

  • Start with your most relevant records like current clients. Begin cleaning your top 100 to 500 along with associated key contacts.
  • Review frequently used lists to ensure your communications and invitations are reaching the right recipients.
  • Vet bounced emails after each campaign, or better yet, regularly run lists through an automated data process to identify bad emails before a campaign to ensure that information actually reaches your targets in a timely manner.
  • Tackle time-sensitive one-off projects. For instance, an upcoming event often provides a good opportunity to get users engaged in cleanup efforts, particularly if the event is important to them.

It’s also important to remember that because data degrades so rapidly, data cleaning can’t be a one-time initiative. Once your team begins regularly maintaining your data, the cleanup will get easier over time. And remember, because data cleaning never really ends, the good news is that this means you have forever to get better at it.

Article By Christina R. Fritsch JD of CLIENTSFirst Consulting

For more business of law legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

© Copyright 2022 CLIENTSFirst Consulting

Fall 2022 Legal Industry News Highlights: Law Firm Hiring and Expansion, Notable Awards and Recognition, and the Latest in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Happy November! As the holiday season approaches, we hope you and yours are remaining safe, happy, and healthy. Please read on below for the latest in legal industry updates, including notable law firm hirings and expansions, legal awards and recognition, and diversity, equity, and inclusion news.

Law Firm Hiring and Updates

Ropes & Gray has named 21 new partners as of November 1st, 2022. They have been selected for their roles as outstanding advisors to the firm’s clients across the globe, representing practices and specialties across sectors such as healthcare, life sciences, technology, labor and employment, and more.

“We are pleased to welcome this new group of partners, who are uniquely positioned to help our clients thrive in today’s uncertain economic environment,” said Chair Julie Jones. “These lawyers are problem solvers and big-picture thinkers, guided by a commercial approach and a deep understanding of the law.”

The firm’s newest partners are as follows: Samantha Barrett Badlam, Stephanie Bruce, Drew Clary, Dan Coyne, Sally Davis, William T. Davison, Gabrielle DiBernardi, Shona Ha, Laura Hirst, Yoni Levy, Nichole Lopez-Tackett, Jessica Marlin, Pascal Mayer, Anthony Mongone, Jessica Reece, Ben Rhode, Scott Rolnik, Alexander Simkin, Annie Sipe, PJ Sullivan, and Dan Zuckerman.

Baker Donelson has added Jill Walters to its Corporate Restructuring & Bankruptcy Group. Located in the firm’s Raleigh/Research Triangle office, Ms. Walters joins as a shareholder, providing more than fifteen years of experience counseling clients in restructuring, bankruptcy, insolvency, and complex Chapter 11 cases. Her work spans many industries and sectors, such as healthcare, manufacturing, real estate, and construction.

“I am thrilled to welcome Jill to the Firm. She is an excellent addition to our team and further deepens our bankruptcy and restructuring bench,” said Eric L. Pruitt, leader of Baker Donelson’s Corporate Restructuring & Bankruptcy Group. “Jill joins a dedicated team that has extensive litigation and transactional experience, and is advising clients in highly complex financial restructuring and bankruptcy cases.”

Morgen A. Mueller has joined Goldberg Segalla as an associate in the firm’s Chicago office. Now a part of the Workers’ Compensation practice group, Ms. Mueller focuses her practices on representing and defending insurers, administrators, and employers in all aspects of employment law, managing claims at all stages, including discovery, hearings, depositions, arbitrations, mediations, and trials.

Previously, Ms. Mueller served as legal counsel at Liberty Mutual Insurance, where she handled workers’ compensation defense cases and personal injury cases.

Davis|Kuelthau s.c. and SmithAmundsen LLC have announced that they will formally merge on November 1st, 2022, to form Amundsen Davis, LLC. The firm will offer services in a wide variety of areas, including labor and employment, intellectual property, litigation, mergers and acquisitions, real estate, and more. Comprised of twelve offices across the US, Amundsen Davis will serve clients both nationally and internationally.

“SmithAmundsen has grown steadily and strategically over the last 25 years to add service areas and expand our geographic reach to truly benefit our clients,” said Managing Partner Larry A. Schechtman. “The opportunity to combine with a firm that is so like-minded is one we are very excited about. What will set Amundsen Davis apart from its large law firm competition is our ability to maintain a boutique firm feeling in terms of client service while providing the resources and infrastructure of a large national firm.”

Legal Industry Awards and Recognition

Julia Perkins, partner at Varnum LLP, was named Class of 2022 Leaders in the Law by Michigan Lawyers Weekly. This honor goes to lawyers who have had outstanding accomplishments, exhibited leadership in improving the justice system in Michigan, and have made improvements to the legal community.

Ms. Perkins is the leader of Varnum’s Family Law Practice Group. Her contributions go beyond the legal field as she has served on the advisory committee for Kids Talk Children’s Advocacy Center since 2005. Using her legal experience, she volunteers as a mediator for Lakeshore Legal Aid. Lakeshore Legal Aid provides legal services to low-income families, seniors, and survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault.

LMG Life Sciences recognized five ArentFox Schiff lawyers’ outstanding work in the life sciences industry. The organization specifically recognizes key North American law firms and lawyers that work in the field of life sciences, taking into account case evidence, peer feedback, and client feedback for rankings.

The ArentFox Schiff attorneys that were selected, as well as their practice groups, are as follows:

  • Partner Imron Aly – Hatch-Waxman Patent Litigation
  • Partner Richard J Berman – General Patent Litigation, Patent Prosecution, Patent Strategy & Management, Hatch-Waxman Patent Litigation
  • Partner Kevin Nelson – Hatch-Waxman Patent Litigation
  • Partner Sailesh Patel – Hatch-Waxman Patent Litigation
  • Partner Stephanie Trunk – Healthcare Pricing & Reimbursement

Rhonda Tobin of Robinson & Cole LLP was one of five women recognized for Managing Partner of the Year in Corporate Counsel’s 2022 Women, Influence and Power in Law (WIPL) Awards. The WIPL Awards are meant to honor general counsel, in-house attorneys, and other law firm leaders who have demonstrated ongoing efforts to empower women in the legal profession, and who have overall made a substantial impact on the field.

Ms. Tobin is a partner at Robinson+Cole and has spent 32 years working on high-profile insurance coverage litigation. She has served as Managing Committee for 12 years and as a chair of the firm’s Litigation Section for 13 years before becoming the firm’s first woman managing partner. This year, she was also listed in the Hartford Business Journal’s 2022 Power Players Section, and she has also been recognized on the Insurance Law Trailblazers list from the National Law Journal.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Global law firm Kennedys and U.S. law firm Miller Canfield have achieved Mansfield Plus Certification from Diversity Lab, a DEI incubator. Diversity Lab adopted the Mansfield Rule, a 12-month program for law firms to boost underrepresented groups in firm leadership, in 2017. The 2021-2022 Mansfield 5.0 program required firms to consider at least 30% historically marginalized groups for at least 70% of senior promotions and enrichment roles, track and document job candidate demographics, submit three-month, six-month, and annual surveys and data collections, and build professional community with other firms.

Kennedys achieved U.S and U.K. certification as a first-time participant in the program. “Kennedys has always been committed to D&I but participating in Mansfield provided both a structure and a mechanism for accountability that allowed us to move beyond words to concrete action. It was a turning point for all of us and has allowed us to continue to identify concrete goals for the future,” says Meg Catalano, US Regional Managing Partner and Global Board Member.

Miller Canfield is a veteran of the Mansfield Program. The firm was the first in Michigan to adopt the rule, one of 27 firms to achieve certification in the program’s first year, and one of 39 to be certified five years in a row.

“When we first adopted the Mansfield Rule, we didn’t know how or if this small, but influential, group would have an impact on the profession and on law firms nationwide,” said Miller Canfield CEO Megan Norris. “We didn’t know whether law firms would be ready to adopt this level of transparency and accountability. We’re pleased to see that the movement is growing and maintaining momentum to create an opportunity for equity in law firms.”

The American Association for Access, Equity And Diversity presented Jackson Lewis P.C. with their 2022 President’s Award at a virtual award ceremony on October 13th, 2022. The award is intended to recognize organizations that have demonstrated ongoing commitment to the AAAED and their mission of expanding access, equity, and diversity.

Jackson Lewis’ Affirmative Action, OFCCP and Government Contract Compliance practice group works with clients and partners to foster a strong DEI culture within a wide range of powerful organizations and industries. The firm has collaborated with AAAED on a number of initiatives, from providing faculty for the AAAED Professional Training Institute to participating on an AAAED amicus brief team to submit two briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina.

“We are thrilled to be recognized for the President’s Award,” says Matthew J. Camardella, co-leader of the firm’s Affirmative Action, OFCCP and Government Contract Compliance group. “I would like to thank Firm Chair Kevin G. Lauri and Chief Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Officer and Principal Kimya S.P. Johnson for continuing to invest in our partnership with AAAED and its mission to promote and protect policies that ensure equity and inclusion in all spheres of opportunity.”

Article By Chandler Ford, Crissonna Tennison, and Shelby Garrett of The National Law Review / The National Law Forum LLC

For more business of law legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

Copyright ©2022 National Law Forum, LLC

State Voting Leave Requirements: A Refresher in Preparation for the 2022 Midterm Elections

Millions of workers across the United States will be headed to the polls on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, for the midterm elections. With control of Congress up for grabs for the final two years of President Joe Biden’s first term, several close Senate races, five states considering ballot measures to legalize recreational marijuana, and 36 states holding elections for governor, this midterm election is one of the most highly-anticipated in decades. Early voting numbers in some states already suggest there could be record turnout.

Despite the proliferation of early and mail-in voting, increased interest in this election could drive more employees to request time off from work to vote. Most states require employers to provide at least unpaid leave from work when polls are not open for a reasonable amount of time outside of employees’ work hours. Here is an overview of voting leave requirements across the United States to help employers prepare for Election Day.

States Without Specific Voting Time Off Requirements

Several states do not require employers to provide any specific leave to allow employees to vote. These include Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, and Virginia.

While not requiring leave, some of those states more generally protect employees’ rights to vote or participate in politics more generally. For instance, Florida and Mississippi prevent employers from discharging an employee for voting or based on how they voted. Similarly, in Idaho and Michigan, employers may not attempt to influence an employee’s vote by discharging or threatening to discharge an employee from employment.

Delaware and New Jersey prohibit employers from intimidating employees into how to vote or not to vote, and Pennsylvania prohibits employers from interfering with an employee’s right to vote. Louisiana requires that employers with 20 or more employees not make any rule that prohibits an employee from participating in politics. In North Dakota, employers are encouraged, but not required, to allow employees to take leave to vote in all elections when employees’ regular work schedules conflict with the time the polls are open.

Finally, Washington and Hawaii do not have specific voting leave laws, but both conduct elections by mail, eliminating the need to take leave to wait at the polls. Hawaii repealed a prior law providing for up to two hours of voting leave when it switched to vote-by-mail for all statewide elections with the 2020 primary election.

Voting Leave Laws Map

States With Unpaid Voting Leave Laws

Several states require employers to provide employees with some amount of unpaid leave to allow them to vote. Connecticut joined this list of states in June 2021, requiring employers to provide all employees with two hours of unpaid leave to vote in a covered election, though employees must provide the employer notice of the need to take the time off at least two days prior to the election. However, the law is set to sunset on June 30, 2024.

Arkansas and Ohio generally require employees to allow employees to take a reasonable amount of time off, unpaid, to vote on Election Day. In Alabama, employees are allowed to take up to one hour of leave to vote in primary and general elections if the polls are not open at least two hours before or one hour after an employee’s work shift.

In Georgia, employers must give employees “necessary” time off to vote when employees provide reasonable notice of the need for the leave, however, employers are not required to provide time off for employees who have at least two hours before or after their work shift when polls are open to vote. In Massachusetts, unpaid voting leave applies only to employees working in manufacturing, mechanical, or mercantile establishments, and employers are not required to pay for this leave. Further, employees may only request leave for the first two hours after the polls are open.

Some states provide more than two hours of leave for employees to vote, though employers are not required to pay for it. In Wisconsin, employers must allow employees to take up to three consecutive hours of unpaid leave to vote. Employers may not deny a request for this leave, but may designate the specific time of the absence. Kentucky provides the most time for voting leave, requiring employers to allow employees to take unpaid leave for a reasonable time, but not less than four hours, to vote or apply for an absentee ballot. Still, employees must request leave in advance and specify the hours to be used.

States With Paid Voting Leave Laws

Employers in a number of states are required to provide paid time off for employees to vote, at least in circumstances where polls are not open outside of an employee’s regular work hours. Alaska requires employers to allow employees who do not have two consecutive nonworking hours while the polls are open to take off as much work time as necessary to vote “without loss of pay.” Similarly, in Texas, employers must allow employees to take paid time off to vote, unless the polls are not open for two consecutive hours outside of an employee’s working hours.

In Minnesota, employees must have “the time necessary” to go to their designated polling place and return to work on Election Day. In Nevada, employees may request “sufficient” leave time to vote on Election Day, which is determined by the distance of the polling place from the employee’s workplace (1 hour for up to 2 miles; 2 hours for greater than 2 and up to 10 miles; and 3 hours for more than 10 miles). Wyoming requires employers to provide for one hour of leave other than a meal break to vote in a general, primary, or special congressional election unless polls are open for at least three consecutive hours outside of an employee’s work shift.

Many states provide for up to two paid hours of leave for voting. These include: California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Utah. Iowa, in 2021, reduced the paid leave from three hours to two. On the other hand, D.C. joined the states providing for up to two hours of paid leave for voting in October 2020. The D.C. law further requires employers to post a “Time Off to Vote” notice in a conspicuous location in the workplace. In New York, employers must give employees two hours of paid leave if employees do not have at least four consecutive nonworking hours to vote while polls are open. New Mexico’s leave law includes elections for Native American nations, tribes, or pueblos.

A handful of states provide for up to three hours of paid leave to vote if necessary, including Arizona, Missouri, Tennessee, and West Virginia. These states require employees provide notice of the need for leave prior to Election Day.

Employers may want to prepare for employees to take the leave time afforded by these laws to vote in the November elections.

Article By Ashley Prickett Cuttino and Zachary V. Zagger of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.

For more election law and legislative news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

© 2022, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., All Rights Reserved.

The Evolving New York City Workplace: Two Important Updates Effective November 1st

Two important measures impacting New York City employers will be effective on November 1, 2022. The first measure is Mayor Adams’ lifting of the COVID-19 vaccine requirement for private employers, which was implemented by his predecessor Mayor de Blasio shortly before he left office. The second measure is New York City’s new “pay transparency” law, which continues the city’s aggressive efforts to eradicate pay disparity and requires employers to immediately review and update their hiring practices.

Vaccine Mandate Lifted

The New York City COVID-19 vaccine mandate, which became effective on December 27, 2021, mandated all New York City private employers to require that all in-person employees be vaccinated against COVID-19, subject only to approved religious and medical exemptions. Effective November 1, 2022, this vaccine mandate will be lifted.

Going forward, New York City employers retain the right to implement their own vaccination policies. New York City employers may lift the requirement and allow employees who are not vaccinated to return to work on site. Alternately, employers may continue to require the COVID-19 vaccine for in-person staff, in which case such employer mandatory vaccination policies must still provide for medical or religious exemptions consistent with applicable laws.

Pay Transparency

Following a recent national trend, New York City continues to aggressively regulate pay equity by amending the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”) to implement “pay transparency” requirements. The law also contains an anti-retaliation provision. The New York City pay transparency law applies to employers with four or more employees (or one or more domestic workers) and employment agencies of any size. The new law does not apply to temporary help firms seeking applicants to join their pool of available workers.

Going forward, covered entities must include the minimum and maximum annual base salary or hourly range of compensation that the employer believes in good faith to be accurate at the time in any advertisement for a job, promotion or transfer opportunity that can or will be performed, in whole or part, in New York City.  While the statutory language is sparse, and regulations have not yet been issued, according to a Fact Sheet published by the New York City Commission on Human Rights (“Commission”) (https://f.datasrvr.com/fr1/622/87383/Salary-Transparency-Factsheet.pdf?cbcachex=897118), an “advertisement” is defined broadly as a written description of an available job, promotion or transfer opportunity that is publicized to a pool of potential applicants, regardless of the medium, and includes postings on internal bulletin boards, internet advertisements, printed flyers at job fairs and newspaper advertisements. The requirement applies when advertising for full-time or part-time employees, interns, domestic workers or independent contractors. The law does not prohibit employers from hiring without using an advertisement or require employers to create an advertisement in order to hire.

According to the Fact Sheet, employers must include both a minimum and maximum salary, and the salary range cannot be open-ended. However, note that “salary” does not include other forms of compensation or benefits offered, including overtime, commissions, tips, bonuses or stock. For example, “$15 per hour and up” or “maximum $50,000 per year” would not be consistent with the new New York City requirements. Further, an advertisement that solely provides that a salary will be commensurate “with experience” also would appear to be inconsistent with the new law.

The Commission investigates complaints of discrimination, as well as the new salary transparency protections. Employers and employment agencies who are found to have violated the NYCHRL may have to pay monetary damages to affected employees, amend advertisements and postings, create or update policies, conduct training, provide notices of rights to employees or applicants and engage in other forms of affirmative relief. According to the Fact Sheet, the Commission will not assess a civil penalty for the first complaint alleging violation of the salary transparency provision, provided that the employer shows that it has fixed the violation within 30 days.

Notably, New York State lawmakers have also passed a similar pay transparency bill, which is currently pending Governor Hochul’s signature and would go into effect 270 days after it is signed into law. The New York State bill, if it is enacted in its current form, will be potentially broader in its application, such as requiring provision of a job description for the position, if one exists.

It is also important to note that prior recent measures adopted by New York State and/or New York City to ensure non-discriminatory hiring practices and equal employment opportunities include regulations prohibiting employers from asking candidates about their prior salary history, pay equity provisions requiring equal pay for the same or substantially similar work, and stringent limitations on criminal history inquiries.

Takeaways

New York City continues to be at the forefront of enacting employment legislation to protect the rights of employees and applicants. It is critical for New York City employers to be vigilant to ensure compliance with the ever-changing legal requirements, including those relating to COVID-19, and to implement appropriate policies and practices.

With regard to the new pay transparency law, it is important for employers to promptly assess their pay practices, ensure that pay ranges are appropriate and equitable, consider documenting the applicable factors that were considered in reaching the salary decision, review job descriptions and ensure that advertising complies with the new requirements (including online recruitment sites).

For more Labor and Employment Law news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

© Copyright 2022 Sills Cummis & Gross P.C.

Biden Administration Expands Public-Private Cybersecurity Partnership to Chemical Sector

On October 26, 2022, the Biden Administration announced that it is expanding the Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Cybersecurity Initiative to the chemical sector. The White House’s fact sheet states that the majority of chemical companies are privately owned, so a collaborative approach is needed between the private sector and government. According to the fact sheet, “[t]he nation’s leading chemical companies and the government’s lead agency for the chemical sector — the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) — have agreed on a plan to promote a higher standard of cybersecurity across the sector, including capabilities that enable visibility and threat detection for industrial control systems.”

The fact sheet states that the Chemical Action Plan will serve as a roadmap to guide the sector’s assessment of their current cybersecurity practices over the next 100 days, building on the lessons learned and best practices of the previously launched action plans for the electric, pipeline, and water sectors to meet the needs for this sector. The Chemical Action Plan will:

  • Focus on high-risk chemical facilities that present significant chemical release hazards with the ultimate goal of supporting enhanced ICS cybersecurity across the entire chemical sector;
  • Drive information sharing and analytical coordination between the federal government and the chemical sector;
  • Foster collaboration with the sector owners and operators to facilitate and encourage the deployment of appropriate technologies based on each chemical facility’s own risk assessment and cybersecurity posture. The federal government will not select, endorse, or recommend any specific technology or provider; and
  • Support the continuity of chemical production critical to the national and economic security of the United States. The chemical sector produces and manufactures chemicals that are used directly or as building blocks in the everyday lives of Americans, from fertilizers and disinfectants to personal care products and energy sources, among others.

The ICS Cybersecurity Initiative emphasizes that cybersecurity continues to be a top priority for the Administration.

For more Cybersecurity Legal News, click here to visit the National Law Review.

©2022 Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.

Episode 5: What’s New In Law Firm Thought Leadership? with Alistair Bone, Vice President for Passle

Welcome to Season 2, Episode 5 of Legal News Reach! National Law Review Web Content Specialist Shelby Garrett sits down with Alistair Bone, Vice President with Passle,  to catch up on the latest in law firm thought leadership trends. What are four strategies for content marketing success? How can current events play a role in brand development? And why is thought leadership more important—and competitive—than ever?

We’ve included a transcript of the conversation below, transcribed by artificial intelligence. The transcript has been lightly edited for clarity and readability.

Shelby Garrett

Thank you for tuning in to the Legal News Reach podcast. My name is Shelby Garrett, Web Publication Specialist with the National Law Review, and in this episode I’ll be speaking to Alistair Bone, Vice President for Passle. Would you mind sharing a bit about your background in legal and what you do at Passle?

Alistair Bone

Thank you very much for having me on, firstly, it’s nice to be kind of the interviewee as opposed to the interviewer. Typically, as you might have come across, there’s the CMO Series podcast at Passle and I’ve been heavily involved with that, which is always enjoyable, so nice to be here. A little bit of background for me is that I was previously a professional sportsman playing rugby, I was very fortunate to have done that. But sadly, that all came to an end about three years ago. I then went into headhunting in the world of law, which kind of sparked the initial interest in law firms and professional services. And I learned a huge amount there. But then my sort of interest was really sparked in technology and how that can kind of really enable law firms to further what they’re doing. And that’s where Passle came along. For me, I love relationships, I love meeting people, I am very much a people person, and this kind of seemed to bring all those different worlds together for me. So yeah, that’s kind of how I ended up Passle, and I’m absolutely loving what I’m doing here.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, I’m really excited to speak with you today. Passle sounds like an amazing tool for professionals, content creation can be an extremely overwhelming process and I think that Passle really removes those roadblocks and kind of simplifies the whole process so that professionals can easily share their expertise

Alistair Bone

Bang on, I mean Passle is a software that has been used by professional services. As you mentioned, we work with Magic Circle firms, Am Law 100, the Big Four accountancies, and fundamentally it’s a platform that makes that critical challenge of demonstrating the firm’s expertise, getting it out to the market nice and quickly and effectively and fundamentally enjoyably.

Shelby Garrett

Amazing, let’s get into a little bit of discussion about thought leadership. Could you give us a nice little definition and why it’s currently a priority for law firms?

Alistair Bone

Yeah, of course, it’s a really nice place to start and hopefully I can give a little bit of an overview. When you come to sort of thought leadership, you know, in professional services, being able to demonstrate your firm’s knowledge and value to the market is really key. Thought leadership definitely sits at the heart of all successful professional service marketing. Really, when you start thinking about it, nearly every growth initiative, business development target, or marketing activity centers around how well that firm can demonstrate the knowledge of its experts. Fundamentally, they want to put out that knowledge to the market. Now, when you start to consider that in terms of what’s happening, we’re really seeing that shift of firms becoming far more global, and certainly more digital. So therefore they’re really starting to prioritize that expertise online and really invest into the thought leadership infrastructure. That said, it’s not happening with everybody. But of the general sort of trends, what we’re really seeing is that the places that have really proved progressive, CMOs are doing very well with it, but also firms are trying to really sort of position themselves in a space or a city and sort of elevate what they’re doing. So hopefully, that’s a nice little bit of an overview of sort of thought leadership and what we’re seeing in the world right now.

Shelby Garrett

When firms start to look into thought leadership, what are ways for them to measure their success, in really cultivating that?

Alistair Bone

So when it comes to how they’re able to sort of really prioritize their thought leadership and what they’re doing, there’s definitely a few reasons sort of behind that in terms of how they can kind of start to prioritize it, and why they might be prioritizing it. For some firms, it’s sort of central to their ethos in their output of what they’re trying to achieve. So if you take, for instance, Reed Smith, they are a global player, they see themselves as a global player in the market, and they want to be first to the market in terms of commenting on what’s happening now, what are those new initiatives, what’s changing in the marketplace. So that’s one way that people are doing it. Again mentioned sort of beforehand, but it can be just that people are wanting to sort of position themselves in a space where they see a really big opportunity. As all law firms know, their clients are really hungry to understand what’s happening in their various markets. And something that at the moment, we’re really seeing that sort of trend of why people are prioritizing it is areas such as your ESG, or your E-Sports are really nice places that people can focus their thought leadership and elevate the sort of teams around that.

A different example is actually, you know, we’ve just launched with Goulston & Storrs, who are a Boston based firm, they’re very established there, but they really want to be recognized in the New York market. And so again, for them thought leadership’s going to be key there to kind of really elevate themselves. So hopefully that’s kind of a nice little bit of a wrap up. I think the other thing that we really noticed with people prioritizing their thought leadership is, we on an annual basis do something called the Digital Performance Index. Now we take a look at a whole host of online activity from law firms, you know, right through from their website, how they’re performing on LinkedIn, etc. And naturally being a thought leadership expert, so to speak, we focus in on that and what we see there is that a lot of firms really sit in sort of amongst their competitors in an area that we would really say is fierce competition. The average attorney in the US and the UK creates one piece of thought leadership a year. So again, firms who want to get themselves out of that fierce competition to be seen as a category leader as kind of mentioned previously, they’re the ones that that are sort of starting to prioritize thought leadership.

Shelby Garrett

Sounds like the measure of success might vary depending on what the goals of the firm are. But is there anything that you’ve noticed that separates successful thought leadership programs from ones that are struggling?

Alistair Bone

Yeah, certainly, I think when you start to measure in what actually makes a successful thought leadership program, as said before, like, those are the reasons that maybe are what made people want to do it. But what’s going to make it successful? I think, before maybe answering that, it’s worth talking about what is a thought leadership program, because it might differ for people. But fundamentally, you know, it’s that sort of concerted effort by firms to demonstrate their expertise to the market. So we’re really fortunate that we get to work on a global scale with the likes of Freshfields, Deloitte, and they’re all having really huge success. On the flip side, we also see what doesn’t work. But fundamentally, success comes down to what we call the four pillars. Within those four pillars, there is the author, there is governance, there’s something that we call “Create Once and Publish Everywhere,” and then your feedback. So that’s a little bit of maybe an introduction in sort of that thought leadership and what makes it successful.

When it comes to considering the author, if we take the first pillar, you really want to ensure that your thought leadership is author-centric when you’re making that publication. So how can you empower them and motivate your authors, your lawyers, your consultants to create that content in a really easy sort of well understood way? The second pillar would be governance. And so it’s really important to be able to make sure that there’s no friction in the process of actually creating the content. So you know, how do you get those nice, quick, efficient approval processes for the content you’re putting out there, you know, making it a matter of hours, as opposed to days? Because you want to be timely, you want to be putting it out there in a really nice format that’s responding to what’s happening in the market. When we come on to “Create Once and Publish Everywhere,” there’s a really nice term we like to refer to, “Cope.” So it’s about actually, you know, how are you guaranteeing the reach of that content, you know, you’ve created this great piece of thought leadership, where’s it going from there? So of course, you know, the lawyers have really strong networks on LinkedIn, it’s a really nice place to push that out. But equally there’s all the sort of online publications. There’s obviously yourself, the National Law Review, great place, you know, want that content on there. But also, if I hope you don’t mind me mentioning, there’s obviously JD Supra, Mondaq, Lexology—again, nice places that you want your content on. So again, how can you really push that out to the market? And then finally, there’s feedback. And in some ways, once you’ve done all of the above, this is actually the most critical part because there’s no point in creating thought leadership and that content and pushing it out there if people don’t know the benefit of what they’ve done. And actually, it’s got to be in a nice layered way. Because when you think about it, there’s multiple stakeholders who want to understand the feedback. So if we take the authors, you know, that’s very personal, they want their clients, they want their prospects, they want to know who’s been engaging with it. If you take it from the firm’s perspective, the management know, they’re probably looking at that bottom line, you know, who’s bringing in the money for them? So are they getting engagement from those key people? And the third and final sort of layer is actually the marketing business development. So again, when you have a look at all of that feedback put together, that starts to demonstrate the success of all of that time that you’re investing into it. So yeah, hopefully, that’s a nice way to understand it. But fundamentally, success comes with aligning themselves to those four pillars and making sure you’re doing each in the best way possible. And that’s what gets, you know, a real virtuous circle of content creation going.

Shelby Garrett

Amazing, that was really great context and a really full theory of success. For firms that might be looking to really transform their thought leadership programs, is there a good place to start? We talked about the four pillars. Is there one first step that they can really use to jumpstart this?

Alistair Bone

I think there’s a few different places that they can start with, but in some ways, it’s actually quite simple. I’ve mentioned those four pillars there, and actually it’s about assessing those four pillars. Are you engaging your authors? You know, is it very easy for them, if you remove those barriers to entry to make sure that they can create their content? Again, when it comes to governance, you know, have you addressed those workflows? Is it again, a simple process for them to be able to actually create that content? And then get that out there? Once it’s done, where are you putting it out? And finally that feedback, are you actually providing feedback to people? I think by taking that step back and taking a look at the sort of overall process of your thought leadership program, and looking at those four pillars, that really allows you to then hone in on actually, “Okay, we’re not enabling and empowering our authors to create content. That’s why it’s not actually happening. So therefore, we need to do that and then we can start to go from there.” It may be that you’re doing all of this, but there’s no feedback. You know, maybe you give something small once a year. I know that if I was doing something I’m putting time and effort into and I got no feedback and didn’t really know the value that I was adding to people, then I probably wouldn’t want to continue doing it. So again, it’s just a nice way to kind of really address it. So I think that’s a really nice place for people to start when it wants to come to, you know, transforming their thought leadership program, or even beginning it.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, that’s a really great point. I feel like there’s a lot of excitement when starting something new, but you have to take that kind of honest and realistic assessment of what you currently have going on to develop that full game plan. Thank you. That was amazing.

We talked about measurements of success, but are there additional tools and resources that are available for firms that are looking forward to making these changes?

Alistair Bone

I mean, if you look at it from our perspective, on the Passle website, I mentioned it at the top, but the CMO Series podcast is a really nice place for anybody at any level in smart marketing and business development to listen to what’s happening in the market be it from, you know, what it’s like to be a new CMO, be it data, developing your team. So that’s a really nice resource hub. If you think about thought leadership, we have various resources in terms of one-pagers that you can come on, and you can learn a little bit more around what’s happening. Similarly, feel free to reach out, you know, we’re always here to have conversations and discuss what we’re doing here at Passle and how we’re helping a number of different firms with their thought leadership programs and forming that infrastructure for them as they move forward.

Shelby Garrett

Absolutely. Yeah, your website is a great resource, I listened to a couple of those podcasts and you guys have quite the range of guests as well, that are very happy to share their expertise, which is great.

Alistair Bone

Yeah, we’re really fortunate from that perspective. And it’s been a really nice thing to do. I say, normally, I’m sat interviewing people, but it allows myself and my colleagues to ultimately make some great friends throughout the legal world. So it’s been a real success.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, with those connections you’ve definitely built a lot of knowledge that’s accessible for people in that podcast as well, which is wonderful.

Moving away from the firm focus, but kind of looking at more of a macro lens, what are some of the current trends that are happening in law firm thought leadership programs?

Alistair Bone

I think, you know, if we take it back to the start, the biggest trends that we’re noticing is just people, one focusing on key areas. So, you know, be it new practice areas, such as their ESG, or their E-sports, that’s where people are certainly starting to focus in on. I think the other place is that people are looking at it as career development, which is a really nice place to, you know, help elevate what attorneys and lawyers are doing, as they kind of come through that natural path where you become associate, senior associate, you’re not necessarily doing a lot of business development until you get to partner. So again, it’s a nice chance for you to start to be seen in the network and be seen as those experts. The other place that I think people are starting to focus in on is realizing that there’s always a place for your big white papers. They’re fantastic. There’s so much time, effort, money goes into them. They provide a huge amount of knowledge, but what the market wants on the whole, and certainly what us as individuals out there want in this world now is that nice, short, digestible, timely content. So actually, you don’t want to be writing much more than maybe sort of 200, 500 words. So again, that’s a nice shift that we’re starting to see that people understand that value from that perspective.

Shelby Garrett

 Yeah, absolutely. I have a background in public libraries and having this information available online with these different topics is just so valuable for everybody sharing that information, and your expertise.

Alistair Bone

It’s that chance to kind of dip into different areas of people’s expertise. You know, something’s changed and, you know, the interest rates have moved here in the UK, how’s that affecting your mortgage rate? And what’s the law behind that? Or, you know, unfortunately, there was the big storm, you know, Hurricane Ian down in Florida recently, you know, maybe an employment lawyer might want to put out some recent content or something around, “What are your employment rights around working from home?” or whatever it might be. So it’s a really nice way to kind of start engaging with people, you know, don’t have to look at it in the lens of simply being the law and client alerts and that sort of thing. So as you said, you can dip into these different things and learn something.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, absolutely. The new iOS update for Apple with the ability to delete text messages and e-Discovery that’s, like, so intriguing to me. And yeah, just as like a public person. I think that’s like, extremely interesting.

When we’re looking at all of these big changes, like you’ve mentioned the hurricane, have you seen law firms kind of shift their content marketing approaches, in light of that?

Alistair Bone

I think on the whole, we are seeing people just start to engage in maybe a slightly different way. I mean, I’ve been fortunate enough on some of those podcasts to have great conversations with people in the industry for a long time and they kind of talked about what they’ve seen the marketing functions of law firms do and the real shift. But I think now people are starting to realize that ultimately it really is about elevating your attorneys and what you’re doing and therefore how can you push out, ultimately their knowledge? I think the other thing to consider in the world we’re all now living in is that a lot more people will be working from home, you know people, or law firm should I say spend a huge amount of money on the infrastructure of offices, office spaces, people aren’t necessarily coming into it, you’re not necessarily having your clients come into it so that online presence is becoming ever more important. So again, what you’re putting out there on the website, what your attorneys are able to do, what your consultants are able to do becomes that bit more important. So yeah, there’s definitely I think that more of a shift online to being able to elevate what people are doing.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, that kind of ties into with the smaller or the shorter pieces that are being created, you could kind of shift your topics more quickly. Looks like we are nearly coming to a close. But I do want to pull this all together and talk about where Passle exactly fits in and helping these law firms create and share their thought leadership. I know you kind of walked us through the tool that you guys have and your Chrome plugin previously. But if you could explain that a little bit more for our listeners?

Alistair Bone

Sure, well, I’ll give a very brief overview of how Passle works for people who don’t know. Passle is a piece of software that quite simply goes onto the laptop. And as they removed all the barriers of entry for the attorneys, the consultants, your experts to create the content. So it can be used in a host of different ways. Not only you can write content but you can do your podcasts, you can do your videos, you can host PDFs, you can embed different content, there’s so much that you’re able to do with it. And once you’ve got over the fundamental hurdle of people being able to create the content, you can then do a host of different things then in terms of starting to form that infrastructure on the website. So be that plugging into the attorneys’ profiles or consultants’ profiles, plugging it into the practice areas. Yeah, kind of the world’s your oyster, once you get up and running with it, which is, which is really cool. If you want to launch with Passle, the way that we always do it, because we know this is tried, tested, and works incredibly well is we do a Proof of Value that we run over the course of two months. It’s all about that behavioral change, you know, taking a group of 20, 25, attorneys, consultants, experts within your firm, and getting that shift of going from, “I don’t understand thought leadership, I don’t know how to create content, I don’t necessarily want to, I haven’t done it before,” to overnight, shifting them into actually understanding the benefits that come from thought leadership and what they can do with it. So that’s kind of the launch process. I don’t want to bore people too much with it. But hopefully, that’s a bit of an overview of Passle and where it kind of plugs in. But it’s a very exciting time for us. And we’re very fortunate to be working with some of the world’s global firms and some real leading players there.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, absolutely. I, when you were talking about the four pillars, I certainly could immediately connect it to what you were showing us earlier through your demonstration.

Alistair Bone

I think that’s the thing with Passle is that once you have the opportunity to see it, everything clicks, and you understand the value that it’s going to bring and how easy it is because it’s not just on the attorney side. If you take the marketing, the BD, the communications team, we obviously elevate everything that they’re doing and make it very easy for them. But also because it’s all focused in on one sort of screen. You know, when you have that Passle posts, that completes the content you’ve created approved, the marketing, the BD teams get a notification, it’s all in one place, they can top and tail it, do what they want to before it’s going live on to the website. So you remove that arduous process of back and forth again, which is a really nice place to be. So it’s not just about the attorneys. It’s actually about the marketing, the BD, comms teams and elevating everything they’re doing as well.

Shelby Garrett

It certainly is daunting for lawyers to create their own content. And it’s a large task and Passle makes it a bit of a smoother process I think, at least from what I’ve seen.

Alistair Bone

Everybody has the impostor syndrome, whatever you do. Once you get over that hurdle, you know, it’s pretty smooth sailing.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, absolutely. How has Passle’s technology been able to help firms succeed over the years? I know we’ve covered it throughout. But if you could really like, bring that all together in a nice little package for us?

Alistair Bone

Yeah, sure. I think what might be the best thing to do, and I thought it might be able to answer it earlier but didn’t have the chance to was, you know, what actually makes a successful thought leadership program? So maybe if I can demonstrate some of the successes people have had, that kind of demonstrates what’s happened over the years. I think success can be defined in multiple ways for different people in terms of what your ultimate outcome is from a thought leadership program. But what we’ve seen is it really differs over time. So in the initial instance, you know it’s that overnight change the behavior change in in the attorneys, you know, you go from individuals never having created content to writing and understanding value. We launched with a law firm here in London called Forsters. One of my fantastic stories I absolutely love from it was one of their senior partners who didn’t like technology, had never used it, didn’t want to engage with it was part of our launch, the Proof of Value. Not only did he write four pieces of content, which again was a huge change, he started using LinkedIn. And even then he got himself an Instagram account, because he understood the value of technology all of a sudden, obviously slightly different to your work stuff. But again, a really nice story of kind of people seeing that change. You then kind of start to look at what’s happening over the next couple of months. And as you get deeper into that sort of thought leadership program, and more success starts to come in terms of the impact on people’s diaries. You know, they’re starting to have conversations with clients, they’re starting to meet prospects, you know, they get engaged with all of the right people. Additionally, and I sort of want to touch on it, as well is there’s that career development I mentioned earlier when you were sort of saying some of the trends, but there’s a real understanding for sort of the associates,  senior associates of how they can help develop their career. So again, a really nice example there was there’s a lawyer, a senior associate called JJ Shaw at a firm called Lewis Silkin in the sports team there and he was sharing with us that actually, you know, from creating content, putting it out there to his network, he started to have people come back to him asking him to post panels to sit on different talks, which is amazing, because all of a sudden, he’s being seen as that go-to expert, and people are actually engaging with what he’s doing. So again, a really nice development tool. And then I just think longer term, it’s fundamentally about winning business. And once you start winning the business, everything you’re doing with that big thought leadership program makes sense. So again, we’ve got a lot of anecdotal examples. One that I know I can share with the public was from Alvarez & Marsal, one of the big US consultancies, and we were fortunate enough to sit down with Linda Orton, who’s the former CMO there. And she shared with us that Mike Carter, who was again, a former Senior Director there had done this post around anti-money laundering, he put it onto LinkedIn, she’d actually invested a little bit of spending into that to sort of elevate what was happening, you know, something like 50 quid, not a huge amount of money. That then led to a conversation, which then led to business and over the past couple of years, that’s actually generated 12 million in revenue. So all of a sudden, admittedly, there’s a whole host of work that went into that. But it’s that understanding that by being seen as those go-to experts elevating what you’re doing, you know, the business starts to come. So hopefully, you know, I know, I’ve broken it down there, but that gives an idea of how actually, we’ve helped firms over the years, and particularly now, just really forming that thought leadership infrastructure for people.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, amazing. I can certainly see the building the confidence aspect of the technology that you have making it simplified, but also seeing those results really would build your confidence in creation.

Alistair Bone

And it spans throughout firms, because someone else sees that and they want to get involved and do something around it. So it’s really nice.

Shelby Garrett

Yeah, it’s wonderful. Before we wrap up today, are there any final thoughts that you would like to share with us?

Alistair Bone

There’s probably one or two, I just want to keep it really succinct. I think just the main thing is that thought leadership really is for everybody, and is something that everyone should be considering at the moment, I think, whether it’s that you’re really wanting to stand out in a specific field or elevate some of the great work that you’re already doing, you know, whether that is the marketing or BD teams or for the attorneys, there’s so much that you can invest into it. And you know, that online presence has never been more important. So I think those two things are probably the key takeaways for me that hopefully it resonates with people as they listen to this. And you know, if there’s anything that you want to do in terms of understanding more than please feel free to obviously reach out to me via email or on LinkedIn or equally you can visit home.passle.net. There are plenty of places that you can get some information, but hopefully this has been some worthwhile information for people to listen to.

Shelby Garrett

We can’t thank you enough for joining us today and sharing your thoughts. Thank you to our listeners as well for tuning in. We will see you all next time.

Conclusion

Thank you for listening to the National Law Review’s Legal News Reach podcast. Be sure to follow us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts for more episodes. For the latest legal news, or if you’re interested in publishing and advertising with us, visit www.natlawreview.com. We’ll be back soon with our next episode.

For more Legal Marketing News, click here to visit the National Law Review.

Copyright ©2022 National Law Forum, LLC