Bullying in law firms: hard to define, easy to spot

In a profession that prides itself on upholding the laws that govern society, rules can fly out the window when lawyers become bullies.

It is not uncommon for one or more of a firm's senior lawyers to verbally, physically or psychological abuse subordinate lawyers and support staff, said Lisa G. Lerman, a law professor at Catholic University of American Columbus School of Law and moderator of a recent program on "Law Firm Bullies" at the 33rd National Conference on Professional Responsibility, in Chicago.

Some lawyers scream, hurling insults. Others hurl objects. "Staplers are a favorite," said Lerman.

Wm. Marty Martin, Ph.D., associate professor in the College of Management, Department of Commerce at DePaul University, compared lawyers with medical doctors, citing instances of surgeons in the midst of surgery who splash nurses with blood or who berate other members of the health care team in front of patients or family members.

When bullying appears in a law firm, especially if the bully is a highly productive partner, there can be organizational hurdles to taking action.

"Nobody wants to drive away a productive member of the firm, the person with the business," said Stafford Henry, a psychiatrist and medical director of the Behavior Health Multidisciplinary Program at Rush Medical Center in Chicago. But he cautioned that it is also important to consider associates, who are "the future of the firm."

To handle bullying, panelists agreed that managers need to document disruptive behavior, confront it, set expectations for improvement and spell out consequences if the behavior persists. But they also agreed that details on how those steps are carried out may vary with the cause of the behavior, and that discerning the cause may require the services of a mental health professional. Interventions can be tricky and behavior modification can require psychotherapy.

Back to top

Sometimes the problem stems from a narcissistic personality, involving haughtiness and projecting blame for failure on others. Other times a problem may result from an attempt to preserve the bully’s status quo, where the bully makes excuses for his own shortcomings or elevates her own sense of self-worth through intimidation and unwarranted unprofessional behavior toward others.

Peter Bulmer, managing partner of the Chicago law firm of Jackson Lewis, LLP, represents management in employment disputes. He compared bullying to obscenity—hard to define but easy to spot. He professed not to know what bullying is, in a legal sense. The law doesn’t say much about it, he said.

Henry noted movement toward legislative prohibitions that would change the landscape dramatically. Bills are pending in Connecticut, Hawaii, Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Washington and Utah. There even is a proposal to build the concept of anti-bullying into the ethics code for lawyers in New South Wales, Australia.

Absent legislative approaches, the "fix" can become a question of what culture a law firm has, what culture it wants, and how the firm can get there without violating partnership agreements. "There’s always a lawful way," Henry said.

Managers need to step back, and evaluate the pros and cons of an offender in order to assess the effect on the organization, suggested Henry. "Is this someone you want to keep, or do you want to move them out? That decision will govern your steps," he said.

Contractual issues in partnership agreements can tie the hands of law firm management. But such agreements also can permit disincentives that can affect behavior, options like cutting compensation or ejecting a person from the firm.

Martin said there is one more piece to the puzzle. "You can’t just look at the legal piece and the ethical piece—you need to look at the organizational piece as well—the effect on others and the impact on business." He suggested standardized surveys in which partners and associates can comment on each other anonymously as one way to take that look.

Back to top

Bulmer agreed that surveys can be useful. In his firm, once a year all staff evaluates "everybody above them in the food chain." Most people take it seriously as a helpful tool for reform, and it produces results, he said. The firm conducts a formal top down review process twice a year.

Others suggested anonymous associate surveys can be abused as tools against unpopular partners.

In smaller firms with no anonymity, surveys might not work, but firms can create an environment that teaches people how to give and receive criticism, and how to bring behavioral concerns to the attention of someone in a position to address it, said Martin.

In considering the role of risk management structures in addressing bully behavior, Bulmer suggested every law firm has such a structure in place, but said they need something more. Risk management is designed for legal liabilities, and bully behaviors often don’t cross the legal line. He urged multiple low-risk routes to bring concerns to firm leaders who are positioned to address them—tools like ombudsmen, for example.

In the end, panelists agreed with Bulmer’s reiterated view: "It's about the culture of the firm."

To view a pdf of the Oregon State Senate bill on bullying in the workplace click here.

Back to top

Back to home