Even lawyers need a hug. When workdays stretch into worknights and the pressure to meet the quota for billable hours grows, lawyers and staff members at the firm of Perkins Coie can often expect a little bonus.
In Perkins Coie's Chicago office, members of the firm's "happiness committee" recently left candied apples on everyone's desks. Last month, the happiness committee surprised lawyers, paralegals and assistants in the Washington office with milkshakes from a local Potbelly Sandwich Works, a favorite lunch spot.
"That's the whole beauty of it all - it's random acts of kindness," said Lori Anger, client relations manager of Perkins Coie, which is based in Seattle. "We have pretty strict hours, so it's a nice way to surprise people."
A "happiness committee"? "Random acts of kindness" from someone whose job title is client relations manager? This is just nonsense. Demand for legal services is going up, so wages are going up, and that's a good thing for young lawyers. The way this article is framed makes it seem like these young lawyers are so lucky to be paid by their munificent bosses, who are doing nice things for them like buying them milkshakes.
The framing goes on in this 'why don't they have it hard' narrative for basically the whole article.
But while some of these benefits take the form of highly practical solutions - like on-site child care - others raise questions whether law firms are subsidizing a cushy lifestyle.
"As if a $160,000 starting salary wasn't enough for associates" fresh out of law school, "yes, there's more," said Peter Johnson of Law Practice Consultants in Boston.
So law firms that pay their associates more, in benefits or wages, are 'raising questions about whether law firms are subsidizing a cushy lifestyle'. The article never bothers to note that law firm partners make an exceptional amount of money, or that most young law firm associates spend 80 hours a week on incredibly boring repetitive corporate work and have large student loans to pay back. It's all framed around whether young lawyers are getting too big for their britches, with no larger questions about the economics of the legal profession.
This isn't an example of the New York Times beating up on autoworkers, or janitors, or old people for taking too many Social Security benefits, but young upscale lawyers making good money. The pattern of beating up on the non-superrich, though is the same, and it's designed to make you shake your head and say 'man, those young'uns are getting spoiled out of their mind' instead of recognizing that services like child care, high wages, and decency towards employees are good things.
It's the pain caucus, always, brought to you by the DC Villagers, and it's a subtle propagandizing force that says there are billionaires, power players, and celebrities, and then there is the vast useless consumer horde that should just take what they get and like it. |
STATE BLOGS
