Many Lawyers Are Reeling From Election Results, but Leaders Are Staying Mum
“Firm leaders just aren’t talking about it,” said Katherine Wilson, co-founder of Fractional CMO. “In the quest for unity, they tend to say, 'Well, it’s just better to not say anything, because I don’t want to offend anyone.'"
November 11, 2024 at 05:19 PM
6 minute read
Reactions to last week's presidential election results are ranging from excitement to devastation, if a quick look on social media is any indicator. But law firm leaders aren’t exactly being candid about how, if at all, they’re handling attorneys’ reactions to the hotly contested race or how they’re supporting employees disappointed with the election’s outcome.
Law.com analyses of Federal Election Commission financial data across a variety of legal markets, including those based in swing states, found that attorneys in Big Law overwhelmingly gave their financial support to Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for president. The day after the election, those attorneys were given a shock to the system when confronted with an impending second term for former President Donald Trump.
However, when leaders were asked how they were helping their attorneys cope with election results, many deflected by pointing to the overall resilience of attorneys, as well as their firms’ innately and collegially bipartisan cultures; one leader, a litigator, compared this moment to losing a case in court but having to get over it and go on to the next case, while another said he hadn’t noticed much of an impact on office morale after the election.
|
A Peek Inside
One firm that did offer an inside look at how it’s accommodating attorneys post-election is California-based Am Law 200 firm Hanson Bridgett.
“I approached leadership first by acknowledging that there are a wide range of reactions here at Hanson Bridgett and at our clients. The election is a time of heightened uncertainty,” said managing partner Kristina Lawson. “I focused on creating a supportive environment where I had an opportunity to listen to concerns from all points of view and make sure they’re heard, they’re validated and they’re addressed.”
Lawson didn't limit her efforts to the day after Election Day, but instead aimed at being solicitous in the period immediately before the election as well as a longer period of time after results were announced.
“Our focus has been on leading with empathy, and listening is a big part of it,” Lawson said. “Another piece of our approach is to give ourselves some purpose during a time of politically charged change, in addition to all of those other things like making sure there’s open communications throughout the firm, walking the halls and making sure we provide our mental health resources to those who feel impacted in a particular way.”
The firm also found ways to promote community in the wake of the election, even as attorneys discussed a new legal landscape under the Trump administration, Lawson said.
“We put our worry about uncertainty into action by focusing on the changes a new administration would bring and how that would impact our clients’ businesses,” Lawson said. “There were a lot of team meetings and people getting together to talk about how we could respond. It gave people the community around the certainty and helped us focus on what we’re all about, which is providing legal services.”
|
A Wall of Silence
While Lawson was candid about her firm’s actions post-election, other firms have been less transparent. Both mental health and marketing consultants suggested that firm leaders were hesitant to send out messaging related to the election or its aftermath for fear of falling out of step with clients and accidentally signaling support for one political faction or the other.
“Firm leaders just aren’t talking about it,” said Katherine Wilson, co-founder of Fractional CMO. “In the quest for unity, they tend to say, 'Well, it’s just better to not say anything, because I don’t want to offend anyone.'"
But Lawson at Hanson Bridgett contended that it's possible to speak out in a way that's not going to alientate stakeholders, while also acknowledging the reluctance to offer public statements in the wake of the election.
“We, like many firms, didn’t offer any public statement. … That’s the approach most firm leaders are taking,” she said. “We’re taking that internal approach to make sure we recognize the stress and uncertainty that can accompany election results. … Law firms, professional services firms, corporations, aren’t issuing public statements as they did previously.”
Patrick Krill, a mental health consultant who founded Krill Strategies, suggested that from the perspective of a law firm managing partner, leaders can find themselves “in a somewhat conflicted position” given that the election results are expected to improve law firm business even if some employees are less than pleased with the outcome.
“There isn’t a playbook for navigating that,” Krill said.
|
Navigating the Tension
Yet, as Wilson said, there are ways to navigate uncomfortable communications without alienating people with different opinions. Wilson, Krill, and business lawyer turned executive coach and psychotherapist Gail Cummings all said that firms should at least acknowledge the storm of emotions overtaking their employees in the wake of the election.
"When there's a national event like this that impacts everybody, it's important [leadership] acknowledges what's going on," Cummings said. "They need to acknowledge that there's a lot of feelings and anxiety post-election, and this may be very distracting and hard for people to process. That acknowledgement is at least 50% of what they need to do."
Wilson and Cummings also emphasized the importance of community in terms of support.
“It’s important to communicate unity and acknowledge there is an impact here, that people may be feeling alienated or feeling scared,” Wilson said. “You have to acknowledge it for people to move on. … You can focus on the firm’s culture bringing people together and remind [employees] to come together with [the firm’s values] with the recognition that this might be a very difficult time for people in the organization and we need to support each other.”
Krill, meanwhile, focused on the importance of acknowledging the current environment and proposed that firms use this as an opportunity to remind employees of pre-existing mental health benefits.
“Generally speaking, it would be appropriate for any firm to acknowledge this was an enormously stressful period of time, and this is irrespective of who people supported in the lead up to the election. Just recognizing and acknowledging that would be warranted, as would be using that as an opportunity to remind law firm personnel that we take mental health and well being seriously, and we have resources,” he said.
Wilson encouraged firms to take this opportunity to “think of how they can use this to promote some more systemative resources and keep the train going.”
“This isn’t just one day. This is a shift for all of 2025 and beyond,” she said. “It’s not just something that’s a one and done message.”
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Related Stories
View AllYou Might Like
View AllMore Young Lawyers Are Entering Big Law With Mental Health Issues. Are Firms Ready to Accommodate Them?
O'Melveny Partner Healthier on the Job, More Creative, From Working at His Flower Farm
5 minute readMental Health in the Legal Industry: How to Mitigate Systemic Challenges and Boost Individual Resilience
2 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250