Memorandum to management

TO:  Anita and Richard
FROM:  [Xxxxx]
DATE: 8/15/13

Earlier this year, I brought up the issue of name-calling opposing parties, which seemed to be happening more and more.  I raised the issue at a family law unit meeting.  I stand by my position that name-calling anyone (client, opposing party, co-worker, court official, etc.) in any setting is wrong.  I regret and feel ashamed, however, of my delivery, since I was too emotional when I raised it with the unit.  I learned from that mistake and hope to be better at delivering criticism to others.

Note that Sue repeatedly used the word "asshole" to describe only men opposing parties.  In a private conversation between Sue and I in my office, I told Sue that if she continued to name-call men as "assholes," then I would name-call women opposing parties as "cunts."  Of course that suggestion elicited a very angry reaction from her.  Just as I was angry at what I perceived as a unit bias against men.

The unit responded by making a policy that no one shall name-call a client or opposing party at a unit meeeting; instead each person shall use objective, descriptive statements of fact.  I accepted the unit's policy decision as a step in the right direction.  I added that I acknowledge I have no right to tell people how to speak behind closed doors, but I believe the policy should be no name-calling ever, in even private.  We, especially the leaders in the unit, have a duty to set an example of professionalism at all times.  There's no legitimate reason to name-call; there's no excuse to name-call.  The unit listened to me, but made no decision to take it to that level.

Just a couple days ago, I found out that Sue name-called me.  Sue called me a "bitch" in a private conversation with (an)other person(s) from the unit.  I'm not surprised, coming from the person who most name-called men opposing parties and the person who most wanted to limit the policy against name-calling to unit meetings only.  If I called any woman in my office a "bitch," I'd be fired for sexual harassment.  In a pro-woman-biased organization, however, the double standard is condoned.

I have two salient issues.  First, the alienation of me as the only male in the unit, especially since my personality is such that I get very frustrated with any kind of injustice or inequality.  Second, that the supervising attorney of the unit (and implicitly also management, by my perception of their failure to manage this situation) has not been a leader; she has not set an example of what a complete, professional, competent attorney should be; she's teaching the young people in our unit (paralegals, law students and even newer attorneys) that it's okay to assess a case by calling a man a "fucking asshole" or consider a case for representation based on an emotional sympathy for the woman client, rather than based upon the objective facts of the case.

I have many more issues with Sue's quality of work as supervising attorney (most of which I've told her directly) but that's beyond the scope of this memorandum.  I'll just say that I've tried at least a couple times to "manage up," and I've come to the conclusion that it's a useless waste of time.  I don't think that I will ever change Sue.  And it's also not my job to supervise or manage Sue.  Now having no respect for Sue, I intend to have as little contact as possible with Sue and I request management's approval of such.

As a final consideration, let me swear and affirm that I have never name-called any client, opposing party, coworker, or court official ever in any setting, whether at a unit meeting or closed-door meeting with anyone.  And as yourself: if you knew that the person supposedly guiding you and your legal career called you a "bitch," would you feel morale to come to work, see them in the office, consider their advice or assessment of cases, or like them as a person?  If your answer is anything but "no," then I will consider all my options, including sharing this with others and/or resignation.