<p>I imagine that some temps are under such stress from under-employment/income that there might be issues whenever the event occurred.</p>
<p>I can also see that the “holidays” added to some feelings of anger and frustration.</p>
<p>Or they are morons. </p>
<p>That one seems somewhat likely.</p>
<p>I would be VERY concerned that if they think crashing the part sends a message, what is next…transposing document/case numbers so you have to recode and verify all their input.?
they would have been locked out in 20 minutes if partners were paranoid.
Which I think maybe they should be.</p>
<p>I was a contractor, software, not lawyer, and there are clear lines, plus, I didn’t go to some parties because it is MY IRS tax bill that would have been impacted if they decided I was an “employee”.</p>
<p>07DAD, I completely understand where the frustration comes from. I am always very saddened by the fact that they come in here thinking that if they do a fantastic job they will be hired as permanent, partner-track employees. That doesn’t happen and the realization is often crushing.</p>
<p>You want to trade SAT tutoring for a spot after law school graduation?</p>
<p>Ha! I suspect your son won’t need anyone’s help, but I never forget about him, don’t you worry.</p>
<p>I agree with Esobay. I would not trust them to do the work if they are resentful in doing it and how they are treated at your company. </p>
<p>I do understand that they are disappointed. But the behavior is still inexcusable. A lot of people are in that same situation and worse. There are good reasons why labor movements and unions came into being.</p>
<p>The temp company needs to communicate with their employees more, and be more specific about these positions if they have expectations that re not going to happen. As I said earlier, I think there were contractual barrier against hiring our secretarial temps. Never really looked carefully at that stipulation, but knew it was not going to happen, and the temps knew it too.</p>
<p>“Temps behaving badly?” Sounds like the making of a new, late-night, trash-TV station, reality series.</p>
<p>
I completely agree. </p>
<p>The company has every right to invite anybody it wants to a party and those not invited do not have the right to insist that they be allowed to attend.</p>
<p>Although I disagree that they were not invited because the company doesn’t want to treat them like employees. If that’s the case, the law offices around here have never heard of this rule. I know many lawyers and at this time of the year, all they do is go to christmas parties. Whether they work at a firm or not. Firms invite their employees, spouses, contract workers, temporary staff and anybody else they can find. Whether you are invited to a party or not is certainly not on the IRS’s list of criteria for determeniing W-2 vs 1099 employee.</p>
<p>
It’s really hard to imagine that anyone would be delusional enough to think that coding documents–a job that could be done by a highly skilled paralegal–could possibly lead to a permanent job. We really, really, need to find a way to cut back drastically on the number of law grads we produce each year so unemployed attorneys aren’t forced into these kind of jobs in the first place. Maybe this tale of a pack of rebelling temps needs to be posted on the Law School forum!</p>
<p>
You are not kidding! The thing is that they are all smart and accomplished, so it’s not as weird that each of them would think that she was going to be the exception.</p>
<p>If they are so smart and accomplished, they’d understand that they need to find other ways to find a job with an upward path. I know a number of young attorneys now very successful, but they had to find their jobs more creatively than lawyers typically did in the past. THough even in my day, it’s not like a law degree guaranteed you a job like an MD or CPA or RN designation.</p>
<p>I think it’s pretty mean to have a big party on the premises to which almost everyone is invited, but not those who probably need a party the most. I don’t care what employment law has to say about it. I think it’s on the unethical, unkind, unmoral side of life. If they felt strongly that it was illegal (as MOWC suggests) maybe they should have sent them all a non-invitations explaining why they couldn’t be invited. That said, I’ve never worked in a big impersonal firm where anything like this would even have been an issue.</p>
<p>(Obviously the temp employees behaved badly too.)</p>
<p>Lets see. </p>
<p>Attorney group #1: Rude, ill mannered and boorish …for having an exclusive party in front of others they didn’t invite. Self centered for not giving thought to how those uninvited would feel.</p>
<p>Attorney group#2: Rude, ill mannered and boorish…for crashing a party they were not invited to. Self centered for expecting to be invited.</p>
<p>Perfect. Soulmates</p>
<p>This happened all of the time, happens all of the time in my life, so I don’t see the problem one bit. There are often things happening to which not everyone is included. I am totally puzzled as to why the temps even felt slighted. I can’t remember if it was made clear that the party was not for the temps, so that they found out in an embarrassing way, but at any number of companies there are private events, sometimes with great food and amenities happening only for a set group. It wasn’t just the attorney temps not included Since they don’t get how hierarchy works in a firm like that, they probably don’t belong in that kind of a job.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>According to the OP, this party was not right “in front of others.” The more the OP says about it, the less I feel this was some huge insult. The temps apparently weren’t the only ones not invited. The partners have every right to invite whomever they want to a party that they are paying for.</p>
<p>Those not invited are certainly entitled to their feelings about it. They are NOT, however, entitled to crash the party and then make a huge scene about it when told they could not enter. That’s pretty freaking foolish in my opinion, and you just have to wonder where they got the idea that feeling left out equates to being able to literally force your way in as if you are storming the Bastille.</p>
<p>I think I learned two things. That some people think they are entitled. I think it’s kinda like everyone gets a trophy mentality. </p>
<p>And law school is a bad idea. A very bad idea.</p>
<p>Yes, deb922, if I didn’t already know that law school was a bad idea, I certainly would now. It is sad to think of those law school graduates having no better options than this temporary coding job. I am very sad, in general, about how hard (or impossible) it is for young people to get started in careers of their choice these days. It was much, much easier when I was young. </p>
<p>I think that the temp workers’ behavior was abominable, and I’m surprised that so many of them thought it was a good idea to crash a party in a professional situation. </p>
<p>In terms of having the party, I would err on the side of being inclusive. It sounds like the added numbers if it were open would be significant, 50 temp lawyers plus other assorted contract employees, etc. And I understand that only regular employees are involved in the move. But, still - I would make the party less fancy and open it up. </p>
<p>Although I wouldn’t have done it, I would not equate the partners’ behavior in having a party on site (on another floor) that was open only to regular employees to that of the crashers. The partners may have been a bit insensitive, at most. The temps were boorish.</p>
<p>S-2’s girlfriend, now pursuing an Masters in Management Communications (“like an MBA without the money”) would have a field day trying to untangle this one. </p>
<p>I wonder about the perspective of the temps who didn’t crash. Were they sheep-scared or did they weigh and put more personal value on the firm’s other perks and niceties? Or just better mannered?</p>
<p>P3t, that is an interesting question re the other temps. Those that I know best personally never considered that they should be invited. They know that the permanent employees are up against a major disruption and think it is nice that the firm is trying to make that positive. In a strange coincidence, I happened to cross paths with the person I perceive to have been one of the ringleaders. She was carrying on today because the temp agency had pizza for them and it came much later than anticipated. It made me wonder if there are just a few troublemakers who drag others along. I mean I know I won’t be able to answer that, but it made me curious.</p>