Accommodation Nation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

You know some of the most gifted litigators in the world have dyslexia and learning disabilities, right? Take a look at David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser.

They don’t get extra time from the courts based on their dyslexia….

They've both admitted to being slower readers and writers. That doesn't mean they can't make court deadlines, which are virtually always set with plenty of lead time, and at a minimum a day of lead time.

Nothing like timed tests in school...

So you're for getting rid of all timed tests, correct? Just across the board because they are so useless.

I'm not a fan of them, personally. I never said they need to be gotten rid of. I'm saying people who need extended time can be really successful in high-stress careers.

As a teacher, I don’t think some of you understand how many of my students would quite literally never complete an assignment if there wasn’t a deadline attached to it. And frankly I think the shorter deadlines are going them a favor. Just do it and be done. The kids with extra time drag it out a lot more and seem to stress more.

No one said no deadlines! No speeded test where it's designed to be a race. Give them a day or two days. Take home. Whatever.

And this is why a scary number of high schoolers don’t know what 6x9 is off the top of their head. Or can’t add 112+209 without a piece of paper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

You know some of the most gifted litigators in the world have dyslexia and learning disabilities, right? Take a look at David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser.

They don’t get extra time from the courts based on their dyslexia….

They've both admitted to being slower readers and writers. That doesn't mean they can't make court deadlines, which are virtually always set with plenty of lead time, and at a minimum a day of lead time.

Nothing like timed tests in school...

So you're for getting rid of all timed tests, correct? Just across the board because they are so useless.

I'm not a fan of them, personally. I never said they need to be gotten rid of. I'm saying people who need extended time can be really successful in high-stress careers.

As a teacher, I don’t think some of you understand how many of my students would quite literally never complete an assignment if there wasn’t a deadline attached to it. And frankly I think the shorter deadlines are going them a favor. Just do it and be done. The kids with extra time drag it out a lot more and seem to stress more.

No one said no deadlines! No speeded test where it's designed to be a race. Give them a day or two days. Take home. Whatever.

And this is why a scary number of high schoolers don’t know what 6x9 is off the top of their head. Or can’t add 112+209 without a piece of paper.

The outcome is we give the richest kids whose parents can afford to find a practitioner to sign off on "slow processing speed" to give those kids a huge advantage. To make it fair, eliminate all timed tests and give everyone their best shot. Strangely that PP is against that idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

You know some of the most gifted litigators in the world have dyslexia and learning disabilities, right? Take a look at David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser.

They don’t get extra time from the courts based on their dyslexia….

They've both admitted to being slower readers and writers. That doesn't mean they can't make court deadlines, which are virtually always set with plenty of lead time, and at a minimum a day of lead time.

Nothing like timed tests in school...

So you're for getting rid of all timed tests, correct? Just across the board because they are so useless.

I'm not a fan of them, personally. I never said they need to be gotten rid of. I'm saying people who need extended time can be really successful in high-stress careers.

As a teacher, I don’t think some of you understand how many of my students would quite literally never complete an assignment if there wasn’t a deadline attached to it. And frankly I think the shorter deadlines are going them a favor. Just do it and be done. The kids with extra time drag it out a lot more and seem to stress more.

No one said no deadlines! No speeded test where it's designed to be a race. Give them a day or two days. Take home. Whatever.

And this is why a scary number of high schoolers don’t know what 6x9 is off the top of their head. Or can’t add 112+209 without a piece of paper.

The outcome is we give the richest kids whose parents can afford to find a practitioner to sign off on "slow processing speed" to give those kids a huge advantage. To make it fair, eliminate all timed tests and give everyone their best shot. Strangely that PP is against that idea.

+1

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

You know some of the most gifted litigators in the world have dyslexia and learning disabilities, right? Take a look at David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser.

They don’t get extra time from the courts based on their dyslexia….

They've both admitted to being slower readers and writers. That doesn't mean they can't make court deadlines, which are virtually always set with plenty of lead time, and at a minimum a day of lead time.

Nothing like timed tests in school...

Yes it is like timed tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

You know some of the most gifted litigators in the world have dyslexia and learning disabilities, right? Take a look at David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser.

They don’t get extra time from the courts based on their dyslexia….

They've both admitted to being slower readers and writers. That doesn't mean they can't make court deadlines, which are virtually always set with plenty of lead time, and at a minimum a day of lead time.

Nothing like timed tests in school...

So you're for getting rid of all timed tests, correct? Just across the board because they are so useless.

I'm not a fan of them, personally. I never said they need to be gotten rid of. I'm saying people who need extended time can be really successful in high-stress careers.

No. We can't have two sets of rules. One that puts one group at a distinct advantage (all the time they need!) and another group who may also benefit for more time because it's not about how fast you can't do it but don't get the time. Level the playing field. If working in a timely manner makes no difference in careers then what is the point?

There are a lot of different solutions, and you seem to be really lacking in creativity. No one said two sets of rules. We give exams with an end time that have plenty of buffer built in. A 24-hour take home exam with word limits is a good example.

You keep distorting my words to make it sound like I've made a completely unreasonable proposition. Finishing a test in 45 minutes is not like meeting a deadline a week away. It's also not turning around work product by EOD. Nobody is saying (or certainly I am not saying) to abolish all deadlines.

It’s actually exactly like turning something around by EOD. And many work places demand much sooner than EOD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

You know some of the most gifted litigators in the world have dyslexia and learning disabilities, right? Take a look at David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser.

They don’t get extra time from the courts based on their dyslexia….

They've both admitted to being slower readers and writers. That doesn't mean they can't make court deadlines, which are virtually always set with plenty of lead time, and at a minimum a day of lead time.

Nothing like timed tests in school...

So you're for getting rid of all timed tests, correct? Just across the board because they are so useless.

I'm not a fan of them, personally. I never said they need to be gotten rid of. I'm saying people who need extended time can be really successful in high-stress careers.

No. We can't have two sets of rules. One that puts one group at a distinct advantage (all the time they need!) and another group who may also benefit for more time because it's not about how fast you can't do it but don't get the time. Level the playing field. If working in a timely manner makes no difference in careers then what is the point?

There are a lot of different solutions, and you seem to be really lacking in creativity. No one said two sets of rules. We give exams with an end time that have plenty of buffer built in. A 24-hour take home exam with word limits is a good example.

You keep distorting my words to make it sound like I've made a completely unreasonable proposition. Finishing a test in 45 minutes is not like meeting a deadline a week away. It's also not turning around work product by EOD. Nobody is saying (or certainly I am not saying) to abolish all deadlines.

It’s actually exactly like turning something around by EOD. And many work places demand much sooner than EOD.

Like I said, in my line of work — litigation — I rarely deal with serious issues that need to be turned around same day. And when I do, the timeline still isn’t that tight. Nothing like an exam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

You know some of the most gifted litigators in the world have dyslexia and learning disabilities, right? Take a look at David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser.

They don’t get extra time from the courts based on their dyslexia….

They've both admitted to being slower readers and writers. That doesn't mean they can't make court deadlines, which are virtually always set with plenty of lead time, and at a minimum a day of lead time.

Nothing like timed tests in school...

So you're for getting rid of all timed tests, correct? Just across the board because they are so useless.

I'm not a fan of them, personally. I never said they need to be gotten rid of. I'm saying people who need extended time can be really successful in high-stress careers.

As a teacher, I don’t think some of you understand how many of my students would quite literally never complete an assignment if there wasn’t a deadline attached to it. And frankly I think the shorter deadlines are going them a favor. Just do it and be done. The kids with extra time drag it out a lot more and seem to stress more.

No one said no deadlines! No speeded test where it's designed to be a race. Give them a day or two days. Take home. Whatever.

Take home? So you just want to ensure all As. Take home tests are a joke.

Do you know how curves work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

Extended time big law senior associate checking in! We do fine!

And I’m sure you accept that sometimes you have to work nights and weekends and that’s just how it goes.

I sure do! Working late and longer than most people is how I'm successful in biglaw. That has nothing to do with whether I'm unable to do my job because I got extended time on exams in school.

I completely agree and would have no trouble with someone like this at our firm who met deadlines. We were objecting to a poster who said they “never” in their entire career had to meet timed deadlines.

I don't think they said they never had to meet timed deadlines. I think they said they didn't have deadlines that were short that it approximated a timed test. Virtually all substantive assignments, in my experience, have multi-day lead time.

There are very, very few areas of the law where you can just hole up and write a brief for days with no interaction. Eventually there are questions and matters you need to be able to handle quickly. Even appellate lawyers need to think quickly at oral argument (which is basically a test).

Holing up and writing a brief for multiple days isn’t remotely what I described. Oral arguments aren’t like timed exams, but also most lawyers suck at them, including big law partners. And people don’t just need extended time for slow processing speed. Dyslexics like David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser excel at oral argument, which doesn’t involve reading for them, but are slow readers and writers.

Great. Then their grades should reflect that they are slower than average on some skills but higher than average on others

Not sure why there is this continued denial that what times tests measure (processing speed) has nothing at all to do with skills and intelligence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work as an attorney and it’s shocking (and getting worse every year) how many new employees come in that don’t seem to understand that when I say I need something by noon on Thursday, that isn’t a guideline or a suggestion or a wish. I’m sure I’m not very popular with the young ones. They either figure it out after the first couple assignments or they find other employment.

I’m an attorney too and I’m seeing younger employees come in with that mindset too. Constant requests for time off, constant sick days, not planning ahead, not taking initiative, disregarding instructions. I don’t know if it’s the pandemic, the economy, accommodations, helicopter parenting, or some combination of everything.

More attorneys sharing parenting responsibilities across gender lines, worse childcare options, and fewer people thinking their employers will love them back for making their entire life work.

In the law firm world, the client does not care about those things. Especially not at the rates we charge. If that’s not for you, totally understand. But if you want big law pay, you’ll have to get up to speed or be pushed out. When we tell a client we will get them something by a deadline, we do it barring truly extenuating circumstances. And if you are a litigator, the deadlines are truly firm and imposed by the court/the statute.

I say this as an attorney (one of maybe the majority of this board), but maybe you should staff cases/deals better? Your employees are human beings with human needs. And they have legal entitlement to things like paid sick leave, parental leave, FMLA, etc. You need to structure your staffing to be able to accommodate these inevitabilities, especially when so many firms makes (bullshit) promises about supporting working parents and valuing employee health and wellbeing.

Being a big law attorney is a demanding job. It’s not the kind of job for someone who needs a soft workplace. If we have a filing deadline, we have to get it done whether your kid is sick or not. And no we don’t just keep extra staff on hand just in case. If you let a senior attorney down enough times they will stop bringing work to you. Again, it’s not for everyone.

Exactly. Nobody who has ever had to have extra time to accomplish tasks is cut out for big law. Acknowledge the disability and that it isn't compatible with all jobs. Or just teach the kids how to handle their time and cut out the disability completely.

You know some of the most gifted litigators in the world have dyslexia and learning disabilities, right? Take a look at David Boies and Elizabeth Cabraser.

They don’t get extra time from the courts based on their dyslexia….

They've both admitted to being slower readers and writers. That doesn't mean they can't make court deadlines, which are virtually always set with plenty of lead time, and at a minimum a day of lead time.

Nothing like timed tests in school...

So you're for getting rid of all timed tests, correct? Just across the board because they are so useless.

I'm not a fan of them, personally. I never said they need to be gotten rid of. I'm saying people who need extended time can be really successful in high-stress careers.

No. We can't have two sets of rules. One that puts one group at a distinct advantage (all the time they need!) and another group who may also benefit for more time because it's not about how fast you can't do it but don't get the time. Level the playing field. If working in a timely manner makes no difference in careers then what is the point?

There are a lot of different solutions, and you seem to be really lacking in creativity. No one said two sets of rules. We give exams with an end time that have plenty of buffer built in. A 24-hour take home exam with word limits is a good example.

You keep distorting my words to make it sound like I've made a completely unreasonable proposition. Finishing a test in 45 minutes is not like meeting a deadline a week away. It's also not turning around work product by EOD. Nobody is saying (or certainly I am not saying) to abolish all deadlines.

It’s actually exactly like turning something around by EOD. And many work places demand much sooner than EOD.

Like I said, in my line of work — litigation — I rarely deal with serious issues that need to be turned around same day. And when I do, the timeline still isn’t that tight. Nothing like an exam.

I think you don’t understand what processing speed actually is. You claim that it’s nothing like a timed exam, but you also absolutely need to be able to process information, remember it, and synthesize it in a timely manner accurately and coherently. That is what times tests measure.

[Anonymous]

My daughter has dysautonomia. She needs extra time on her exams so she can stand up and pump blood from her feet to her head (and not pass out from sitting in one position for too long). Unless you looked at her purple feet and her deadpan stare, she looks absolutely "normal". I am not wealthy at all. In fact, we spent tens of thousands of dollars when she was a teenager in search of a diagnosis. I'm sure she would happily pay not to have this disability.

[Anonymous]

My experience coming from a top private is that the top kids don't have academic accommodations unless they are legit and have been in place since elementary school for things like dyslexia or severe ADHD. The ones beneath the top20% scramble to get accommodations in place for anxiety in 10th/11th grade. However, by-in-large this doesn't work to catapult them into the top20s and they end up at colleges ranked above below the top20. And then their parents scramble to get accommodations in place in college--both for the classroom and for housing. A number of these parents I know contacted housing to get their kids private rooms, center-of-campus dorms, etc.

Meanwhile the kids aren't confident and they become increasingly anxious. Because all this hand holding and heavy-intervening by their parents doesn't go missed by the kids themselves. It tells them VERY loud and clearly: "We don't believe in you. You're not competent. We have to step in and help you. You're not like your peers. You have problems" Most suffer from imposter syndrome and their anxiety increases.

So really, it's not great. Stay in your own lane and don't look at these families or kids. It's not worth stressing over because it's nothing to envy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My experience coming from a top private is that the top kids don't have academic accommodations unless they are legit and have been in place since elementary school for things like dyslexia or severe ADHD. The ones beneath the top20% scramble to get accommodations in place for anxiety in 10th/11th grade. However, by-in-large this doesn't work to catapult them into the top20s and they end up at colleges ranked above below the top20. And then their parents scramble to get accommodations in place in college--both for the classroom and for housing. A number of these parents I know contacted housing to get their kids private rooms, center-of-campus dorms, etc.

Meanwhile the kids aren't confident and they become increasingly anxious. Because all this hand holding and heavy-intervening by their parents doesn't go missed by the kids themselves. It tells them VERY loud and clearly: "We don't believe in you. You're not competent. We have to step in and help you. You're not like your peers. You have problems" Most suffer from imposter syndrome and their anxiety increases.

So really, it's not great. Stay in your own lane and don't look at these families or kids. It's not worth stressing over because it's nothing to envy.

as a professional who works with kids, i disagree completely with the second part of this. mental health issues and loss of confidence and negative self concept come when kids are not diagnosed and are being told they're not trying and it's their fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience coming from a top private is that the top kids don't have academic accommodations unless they are legit and have been in place since elementary school for things like dyslexia or severe ADHD. The ones beneath the top20% scramble to get accommodations in place for anxiety in 10th/11th grade. However, by-in-large this doesn't work to catapult them into the top20s and they end up at colleges ranked above below the top20. And then their parents scramble to get accommodations in place in college--both for the classroom and for housing. A number of these parents I know contacted housing to get their kids private rooms, center-of-campus dorms, etc.

Meanwhile the kids aren't confident and they become increasingly anxious. Because all this hand holding and heavy-intervening by their parents doesn't go missed by the kids themselves. It tells them VERY loud and clearly: "We don't believe in you. You're not competent. We have to step in and help you. You're not like your peers. You have problems" Most suffer from imposter syndrome and their anxiety increases.

So really, it's not great. Stay in your own lane and don't look at these families or kids. It's not worth stressing over because it's nothing to envy.

as a professional who works with kids, i disagree completely with the second part of this. mental health issues and loss of confidence and negative self concept come when kids are not diagnosed and are being told they're not trying and it's their fault.

Agree with you 100% when the problems are legit. But the entire point is that the "anxiety" diagnosis is used by the parents to get extra time.
Because they believe that if the kid is not at the top of the class then there must be a diagnosis. Or because the kid's abilities do not align with the parent's aspirations for them. If these kids have debilitating anxiety to the degree that they can't take an exam beginning in 10th grade it's by-in-large because their parents made them anxious.