Skadden’s Email Policy In The Wake Of Trump Deal Triggers Government Investigation

Follow up to Inside Elite Law Firms, Protests and Quitting After Trump Deals – See also Above the Law: NLRB As Interested In Skadden’s Curious Email Policy As We Are “Nearly a month ago, it was revealed that Skadden decided to ink a deal with the Trump administration to provide $100 million in pro bono payola to avoid one of the increasingly common Executive Orders targeting Biglaw, and the tremendous harm that can bring. But that wasn’t the only strange thing afoot. As Above the Law reported, in the wake of the controversial deal, the Biglaw firm shut off associates’ ability to email certain mass email distribution lists. But the process didn’t go as dystopianly as they’d planned, as the plan was inadvertently revealed (via mass email, because irony isn’t dead) as firm leadership wondered how an associate was able to send an innocuous farewell email on their last day at the firm. But the snafu isn’t just bad PR. Yesterday, the National Institute for Workers’ Rights filed an unfair labor practice charge against Skadden with the National Labor Relations Board alleging the move was an interference with associates’ rights. As the filing notes, “Associates used firm email to discuss these changes, submit resignations, plan coordinated rejections of recruitment activities, and express concerns about the impact on what they do, with whom they work, and their ethical obligations.” As reported by Bloomberg Law:

For example, the group cited NLRB precedent spanning 60 years that establish concerns about hiring and diversity practices directly relate to the terms and conditions of employment. “In expressing concern about backing away from diversity initiatives, some Skadden lawyers were indicating that they thought it was important to continue to try to hire more lawyers of color,” the group said. “The caselaw establishes that this is protected concerted activity.” From here, agency staffers will launch a probe into the allegations, and, if they determine there’s merit in the claims the regional director will issue a complaint…”