By charonqc
Civil servants ‘told to imitate answering machines’
The Guardian reports: “Civil servants who continued working during yesterday’s national strike have revealed they were told to pretend to be answering machines to cope with an overload of calls from the public. Staff at the Department for Work and Pensions in Carlisle said today they were given a brief script to read out before hanging up, in the style found on telephone answering machines.
The instruction by managers was initially leaked on Facebook after chitchat between strikers and colleagues who had stayed at work. One worker said: “To begin with, we all found it hard to keep a straight face, and occasionally, I slipped up and I ended up giving my name to the person who was calling.”
The staff said their fake-robot message was issued for peak lunchtime, between midday and 2pm. The script read: “Due to the high volume of enquiries we are currently experiencing we are unable to take your call. Please call back later.”
I wake each morning at 4.00 (ish), more often than not looking forward to seeing what idiocy has taken place overnight in politics, so I was not surprised to read in my RSS feeder this absurd story about the civil service. I am almost tempted, as I have to telephone my local council today, to pretend to be an ‘electronic digital telephone machine’ myself and say…
“Good morning… if you would like to know why I am calling, press 1…if you would like to know if I have anything sensible to say when you do speak to me…press 2…. if you would like to do some work for your inflation proof pensioned up salary and actually do something of value for one of your clients…me…press 3″
The Times reports: City law firms are preparing to raise millions of pounds from external investors as the British legal market braces for its own version of Big Bang. At least 20 firms are planning to raise outside funding under rules that will allow non-lawyers to own a stake in legal practices for the first time, accountants advising the firms told The Times.
Three of these firms are planning to raise a war chest for acquisitions of more than £20 million, either through an initial public offering or from private equity investors. The new rules, which will come into force next year, are expected to transform the legal sector, as deregulation did financial services in the 1980s.
Jeremy Black, a partner at Deloitte, the Big Four accountant, said: “It’s going to change the way firms look at the provision of legal services. Nobody will be untouched by these changes.”
There is no doubt that change is coming and the traditional view of law as a ‘profession’ will finally cede to the values and mores of the markets… where business is business. This does not, of course, mean that lawyers will be any less professional…they will have to be even more ‘professional’ (but in a different sense) because if they go the full route and list on the stock exchange they will be subject to ’sentiment’…and sentiment can be a very hard task master.
I did like this paragraph from The Times…”Many partners remain sceptical. They argue that external funding will dilute their partnership culture and force them to give up too much control of their businesses.”
The writer forgot to add…“and too much of their profits”. It does, however, seem an attractive way of capitalising the business. Traditional law firm structures are ‘thinly capitalised’ given that partners withdraw much of the profit each year. I suspect that full flotation may take some time…and a fair bit of ‘kicking and screaming’. We shall, of course, see in time.
You may like to listen to a podcast I did for The College of Law Inside Track series with Sir Nigel Knowles, CEO of DLA Piper.
Sir Nigel Knowles gave a very sanguine view of the future of the big law firms and the issue of external capital.
Bar Standards Board raps BPP Law School for taking on too many students
While I covered this some weeks ago, The Lawyer adds some interesting points about BPP plans to turn themselves into a fully fledged university.
Offenders who commit ‘grave crimes’ must be named, says judge
The Telegraph reports: “A judge said the public deserved to know the identities of offenders who committed ”grave crimes” as he allowed the naming of a juvenile who killed an innocent peacemaker with a single punch.
This judicial view does not, of course (hopefully), impact on the Venables situation where issues of a fair trial preclude identification.
Jon Venables could be killed if his identity is revealed, key judge warns
The Guardian reports: “Baroness Butler-Sloss, who granted anonymity to James Bulger’s killers, defends Jack Straw’s secrecy stance”
The Sun appears not to have anything on the Venables case this morning. I suspect the bandwagon is moving on.. there are other more important stories for them t reveal to an adoring public.
It is not just the tabloids who are getting in on the ‘Shock’ act…
The Independent has this…
Paedophile ‘alarm button’ was rejected by Facebook, say police
And… if that isn’t enough to slake your taste for salacious titbits (with an intellectual spin) this morning… they have this…
Jealous lover killed ex over web photos
Getting back to a bit of hard law….
Supreme Court rejects Christian registrar’s claim
The Independent reports: "A Christian registrar who lost her job after she refused to carry out civil partnership ceremonies has been refused permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. Ms Ladele, who became a registrar in 2002, said she could not carry out such ceremonies “as a matter of religious conscience”. She claimed she suffered ridicule and bullying as a result of her stance and said she had been harassed and discriminated against by Islington Council in north London.”
Yesterday The Telegraph reported: “A pharmacist refused to issue contraceptive pills prescribed by a doctor because it was against her religion.”
Given that employers were not entitled to discriminate against these employees when taking them on for jobs where, presumably, they knew they would have to carry out lawful work which may be contrary to their religions it is puzzling why they applied for the jobs in the first place. I have little sympathy.
Professor John Flod (RATs – Random academic thoughts) has an interesting film on legal education to look at…
UKCLE’s Ideas on the Future of Legal Education
“My friend, Julian Webb, is who is director of UKCLE and professor of legal education, has put together an interesting short film about the influences on the future of legal education in the UK. I think it also informs discussion about legal education elsewhere.”
Hat Tip to John Flood for picking up this cartoon from The New Yorker:
The Fat Bigot has an interesting piece on recessions…
We must avoid the Japanese problem – “Anatole Kaletsky wrote an interesting piece in the Times today highlighting the Japanese problem. In an attempt to stimulate its way out of recession in the early 1990s Japan increased government spending and borrowed to pay for it. This went on for several years and now, almost twenty years later, the cost of servicing the borrowing is so high there is no additional money available to repay the principal sums borrowed. Japan’s economy has, as a result, seen virtually no growth in GDP.”
Capitalists@Work are running with this... The end of free speech and flaming on the internet
I am delighted to report that a leading Accountancy practice, specialists in dealing with the tax and financial affairs of solicitors and barristers is supporting our free resource project at Insite Law Magazine. Cassons for Counsel have a couple of articles which students and practitioners may find of particular interest
Will my pupillage awards be taxed?
There are differences in the tax treatments of pupillage awards from Inns as opposed to those from Chambers. Read here for more details.
HMRC clampdown on barristers!
A specialist unit has been set up by HMRC to conduct investigations into barristers’ tax affairs. See here for the areas in which they are most likely to be investigating.
Civil servants ‘told to imitate answering machines’
The Guardian reports: “Civil servants who continued working during yesterday’s national strike have revealed they were told to pretend to be answering machines to cope with an overload of calls from the public. Staff at the Department for Work and Pensions in Carlisle said today they were given a brief script to read out before hanging up, in the style found on telephone answering machines.
The instruction by managers was initially leaked on Facebook after chitchat between strikers and colleagues who had stayed at work. One worker said: “To begin with, we all found it hard to keep a straight face, and occasionally, I slipped up and I ended up giving my name to the person who was calling.”
The staff said their fake-robot message was issued for peak lunchtime, between midday and 2pm. The script read: “Due to the high volume of enquiries we are currently experiencing we are unable to take your call. Please call back later.”
I wake each morning at 4.00 (ish), more often than not looking forward to seeing what idiocy has taken place overnight in politics, so I was not surprised to read in my RSS feeder this absurd story about the civil service. I am almost tempted, as I have to telephone my local council today, to pretend to be an ‘electronic digital telephone machine’ myself and say…
“Good morning… if you would like to know why I am calling, press 1…if you would like to know if I have anything sensible to say when you do speak to me…press 2…. if you would like to do some work for your inflation proof pensioned up salary and actually do something of value for one of your clients…me…press 3″
The Times reports: City law firms are preparing to raise millions of pounds from external investors as the British legal market braces for its own version of Big Bang. At least 20 firms are planning to raise outside funding under rules that will allow non-lawyers to own a stake in legal practices for the first time, accountants advising the firms told The Times.
Three of these firms are planning to raise a war chest for acquisitions of more than £20 million, either through an initial public offering or from private equity investors. The new rules, which will come into force next year, are expected to transform the legal sector, as deregulation did financial services in the 1980s.
Jeremy Black, a partner at Deloitte, the Big Four accountant, said: “It’s going to change the way firms look at the provision of legal services. Nobody will be untouched by these changes.”
There is no doubt that change is coming and the traditional view of law as a ‘profession’ will finally cede to the values and mores of the markets… where business is business. This does not, of course, mean that lawyers will be any less professional…they will have to be even more ‘professional’ (but in a different sense) because if they go the full route and list on the stock exchange they will be subject to ’sentiment’…and sentiment can be a very hard task master.
I did like this paragraph from The Times…”Many partners remain sceptical. They argue that external funding will dilute their partnership culture and force them to give up too much control of their businesses.”
The writer forgot to add…“and too much of their profits”. It does, however, seem an attractive way of capitalising the business. Traditional law firm structures are ‘thinly capitalised’ given that partners withdraw much of the profit each year. I suspect that full flotation may take some time…and a fair bit of ‘kicking and screaming’. We shall, of course, see in time.
You may like to listen to a podcast I did for The College of Law Inside Track series with Sir Nigel Knowles, CEO of DLA Piper.
Sir Nigel Knowles gave a very sanguine view of the future of the big law firms and the issue of external capital.
Bar Standards Board raps BPP Law School for taking on too many students
While I covered this some weeks ago, The Lawyer adds some interesting points about BPP plans to turn themselves into a fully fledged university.
Offenders who commit ‘grave crimes’ must be named, says judge
The Telegraph reports: “A judge said the public deserved to know the identities of offenders who committed ”grave crimes” as he allowed the naming of a juvenile who killed an innocent peacemaker with a single punch.
This judicial view does not, of course (hopefully), impact on the Venables situation where issues of a fair trial preclude identification.
Jon Venables could be killed if his identity is revealed, key judge warns
The Guardian reports: “Baroness Butler-Sloss, who granted anonymity to James Bulger’s killers, defends Jack Straw’s secrecy stance”
The Sun appears not to have anything on the Venables case this morning. I suspect the bandwagon is moving on.. there are other more important stories for them t reveal to an adoring public.
It is not just the tabloids who are getting in on the ‘Shock’ act…
The Independent has this…
Paedophile ‘alarm button’ was rejected by Facebook, say police
And… if that isn’t enough to slake your taste for salacious titbits (with an intellectual spin) this morning… they have this…
Jealous lover killed ex over web photos
Getting back to a bit of hard law….
Supreme Court rejects Christian registrar’s claim
The Independent reports: "A Christian registrar who lost her job after she refused to carry out civil partnership ceremonies has been refused permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. Ms Ladele, who became a registrar in 2002, said she could not carry out such ceremonies “as a matter of religious conscience”. She claimed she suffered ridicule and bullying as a result of her stance and said she had been harassed and discriminated against by Islington Council in north London.”
Yesterday The Telegraph reported: “A pharmacist refused to issue contraceptive pills prescribed by a doctor because it was against her religion.”
Given that employers were not entitled to discriminate against these employees when taking them on for jobs where, presumably, they knew they would have to carry out lawful work which may be contrary to their religions it is puzzling why they applied for the jobs in the first place. I have little sympathy.
Professor John Flod (RATs – Random academic thoughts) has an interesting film on legal education to look at…
UKCLE’s Ideas on the Future of Legal Education
“My friend, Julian Webb, is who is director of UKCLE and professor of legal education, has put together an interesting short film about the influences on the future of legal education in the UK. I think it also informs discussion about legal education elsewhere.”
Hat Tip to John Flood for picking up this cartoon from The New Yorker:
The Fat Bigot has an interesting piece on recessions…
We must avoid the Japanese problem – “Anatole Kaletsky wrote an interesting piece in the Times today highlighting the Japanese problem. In an attempt to stimulate its way out of recession in the early 1990s Japan increased government spending and borrowed to pay for it. This went on for several years and now, almost twenty years later, the cost of servicing the borrowing is so high there is no additional money available to repay the principal sums borrowed. Japan’s economy has, as a result, seen virtually no growth in GDP.”
Capitalists@Work are running with this... The end of free speech and flaming on the internet
***
CassonsI am delighted to report that a leading Accountancy practice, specialists in dealing with the tax and financial affairs of solicitors and barristers is supporting our free resource project at Insite Law Magazine. Cassons for Counsel have a couple of articles which students and practitioners may find of particular interest
Will my pupillage awards be taxed?
There are differences in the tax treatments of pupillage awards from Inns as opposed to those from Chambers. Read here for more details.
HMRC clampdown on barristers!
A specialist unit has been set up by HMRC to conduct investigations into barristers’ tax affairs. See here for the areas in which they are most likely to be investigating.
Comments