4 ms·

Is that shocked, or "shocked"? Then again, the purpose of a legal department is (unless I misunderstand it) to _advise_, and if the boss decides to do something

by gknoy 14y ago

Is that shocked, or "shocked"? Then again, the purpose of a legal department is (unless I misunderstand it) to _advise_, and if the boss decides to do something Tremendously Stupid, it's hard to blame the lawyers. Unless, of course, they said they thought it would be fine. (Which I can't imagine they would have done.)

zaidf 14y ago
Some might say that it is in the lawyers' interest at some level that their bosses go against legal advice and open themselves up to lawsuits because when that lawsuit comes in, guess which department stays employed? Now, I think most lawyers operate in good faith and go to great extremes to convince their client of taking the best option but I can see lawyers give up after a certain stage thinking alright whatever, why am I complaining, this just means I'll have enough work for next 2 years because of my client's stupid decision.
- otoburb 14y ago
  Using that logic, it may be in the law profession's best interest, but certainly not for the Best Buy lawyers who were aware of this. Exposing yourself to detrimental litigation where the odds of you winning are low will probably result in you (the lawyer giving the poor advice) being let go and a new set of in-house counsel coming in to fix the mess.
  - zaidf 14y ago
    Woah, no one said anything about lawyers that give poor advice. I was talking about lawyers who give solid advice ... to stubborn clients who choose to go against their lawyer's (solid) advice.
    - rayiner 14y ago
      To be fair, a more plausible explanation for the lawyers giving up after a certain point is that nobody wants to argue with their boss that long.
      - zaidf 14y ago
        Great point :)
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
at-fates-hands 14y ago
No, it was shocked. Here's a little diddy. Best Buy brought in a bunch of people after Target got sued for $6 million for not having an accessible website for blind people. Since Best Buy's site was very poor shape in this regard, they were hiring developers, managers, practically an entire team just to work on this issue. First project I'm assigned, I notice a bunch of these errors and start outlining them and attaching how much time it will take to fix. Once the project launched, guess which ones got axed from the list of requirements in the first meeting? After two more projects like this, I just gave up trying. I was told it cost too much and it wasn't an important issue. To say it was a confusing place to work is an understatement.

by gknoy 14y ago

zaidf 14y ago

Some might say that it is in the lawyers' interest at some level that their bosses go against legal advice and open themselves up to lawsuits because when that lawsuit comes in, guess which department stays employed? Now, I think most lawyers operate in good faith and go to great extremes to convince their client of taking the best option but I can see lawyers give up after a certain stage thinking alright whatever, why am I complaining, this just means I'll have enough work for next 2 years because of my client's stupid decision.

otoburb 14y ago
Using that logic, it may be in the law profession's best interest, but certainly not for the Best Buy lawyers who were aware of this. Exposing yourself to detrimental litigation where the odds of you winning are low will probably result in you (the lawyer giving the poor advice) being let go and a new set of in-house counsel coming in to fix the mess.
- zaidf 14y ago
  Woah, no one said anything about lawyers that give poor advice. I was talking about lawyers who give solid advice ... to stubborn clients who choose to go against their lawyer's (solid) advice.
  - rayiner 14y ago
    To be fair, a more plausible explanation for the lawyers giving up after a certain point is that nobody wants to argue with their boss that long.
    - zaidf 14y ago
      Great point :)
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

at-fates-hands 14y ago

No, it was shocked. Here's a little diddy. Best Buy brought in a bunch of people after Target got sued for $6 million for not having an accessible website for blind people. Since Best Buy's site was very poor shape in this regard, they were hiring developers, managers, practically an entire team just to work on this issue. First project I'm assigned, I notice a bunch of these errors and start outlining them and attaching how much time it will take to fix. Once the project launched, guess which ones got axed from the list of requirements in the first meeting? After two more projects like this, I just gave up trying. I was told it cost too much and it wasn't an important issue. To say it was a confusing place to work is an understatement.