Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
While all of these all methodologies definitely make employees’ day to day jobs much easier, it can cause many long-term security or even legal challenges. Here Lawyer Monthly speaks to Kon Leong, CEO of ZL Technologies to learn more.
While more sophisticated file sharing tools exist, it is a near inevitability that company information will make its way onto free file sharing services. Therefore, if your organization is not prepared to integrate Google Documents into your information governance, a new silo will be born.
New silos further fracture organizational control over data creating legal and security issues for any enterprise. From a security perspective, a free online file share service can only be as safe as the weakest security link. Commonly used passwords, failure to set up two-step verification, or simply forgetting to logout in a public location can all compromise document security. From a legal perspective one has to ask if these files would be readily discoverable by a legal team.
GDPR respects no silos. If an organization wishes to ensure GDPR compliance in any type of file share environment, they must have an iron grip over all their data. That means bringing together every silo so that all data is readily searchable and manageable via holistic information management. Currently, organizations aren’t even aware of all the repositories that requirement management, let alone are they actually able to apply policies across them. This means there is a lot of dark data out there that could be creating unidentified risk.
[ymal]
The risk created by silos of unmanaged file shares on eDiscovery efforts cannot be understated. Imagine trying to perform an e-discovery search when data lies across various siloes, each with its own search engine, each with its own limitations. Thus, in order to successfully complete comprehensive eDiscovery, one needs to be able to search across all these silos, also known as unified data management.
When enterprises perform analytics on company data from emails, instant messages, and various file shares, there will almost inevitably be personal information that coexists within the data. For instance, employee analytics done on company IMs and emails can reveal who works frequently together in an organization, but it may also reveal personal conversations, opinions and other sensitive data that opens the company up to risk—cybersecurity, legal, regulatory, and otherwise. Or to provide an extreme example, what happens when the CEO’s emails end up in the wrong hands due to an analytics initiative?
Organizations have made efforts to protect from the outside (i.e. perimeter security) but there is still much to be done to protect it from the insider threat. Employees create valuable and sensitive data every day, and this internal data is vastly powerful because it reveals human intent. However, employees are also often the biggest threat to protecting that data, unfortunately. With regards to its protection, organizations are often too preoccupied with the 0s and 1s of data to think about the ABCs—in other words, looking into the actual content of documents in order to classify and apply governance.
“People’s personal data is just that – personal. When an organisation fails to protect it from loss, damage or theft it is more than an inconvenience. That’s why the law is clear – when you are entrusted with personal data you must look after it. Those that don’t will face scrutiny from my office to check they have taken appropriate steps to protect fundamental privacy rights.” - Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham
GDPR stands for General Data Protection Regulation and it is Europe's framework for data protection laws, replacing the previous 1995 data protection directive.
The aim of the Regulation is to ease and safeguard the flow of personal data across the EU Member States. Being an EU Regulation, it is directly applicable to each Member State’s national law.
Almost every aspect of our lives revolves around data and almost every service we use involves the collection and analysis of our personal data.
GDPR legislation came into force across the European Union on 25 May 2018 and one of the main benefits of the GDPR is that companies are now required to demonstrate that they are actively working to protect their customer’s personal data, and can be fined heavily if they become complacent about data security.
The GDPR outlines a range of rights that each individual in the EU has when it comes to their personal data:
Essentially everyone. Almost every aspect of our lives revolves around data and almost every service we use involves the collection and analysis of our personal data. GDPR applies to any company or organisation operating within the EU, as well as any company or organisations outside of the EU offering goods or services to customers or businesses in the EU.
An example given is if you provide free WIFI in your building and collect the IP addresses of all users, this will be caught by the GDPR.
GDPR applies to ‘personal data’, meaning any information relating to a recognisable person who can be directly or indirectly identified in particular by reference to an identifier, such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person. This definition provides for a wide range of personal identifiers to constitute personal data, including name, identification number, location data or even online identifiers, which include IP addresses. An example given is if you provide free WIFI in your building and collect the IP addresses of all users, this will be caught by the GDPR.
There are two different types of data-handlers the legislation applies to: 'processors' and 'controllers'.
‘Processing’ means any operation or set of operations which is performed on personal data or on sets of personal data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storage, adaptation or the alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction.
There are two different types of data-handlers the legislation applies to: 'processors' and 'controllers'. The definitions of each are laid out in Art. 4 of the General Data Protection Regulation. A controller is the entity that determines the purposes, conditions and means of the processing of personal data, while the processor is an entity which processes personal data on behalf of the controller. It was previously thought that GDPR applied mainly to data controllers, but it is clear that data processors are affected too.
The individual is entitled to a copy of the personal data in question and does not depend on whether someone is an employee, a worker or self-employed.
DPOs must be appointed in the case of: (a) public authorities, (b) organisations that engage in large scale systematic monitoring, or (c) organisations that engage in large scale processing of sensitive personal data (Art. 37). If your organisation doesn’t fall into one of these categories, then the organisation does not need to appoint a DPO.
Right of access requests under Art. 15 of the GDPR provide individuals with the ability to know whether personal data about them is being processed by a data controller, and if so, what that information is and why it is being processed. The individual is entitled to a copy of the personal data in question and does not depend on whether someone is an employee, a worker or self-employed.
While both the GDPR contains exemptions, these mostly focus on questions of public interest, such as the investigation of crime or the maintenance of effective regulatory regimes.
Observing the core principles of GDPR and preventing fraud at the same time it not an easy task.
Recital 47 of the GDPR clearly states that fraud prevention is a ‘legitimate interest’ to process personal data:
“The processing of personal data strictly necessary for the purposes of preventing fraud also constitutes a legitimate interest of the data controller concerned.”
However, even for the purpose of fighting fraud, the controller still has to prove that legitimate interest applies and that the processing of personal data is necessary and unavoidable. They also have to balance the interest of fighting fraud with the interests, rights and freedoms of the people who the data applies to. The complexity of GDPR means that those who need to investigate fraud may face uncertainty regarding whether they need permission to proceed.
Observing the core principles of GDPR and preventing fraud at the same time it not an easy task.
Organisations can be fined up to 4% of annual global turnover for breaching GDPR or €20 million whichever is higher, which only applies to breaches that occurred after May 2018. This is the maximum fine that can be imposed for the most serious infringements, for example, not having sufficient customer consent to process data or violating core concepts. It is important to note that these rules apply to both controllers and processors – meaning ‘clouds’ are not exempt from GDPR enforcement.
EU countries are now actively pursuing GDPR violators. France fined Google €50 million in January 2019 for its user consent and data policies, and the UK’s regulator, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), fined Facebook £500,000 for serious data protection law breaches, Uber £385,000 for failing to protect customers’ personal information during a cyberattack and Vote Leave £40,000 for sending out thousands of unsolicited text messages in connection with the 2016 Brexit vote.
GDPR imposes strict requirements upon data controllers who wish to rely on ‘consent’ as a legal basis for processing personal data.
Recently, the Information Commissioner issued a notice of its intention to fine British Airways an amount of £183 million for breaches of data protection law. The proposed fine involved user traffic to the British Airways website being diverted to a fraudulent site. Through this false site, customer details were harvested by the attackers with approximately 500,000 customers being compromised. Investigations lead to conclusions of poor security arrangements by the Company, including the login, payment card and travel booking details.
GDPR defines ‘consent’ as: “a clear affirmative act establishing a freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous indication of the data subject’s agreement to the processing of personal data relating to him or her.”
GDPR imposes strict requirements upon data controllers who wish to rely on ‘consent’ as a legal basis for processing personal data. This does raise concerns in a number of areas, as the lines tend to become blurry; an example to refer to is the employment contract and, to the extent it cannot be relied upon as the legal basis for the processing of personal data.
Three key questions arise in this context:
In theory, employees could give their consent freely, independent of their employment contract, however, when there is a significant imbalance of power, such as between employer and employee, it is unlikely that consent will have truly been given freely.
The right to erasure is clearly stipulated in the regulation, however, it is not an absolute right. There are exceptions including GDPR Article 17(3)(b) which imposes a difficulty as companies must retain customer due diligence and transaction records for a certain number of years after the relationship ends, even if the customer has requested to be forgotten. It remains to be seen how the industry will harmonise the regulations and exceptions in practice.
Christiana Kouppi
Partner
Phone: +357 25 261 777
Email: c.kouppi@vrikislegal.com
Many clients these days are using the internet to find law firms that they trust through Google and other search engines. Hence, not adapting to these changes can harm one’s law firm business. To make sure that you can compete with your competitors, below are some of the points on how to come up with a digital marketing strategy for your firm.
To compete in this digital legal world that is there right now, one needs to have a reliable website. This is because most of the business will come from local clients; hence if your website is shoddy or you have none at all, then they will most likely go to your competitor. The website should be an accurate reflection of your firm, its practices, and what it values. It should be able to speak for itself once someone clicks on it. It should also be able to offer information on the common legal questions in your area. If a client finds that your website looks terrible on their mobile device and cannot be navigated easily, they will waste no more time on it and go to a better-looking site. It should be mobile-friendly since most people will access it via their phones. Also, ensure that the site is fast so that the clients can access the information they need quickly.
Search Engine Optimisation (SEO), should also be at the forefront of your strategy. Many people do not get it right; hence, once you do it well, your firm will be ahead of the rest. Ensure that your team does its research well and creates content around the most relevant search terms regarding what your firm offers. Once that is done, it should be uploaded, and customers will be able to get all the support and advice that they need. This will give you an advantage over your competitors, especially if they are not using the relevant keywords. Using these local keywords will also increase your visibility and will increase the chances of attracting clients.
Social media has become a powerful influencer in the past couple of years. Many law firms are taking up social media marketing. Nearly everyone these days is on social media hence having a profile on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other platforms will go a long way in helping your business grow. The best thing about social media is that a law firm can build a relationship with clients before they even walk through the door. You can use direct messaging, tweets and also comments to respond to them. Once you open up a social media page, you need to ensure that you keep tabs on your clients. This involves listening to them, answering their questions, replying to any complaints they have and even offering discounts. Having a close relationship with them will give them confidence in you, and they are more likely to choose you than your competitors. This process is not as easy as it seems, but, it requires a lot of work from you as the business owner. You can also engage in debates on social media and establish your law firm as an authority in the areas that you have expertise in.
In this digital world, any law firm that is not using the internet to market itself is losing out on a lot of opportunities. With the above strategies, one is more likely to attract more customers than their competitors. The results will be positive, and you will wonder why you did not start earlier on.
Ni SEO Legal is well-known as one of the leading providers of online marketing services for the legal profession. To book a free consultation simply phone them on 028-3756-8930 or visit their website.
So, don’t worry, this isn’t another article about how men are preventing women from advancing in the workplace. It’s about how women can accelerate their impact and influence and get themselves to where they want to be, faster.
Powerful people take up more space. Sometimes we play small and don’t take up the space that is rightfully ours. From creating clear goals and developing resilience to having the confidence to speak up and speak out, these are the skills that help women thrive whilst creating better workplaces for all.
Assumption, miscommunication and unconscious bias holds women back.
Men and women are working together but they’re not speaking the same language or having the same expectations. Assumption, miscommunication and unconscious bias holds women back. As a result, too many talented women are not progressing as fast or effectively as they should be. And too many senior women are dropping out of the workplace altogether. What a waste.
65% of men feel they have been “rewarded for [their] work”, compared to only 52% of women.
In 2008, Google noticed that women were being promoted at a lower rate than men in engineering. They realised that it came down to a very simple reason: the default way in which promotions happen. At Google during that time, to get promoted you raised your head and said, ‘I’m ready to get promoted.’ Women were nominating themselves at a lower rate than men (a gender trait that’s often seen from the earliest years of education, where boys will raise their hands more in class). The People team partnered with the head of engineering who sent a communication to the company to highlight this issue, transparently sharing data and explaining what was happening and urging the women to ‘raise their hands’. They did.
You need to repeat your message – and you need other people to repeat it.
The results were great – for a while. After about a six-month cycle, the issue happened again; no one had sent another email and people had forgotten or just reverted to their old behaviour. Remember this when you are trying to create change in your organisation or trying to get investment and commitment from shareholders or outside partners: when you are communicating your message, once is never enough. You need to repeat your message – and you need other people to repeat it. If you can edit it so it is powerful, simple and memorable, that is a start. You will then need to accept that you need to repeat it over and over again in order to create the change or belief needed. Information is not transformation – you can’t just share an opinion or an idea and expect things to happen.
Men are more likely to have had a promotion with 56% progressing, than the 44% of women.
Karen Blackett was lauded as ‘the most admired chief in UK ad land’, according to research that Campaign magazine did into the chief executives of British agencies. One of the things that has helped her, the self-described ‘exhausted mum’, get to the top of her game has been thinking about her own personal brand. Authenticity may be a phrase that people are tired of in the marketing world but it’s tremendously important to her.
If you must use an adjective, make it “great” or “important’”.
She says: ‘People understanding their own personal brand and how that helps the company is what’s important. In any business that’s moving, and especially in this industry when it’s so dynamic and fast-paced, your role isn’t to wait for HR to tell you what your job should be, your role should be to tell your managers how you can contribute and what your job is, so people understanding their own personal brand is important. I think the more senior you become, the easier that becomes. There will be those who react cynically to the idea of a personal brand, but if you think about how brands work, it’s just about creating a short cut for people to understand you, a way to make it clear what type of person you are from the start.’
Women (at 41%) are no more likely than men (42%) to feel spoken over or ignored in meetings.
The first question might benefit from a critical friend’s point of view, i.e., ask others, look at your appraisals, be honest about your real strengths. The second question is very important; if we do things we really enjoy, we tend to be better at them and we certainly are more likely to have the mental energy to keep at them. And, lastly, being able to show how you can contribute and what role you can play makes it quicker and easier for people to believe in you. One note on your personal brand: once you’ve worked out what it is and what your strengths are, get comfortable with communicating it confidently. I’m often frustrated by seeing smart people in business who derail their own progress with self-deprecation.
Accelerating the progress, success and retention of female leaders is clearly good for women but it’s also good for business.
Marlène Schiappa, the French Secretary of State for Equality, is a fascinating ‘brand’ in herself. She is an eloquent speaker and committed reformer who moved from writing novels and blogging to politics, and she refers to this issue specifically when she talks about women needing to take responsibility for communicating their own strengths. ‘Please’, she says, ‘do not belittle yourselves with the language you use. I never want to hear “I have a little job” or “I have a little project”. If you must use an adjective, make it “great” or “important’”. There are many small changes like this that can be made to improve how you communicate your personal brand effectively; once you know what you are and what you want to be, you can make people’s acceptance of who you are faster and clearer. Know yourself and share that knowledge with others positively.’
Accelerating the progress, success and retention of female leaders is clearly good for women but it’s also good for business. Global companies in the top quartile for gender diversity are 15% more likely to have financial returns above their national industry peers. And in the UK, greater gender diversity on the senior-exec team corresponded to the highest performance uplift: for every 10% increase in gender diversity, EBITDA rose by 3.5%.
It’s not just about ‘speaking loudly’ in meetings, as one (male) CEO recently mentioned as the answer to why women’s voices are not heard at work.
Caffeine’s Fast Forward Female programme is designed for companies that recognise the importance of gender diversity and want to support their senior female leaders by giving them the means to accelerate their development. They work with many bright, talented, articulate women who are frustrated that their voices are not being heard at work. To help them, they ask them to focus on three areas. It’s a useful checklist for anyone wishing to take stock of their career and work to accelerate their progression:
Imprint – clarity on goals and strategic focus to identify the imprint you want to leave on the business.
What are your goals? (Yes, you may want to be Partner but you may also have the goal of a more flexible working week or to retire by 50 or to only work with a specific set of clients. Too often we go with what turns up, rather than go after what we want.)
What do you want to change? And, what do you need to do to make that change?
What legacy do you want to leave in the business and beyond?
How do you build on your strengths and identify core areas of expertise to develop to make a tangible difference?
Impact – improving presence and personal impact.
It’s not just about ‘speaking loudly’ in meetings, as one (male) CEO recently mentioned as the answer to why women’s voices are not heard at work. When a profession has been so male dominated for so long as law has, women are dealing with decades of institutionalised behaviours which do not serve them well.
To speed up progress, more women need to gain senior positions and make those changes happen.
Progress requires men to listen (and act) on women’s voices and proposals, but women can advance the impact of their communication by being bolder in tone by: not using apologetic language, (‘If I may…sorry’, or, ‘but…do you mind?’); refusing to be interrupted (‘I haven’t finished’); and, not being afraid to take up space, by taking the time to say what is important, so that others feel the weight of your message.
Influence – developing the strategy and skills to progress in the organisation
Many of the women we coach feel that if they do a great job, their work will be recognised and they will be singled out for promotion and progression. And, at times, with a supportive line manager, that does happen but it’s a very passive approach to take. Those who progress more quickly through an organisation are often those who are good at their own PR. They realise it’s their job to make sure they’re in control of the story. They want key influencers and sponsors to know about them. Should you have to do this? Surely doing the good work is enough? Only up to a point. Make sure you amplify your accomplishments. If this feels uncomfortable, or big-headed, include others such as your support staff in your accolades. But make sure the people who need to know what you have achieved, and what your ambitions are, do.
More than half of men (53%) stated they have experienced a pay rise or bonus which is not connected to a promotion, whereas only 40% of women say the same.
Progress is being made within the establishment structures in business, society, politics and law that stand in the way of leadership diversity, but it’s slow. To speed up progress, more women need to gain senior positions and make those changes happen. Because then, EVERYONE, will benefit.
About the Writer:
Louisa is an experienced facilitator & qualified business coach with an outstanding new business track record and genuine competitive spirit. Louisa spearheads Caffeine’s business growth transformation division in the areas of prospecting, pitching and client retention, brand positioning, leadership coaching, presenting with impact, negotiation, cross-selling and employee engagement.
In fact, 20%[1] of Google’s workers protested from around the globe, from Tokyo setting precedent, all the way to Berlin, it was estimated that more than 1,500 employees - mostly women - walked out from more than 60% of Google’s offices at 11:10AM[2].
Why were they protesting? Well, it may have been a shock to many of you, (those who perhaps are not hired by Google), as the company is renowned for their reputation regarding its work environment and progressive attitude. But a week prior to the protests, Google reported that they had given a former executive a whopping 90 million dollar severance package in 2014.
Andy Rubin – the creator of the Android mobile software - decided to say goodbye to Google in October 2014; his leave was promptly followed by Larry Page, Former Chief Executive of Google, paying homage to their much loved employee, stating[3]: “I want to wish Andy all the best with what’s next…With Android he created something truly remarkable — with a billion-plus happy users.”
Obviously, what Google decided to conveniently miss out, was that an employee had accused Rubin of sexual misconduct and when their investigation into the matter concluded that her claim remained credible, Page asked for Rubin’s resignation after confidentiality agreements were signed.
The cherry on top of the cake is that Rubin is actually one of three executives Google has supposedly protected over the past decade after they were accused of sexual misconduct.
The googlewalkout page on Instagram stated that they wanted Google to make five changes to its company policy:
In arbitration, the proceedings are usually private and the public does not know when the arbitration is occurring or where, and oftentimes many documents are designated as confidential, also without becoming part of public court records.
Touching on their first point, we have previously touched on the issues of using arbitration in harassment cases, especially in the US; Twila White, an employment lawyer in Southern California, explained how employers often require employees to sign an agreement prior to beginning their employment, that if a dispute arises, it will be resolved via arbitration.
This often leaves employees at a disadvantage. Speaking to us earlier this year, she states: “When something bad happens in the workplace, after an employee has signed an arbitration agreement, most of the times the employee will end up in arbitration where there is a retired judge or lawyer, who is the ultimate decision maker. The employer is paying the arbitrator. The employer has the opportunity to have a repeat player dynamic where that employer has been before a particular arbitrator many times over, and has a familiarity with an arbitrator, whereas the plaintiff has no familiarity with that arbitrator or process. Lawyers call it the “repeat player effect”.” Twila expands on this, stating that another issue for employees and the general public, is that arbitration allows cases to not be publically reported for press, leaving little knowledge of such cases to the public eye, thus making it easier to employers to brush their accusations under the carpet.
Twila states: “In arbitration, the proceedings are usually private and the public does not know when the arbitration is occurring or where, and oftentimes many documents are designated as confidential, also without becoming part of public court records.”
Ignorance isn’t always bliss, especially when harassment and discrimination are involved. For the safety and wellbeing of others, shouldn’t the public be aware of a company’s misconduct?
So, How Should Harassment Cases Be Handled?
Obviously prevention is better than cure, and employers should make it evidently clear to what accounts towards sexual harassment and their zero tolerance policy towards such behaviour; workplaces should also have a detailed policy in place if harassment occurs whereby employees should know who to report to and how the investigation, and responses of such an investigation, will occur. Twila recommends that training should be done yearly, and focus on working from the top (higher management), to lower down[4].
Nonetheless, regardless if preventative measures have been taken, evidence of discriminatory behaviour and harassment should be investigated, involving a member of the HR team if necessary, and when appropriate, offer guidance and counselling to the victim. How the case is resolved, depends on the situation itself.
Possible outcomes are: verbal or written warning; a (temporary) restraining order; the accused may be reassigned to another department, away from the victim, or suspended, or terminated from employment; and, depending on the severity of the case, cases may be reported to the police who will sanction the accused appropriately.
Due to the sensitivity of these cases, employers, and in some instances employees, usually prefer to maintain as much confidentiality as possible, and this is where non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) come in.
The purpose of a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is to keep sensitive information confidential.
What is an NDA?
NDAs are contracts whereby parties agree to limit what they say about a dispute in the future. In sexual harassment cases, it may come across as part of a ‘deal’ to get employees to take a form of compensation - monetary, as an example -, as long as you legally agree to not mention this to the public. This may occur when an investigation hasn’t come to a secure conclusion, but employers want to be thorough and ensure nothing will come back to bite them.
Jamie Jenkins, Barrister at St John’s Buildings chambers, tells us more about NDAs in sexual harassment cases:
“The purpose of a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is to keep sensitive information confidential. They are commonly used in business settings, during a deal process, for example, and can be used to protect the confidential or sensitive information from one or both parties during negotiations or a business transaction.
“With the dawn of the #MeToo movement, the use of NDAs to cover up historical sexual misconduct has come to light, prompting widespread scrutiny of how they are used, and to what purpose. In the case of the Harvey Weinstein allegations, the NDAs relate to particular incidents, and were put in place retrospectively. However, in the case of the Presidents Club, the staff were reportedly made to sign contracts in advance, before going on to be subjected to sexual harassment. It is very important that the receiving party, the individual signing the NDA, understands in full the parameters of the agreement being put in place.”
There is an important safeguard. [In the UK] under an employment settlement agreement (s203 Employment Rights Act 1996), it is an express condition that the employee must have received legal advice.
But here lies the problem: confidentiality may refrain other victims coming out about further harassment claims. Moreover, critics of NDAs state that they easily sweep claims under the carpet.
The process of filing a harassment claim can be tiresome, especially in some cases, whereby silence is an easy offer to accept in replacement for money or the termination – or some form of discipline - of such employee.
An example, is this report made on Magnify Money: Chelsea* learnt the difficulties of filing a claim; she never wanted to resort to hiring an attorney, but when the company’s HR team did nothing, - aside from offering her a demotion after filing a complaint that her manager was making sexual advances -, she had little choice left. She wanted to ensure her manager realised his actions were incorrect and hoped taking such action would refrain him from harassing another employee, and stated that her reason for settling was not a ‘money making scheme’, but instead, stated: “I accepted a settlement instead of going to trial is that [sic] I didn’t want to be publicly seen as a woman who files these claims.”
We spoke to Andrew McDonald, Employment Law partner at BLM, on this particular matter.
“Even where an employer fights a spurious claim and wins, it is often a pyrrhic victory, one which incurs extensive legal fees and a huge amount of senior management resourcing. Additionally, these cases tend to attract a high level of press interest, which could concentrate on allegations, rather than the rationale behind judgements which rule in the business’ favour.
“This is where NDAs can come in to play. Faced with these challenges, businesses will often try to see if a claim can be settled for a modest amount either under a settlement agreement [or an ACAS COT3, (solely in the UK)]; these will always include a confidentiality clause, which is a form of NDA. In these circumstances, the use of NDAs are not to protect sexual harassers, but for the simple expedient of avoiding the payment becoming general knowledge.”
NDAs often leave a lot of confusion and do give the accused power to avoid consequences of their actions. However, does it cause the same level of harm, when NDAs are reported to be signed in such cases and leaves us no definite answer to what truly occurred?
Are we intentionally silencing abused women and men? The rise of #metoo has shed light into how much more common sexual harassment is than we think, and it is not until we delve into the process of how things are handled, that we learn the easy misuse of NDAs. What other choices are there for victims? Well, Caroline Humphries, Tutor at The University of Law, Bloomsbury, assures us that not all is lost:
“Some commentators have suggested that due to an inequality of bargaining power such settlement agreements are not really consensual and therefore may be steamrolled through by employers. However, there is an important safeguard. [In the UK] under an employment settlement agreement (s203 Employment Rights Act 1996), it is an express condition that the employee must have received legal advice. This advice is in regards to the terms and effect of the proposed agreement and, in particular, its effect on the employee’s ability to pursue any claims in an Employment Tribunal.
“The employee must, therefore, take legal advice before agreeing to the Settlement Agreement. This means the employee must be advised on the terms of the agreement and they have the opportunity to redress the balance of power.
“Employment lawyers often advise on Settlement Agreements and they will negotiate on behalf of an employee if the terms of the Settlement Agreement are not appropriate. Given this safeguard, I consider that Settlement Agreements have a useful role in settling disputes and should be allowed.
“They bring potentially difficult proceedings to an end. They also do not put employees or their employers through the process of litigation where the results are uncertain and individuals may have to give very personal evidence.
“Allowing Confidential Settlement Agreements does not, of course, mean that they are always appropriate. Employees should have the confidence to understand that if they do not want to settle, there is always the option of employment tribunal proceedings.”
If we turn back to the Google scandal in particular, many of the protestors were aggravated that an employer who had broken policy, was still being paid millions of dollars, even though he has resigned[5]. Rubin denied all allegations, with his spokesperson stating he left due to other reasons. Rubin publicly responded: “Specifically, I never coerced a woman to have sex in a hotel room. These false allegations are part of a smear campaign by my ex-wife to disparage me during a divorce and custody battle.[6]”
NDAs often leave a lot of confusion and do give the accused power to avoid consequences of their actions. However, does it cause the same level of harm, when NDAs are reported to be signed in such cases and leaves us no definite answer to what truly occurred?
In the case of NDAs, whilst stopping serial offenders is crucial, legislators will have to tread carefully to ensure they don’t remove the assistance NDAs provide all parties, ensuring any new regime still allows sensible settlements to be reached with confidentiality maintained.
Jamie sheds more light into the controversy behind using NDAs and how all could be over, if the media finds out: “In a commercial context, NDAs are often restricted in time. On the other hand, NDAs used to cover up cases of sexual misdemeanour have no shelf-life – the receiving party is silenced indefinitely. If a high-profile NDA does come to light, it can prompt a flurry of further disclosures, rendering its entire purpose useless - the allegations having become widely publicised. In such cases, the celebrity may seek an injunction in an attempt to preserve their reputation. The problem with injunctions in this setting is that, whilst they silence the original source, they may not prevent others from spreading the word further - once started, a media furore is hard to quell.”
So, why are they legal? Well, because they are a little more complicated than we think, as Jamie explains: “There are two areas of difficulty surrounding whether NDAs should be used in sexual harassment cases. Firstly, the remit of such agreements is far more complex than is widely reported. Their use to cover up criminal activity, such as rape and assault, is a matter which the government is currently looking into. However, not all sexual harassment is criminal, and NDAs are commonly used in relation to information or conduct that is not illegal – it is therefore wrong to assume that the use of NDAs as a whole is wrong. Secondly, an NDA can play an important role, even in disputes. In such situations, including legal disputes, an NDA can allow all parties to draw a line under the matter, and move on - so they can serve a valuable purpose.”
And what if NDAs were not to exist? With many stating they should be banned in such cases, Andrew highlights what could happen if they were no longer an option:
“The complete banning of NDAs could result in matters which could otherwise have been settled having to undergo a full hearing before a Judge. Employment Tribunal systems would be clogged, and businesses and claimants would face great expenses of time and legal fees.”
He expands on sharing that the important thing to do is to ensure that businesses, across different industries and sectors, commit to stopping sexual harassment and eradicating workplace cultures that may have previously allowed abuse to thrive. He expands: “In the case of NDAs, whilst stopping serial offenders is crucial, legislators will have to tread carefully to ensure they don’t remove the assistance NDAs provide all parties, ensuring any new regime still allows sensible settlements to be reached with confidentiality maintained.”
Since the walkout, Google has announced that they have made some changes to how harassment cases are handled; they will no longer force employees to take their claim into arbitration.
"We will make arbitration optional for individual sexual harassment and sexual assault claims. Google has never required confidentiality in the arbitration process and arbitration still may be the best path for a number of reasons (e.g. personal privacy) but, we recognize that choice should be up to you," wrote Google CEO Sundar Pichai in a company email.[7]
The controversy behind NDAs remain, and even though there is a strong movement for the use of NDAs to be reviewed, especially in regards to sexual harassment cases, it is vital that workplaces do as much as they can to avoid sexual harassment cases in the first place. Prevention is always better than cure.
[1] https://www.reputationinstitute.com/blog/growing-workplace-crisis-google
[2] https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/1/18051026/google-walkout-sexual-harassment-protest
[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.html?module=inline
[4] https://www.lawyer-monthly.com/2018/04/workplace-harassment-how-do-we-stop-it-2/
[5] https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/11/2/18056390/google-walkout-employee-interviews
[6] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.html
[7] https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/08/tech/google-sexual-harassment/index.html
When asked about additional regulation for Google on Aug. 29, President Trump said “we’re just going to see” before adding he wanted to see “fairness” on the platform.
Maintaining an active social media presence for your law firm is critical to the success of both your website and your firm as a whole. Before potential clients give your office a call, they’ll likely check out your Facebook and Twitter profiles.
Facebook alone has over 1 billion active profiles. Combine that with the number of users on other popular social media sites like Instagram, Twitter, Pinterest, Google Plus, and LinkedIn, and you have a real opportunity to get your law firm out there and engaging with potential clients.
Although Google has made it clear on several occasions that being active on social media doesn’t affect how your website ranks in Google searches, there is no denying that a strong social media strategy can indirectly benefit your search engine optimization (SEO) efforts.
Below, Tom Desmond, Co-Founder of law firm SEO company ApricotLaw, looks at five ways you can optimize your law firm’s social media strategy to bolster your SEO efforts.
1. Be Active
Social media gives you the opportunity to provide relevant content to your target audience without them having to search for it on Google first. When a potential client is interested in content from your website that you’ve posted on your firm’s Facebook or Twitter profile, he or she will click through and visit your site.
The person who clicks a link to your site on social media is likely to already be interested in your services or the information on your law firm’s website. That means he or she is likely to click further links after landing on your site. This will help lower your bounce rate, or the number of website visitors that leave the site after viewing just one page while increasing your long clicks. Long clicks refer to the length of time someone stays on your website’s page.
Both bounce rate and long clicks are ranking factors for Google.
But simply having a social media profile isn’t enough. It’s important that you are active and engaged with other profiles and your audience. The more active and engaged you are, the more popular your social media pages will likely be.
2. Target Content Creators
The popularity of social media makes it easier than ever to get your content in front of a large, diverse audience. When you post content on social media that catches the attention of influential content creators, such as journalists and bloggers who browse social media for article or video ideas, these content creators may be inspired to create content that relates to your firm’s practice area.
If they do that, they’re likely to link back to your site from their own content on their own sites. That means you’ve just generated a high-quality backlink.
One critical component of SEO for attorneys is getting backlinks. This is when another website links back to your website. Google considers pages with high-quality backlinks more authoritative than sites without them and ranks them higher for key search terms.
3. Create Interesting Videos
Want to catch the attention of both Google and potential clients? Create videos. With few exceptions, videos get more engagement from social media audiences than other content types. What’s more, Google likes websites that include videos, so when you create a video about your practice areas or some other important information, publish it on your website and share that page on social media.
That way, you get a double-edged benefit: You get a nice little ranking boost from having videos on your site, and your law firm’s social media profiles get higher engagement.
If you upload a video directly to your Facebook, Twitter, or other social media profile, include in the post a link back to your site and indicate that your site has more videos and information. That’s yet another way to get highly engaged visitors on your site, which Google loves to see.
4. Optimize Your Social Media Profiles
Try this out: Type “Ben & Jerry’s” into Google. What are the top few results? You likely see the main website for the ice cream company, followed closely by the company’s Twitter profile and Facebook page — possibly even the corporate Instagram page.
What don’t you see? Results for other ice cream companies. That’s because Ben & Jerry’s has an active social media presence and complete social media profiles, allowing the company to dominate search engine results pages (SERPs) for terms that include the company name (branded searches).
You can apply this to your law firm. By including your website, business name, and other relevant content in the description area of your social media profiles, you can increase your odds of ranking in the top several spots for branded searches. That means more chances for searchers to engage with your firm and a way to push your competition farther down in the SERPs.
5. Consider Other Search Engines
Hearing SEO experts talk, you’d think Google was the only search engine out there. It may dominate the market, but Google isn’t the only search engine by any means.
If even 10 percent of Internet searchers use a search engine other than Google, that represents an enormous number of people. You wouldn’t turn down a potential client at your law firm because he or she doesn’t use Google, and you don’t want to miss out when those using other search engines are looking for attorneys in your location and practice area.
While Google has steadily maintained that it doesn’t allow social media activity to directly influence rankings for a private website, other search engines haven’t been so rigid. Bing has confirmed on at least one occasion that it does examine the “social authority” of websites and that the metric does have a positive effect on search results.
In other words, an active social media presence may only provide indirect SEO benefits when it comes to Google, but it may directly affect your rankings on any number of other search engines.
Social Media and SEO for Attorneys
Social media is an important part of any internet marketing campaign. In addition to giving your firm credibility and proving to potential clients that you’re “real” and an authority in your practice area and location, an active social media presence can provide indirect benefits to your SEO efforts.
Lawyer SEO is a crowded, competitive field. No potential advantage should be ignored, and that includes social media.
When you need the answer to a legal question, unless you’re seriously traditional you most likely pull your smartphone out and ask Siri or Alexa. Below Tom Desmond, CEO of Law Firm digital marketing agency ApricotLaw, delves into the ever-evolving uses of technology in the legal sphere.
Voice searches are becoming increasingly popular. More than 77% of Americans use smartphones and nearly 1 in 6 Americans using smart speakers — and both of those kinds of devices come with artificial intelligence (AI) assistant technologies like Alexa and Siri.
That means many Internet users are conducting searches for lawyers via their smart devices, rather than using their desktop computers or laptops. They may not be asking Alexa to represent them in court, but they are asking her questions they might ask a lawyer, and she’s directing them to attorneys who can provide answers.
These advances in AI and voice search technology are having a significant impact on search engine optimization (SEO) for law firm websites. Is Alexa your new lawyer? No, but she might connect you with your next big client.
Traditional SEO and Law Firms
As most private attorneys know, a good SEO strategy enables law firms to generate more leads, which turn into clients. In the Internet age, SEO helps law firms thrive and dominate their markets.
Traditional law firm SEO involves choosing relevant keywords to target, creating high-quality, original content, getting diverse backlinks to your site, and ensuring that your site is mobile-friendly.
Barring any radical shifts at Google headquarters, these basic SEO principles are likely to remain important in the realm of law firm marketing. But innovations like AI-assisted voice search are changing the SEO landscape, and it’s up to law firms and their SEO providers to keep up.
How Artificial Intelligence Guides Internet Users to Lawyers
As voice searches on smartphones and smart speakers become more common, individuals looking for an attorney are more likely to use these technologies in their research.
The way AI assistants guide voice search users to attorneys is different for each system. For instance, Google Assistant will report only the top Google results, while Alexa will only provide answers that have been proven accurate. And most AIs only relay information from one or two top results to users.
The language used in these AI-assisted voice searches is drastically different from the way a searcher uses Google on a laptop.
For example, if an individual is looking for a car accident lawyer in New Orleans on his or her laptop, he or she might type in “New Orleans car accident lawyer” into Google and be given pages of the top-ranking car accident attorneys in New Orleans.
However, the same individual using Alexa will conversationally ask something like “Alexa, how do I find the top car accident lawyer in New Orleans?” That means the dialogue of voice search sounds a lot different from the text-based Boolean searches of days past.
Generally, someone conducting a voice search through an Amazon Echo or other Alexa-enabled device will want to do, know, or buy something or go somewhere. As it relates to law, that means they want to contact a lawyer, know something specific about the law, retain an attorney, or meet with a lawyer.
Alexa will seek to answer such queries in a conversational, human way. That means law firm website content should be conversational if it hopes to catch Alexa’s attention during voice searches.
How You Can Optimize Your Firm’s Site for Voice Search
There are a number of ways you can optimize your site to dominate voice search results. Answering the “who, what, when, where, and why” of the search queries related to your firm, location, and practice area can convince Alexa to select your firm over your competitor when it answers a user’s voice search command.
An easy way to match the conversational phrasing common to voice searches and hopefully rank well in the voice search results is to emphasize frequently asked questions and answers about your firm and practice areas on your site.
Another key aspect of voice requests through Alexa is assistance with navigation and location. By integrating your firm’s website with Google Maps and making in-content references to your location, you can alert Alexa to the fact that you are, indeed, nearby when a user asks her to find “personal injury lawyers near me,” for example.
Alexa’s No Lawyer, but She Can Connect Clients with Your Firm
Although Alexa is not a lawyer and is in no way able to give legal advice, her algorithm will pick up conversational language, FAQ answers, and location references when answering her voice search queries in an effort to connect users with an attorney who can help them with their legal matter.
By making sure your law firm’s website is optimized for AI-assisted voice searches, you can raise your chance of being her response of choice when she’s asked to find a lawyer for a user.
In light of recent news that the European Commission fined Google 4.3 billion euros ($5 billion; £3.8 billon) over its Android operating system and impact on consumer searchability, Steve Kuncewicz, BLM partner, technology and digital expert, provides Lawyer Monthly with his thoughts on how this could affect regulation around device development in the future.
This is a far more interventionist approach than Google is likely used to and comes from a European Commission (EC) looking to bring the tech giants to heel. It’s not the first time the EC has cracked down on Google either; only last year, a €2.4 billion fine was imposed for what the Commission dubbed ‘old school’ illegality through Google’s dominance in shopping comparison searches.
As with the shopping dispute, we can expect Google to fight this €4.3 billion fine just as fiercely. Its android agreement forms a key part of its business model and it will not relinquish this easily. However, I expect the appeal process will proceed at a glacial pace – this issue was first investigated in 2016 and only now has a fine value been proposed.
The Commission is hoping this will be game-changing for the mobile phone industry. Look at what happened in Russia, for example, when Google lost a similar antitrust case. The company came to an agreement with a rival app, Yandex and the Chrome app now prompts Russian android users to choose either Google, Mail.ru or Yandex as its default search engine – leading to a huge uptake of the latter.
The argument that android is ‘freer’ than iOS is somewhat undermined by Google’s current anti-competitive dominance. Ultimately, this fine is intended to empower consumers with the choice that was previously denied to them. Whether other search engines will have the market power to compete against Google’s search performance is another question, though the EC’s penalty will certainly give them a bigger bite of the cherry.
Google court is now in session.
