This chain of posts was triggered by robert columbia’s speculation in post 9 that since a records clerk is not a lawyer, she would not be bound by the lawyers’ code of ethics. The answer is that while staff in a law office are not themselves bound by the Code of Ethics, the lawyers they work for are, and are responsible to insure that their staff comply with the code. A staff member who does something contrary to the code will not be liable, but the lawyer and law firm may be. The lawyers therefore have a very strong responsibility to make sure their staff understands and follows the code.
Well, Roderick Femm wasn’t asking about legal ethics. He was positing that large corporations are by nature unethical enterprises and suggesting that people of conscience should not work there. That’s a political point of view, not a legal question.
Sure, but that “Big corporations and law firms are EEE-vul” theme is quite separate from the issue of the application of lawers’ codes of ethics within the law office. 
I once knew a guy who was a Houston firefighter. He and his wife had been married about 17 years when wife began working as a clerk in a prominent law firm in Houston. She had no degree and had been working as a bank teller. About a year and a half later she divorced him and took up with one of the lawyers. He told me that once she started working there she seemed to perceive herself as being far too good to be married to a firefighter. Of course, her divorce was free, and he lost half of everything… but to answer your question, I would say there would be considerable “advancement” opportunities.
She started the job this week. Great pay! Many perks! Everyone happy!
Then she described the job to me. Her team’s current project is to digitize the giant vault of files into scannable pdfs.
New files (i.e. not from these archives) are of course automatically scanned into scannable pdfs.
Entire project will take a couple of years she thinks.
I don’t have the heart to ask her the natural question of what happens next.
Pretty sure what happens next is the records clerks all lose their jobs.
What do you think?
I think it’s a bit silly to worry about something (her job running out of files to digitize) that you admit might be years away. No one has that kind of job security. Meanwhile she is accruing experience working in an office and digitizing information, which probably isn’t the worst kind of expertise to have nowadays.
I’ve been a records clerk at a huge law firm. Trust me, it’s not something you want to do for life, even if you could. It’s a fine job to gain experience.
I’ve seen many of these multi-year projects that involve bringing in people as contractors for months or a couple of years even. Some of these people will leave the company at the end of the project. Some are specialists in deploying that system and will move onto another company undergoing an implementation. Others are hired on, perhaps in a new role. Presumably someone manages the team your wife will be working for? Two years is a long time. Perhaps that person will get promoted or leave the company in that time. In that case, they might want to promote someone to manage the digital records system. So I’d recommend that your wife do a good job, show enthusiasm, and volunteer for any special project or assignments (even the dull stuff like documenting processes). That sort of person is the type employers want to keep even after their project is over.
Good points. I tend to have this ‘other shoe will drop’ reaction to bad news and you guys are right that I’m drawing far too hasty a conclusion.
Or the staff are made to sign confidentiality and non disclosure agreements.
Sure, but that doesn’t bring the staff under the disciplinary powers of the Law Society, does it? They’re assuming a contractual duty of confidentiality, owed to the law firm.
No. It allows you to quickly mitigate any breach, including getting injunctive relief and also limit the extent of your liability.