| | |
|
HelenMayerThirdPaper 4 - 21 May 2009 - Main.HelenMayer
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="ThirdPaper" |
|---|
Takeaways | | | The end of a school year is always a time for reflection. It is a time to decompress from the mad dash of finals, to make sense of what we have learned and to write the year’s concluding chapter – the only one that ever gets “re-read” when we think back to that particular period of our lives. It was amusing, though perhaps not surprising that the trigger for the process this year, a simple conversation with my best friend, led me to question whether I had come away from my first year with any tangible legal knowledge, or whether I had merely checked off a box – one year more in the inexorable march toward the completion of my education. But mulling over the experience these past few weeks has led me to the conclusion that the substantive legal knowledge we gain in law school will be relatively unimportant in our legal careers when compared to the values we have already developed over our young lives. | |
<
< | The trigger happened while I was sitting at lunch with a best friend, Sandy, one recent afternoon after finals ended. She has been my closest friend since freshman year of high school, and last year we were overjoyed to discover that we would both be coming New York – she to attend culinary school while working as a line cook and I to attend Columbia. | >
> | The trigger happened while I was sitting at lunch with my best friend, Sandy, one recent afternoon after finals ended. She has been my closest friend since freshman year of high school, and last year we were overjoyed to discover that we would both be coming New York – she to attend culinary school while working as a line cook and I to attend Columbia. | | | “I have a legal question for you.” She broke out suddenly and followed with a customary dramatic pause for effect. After momentarily considering interjecting by reminding her that Law & Order was just a moderately sensationalized television show and not necessarily a true reflection of the law, a genuine sense of excitement came over me. So this is what it will be like, I thought. I will be the woman with the answers, the trusted confidante, the counselor in the best sense of the word. People will come to me with seemingly intractable problems and I will devise creative strategies based on the specialized and closely held knowledge I have acquired in law school. I was about to start with Sandy. Or so I thought. But the story she told and my inability to be of much help demonstrated quite clearly that either I have a long way to go, or I have been looking in the wrong places for this knowledge. | |
<
< | Each week Sandy would be scheduled to work 32 hours at a certain three star restaurant in Manhattan. She would clock into an automated system, work at least her full shift if not a little more, and clock out. Each week she would rip open her paycheck expectantly and see a precise 31.00 hours logged. Every week she would rationalize a reason why this was so – miscalculation on her part, perhaps, or by the restaurant in recording the totals. But each week the same – 32 plus hours worked, 31 hours flat paid. It seems Sandy was not the only one either. After discreetly bringing the topic up with other employees in the kitchen, it became clear that her case was mild by comparison. One employee on the day shift consistently worked two extra hours without pay (let alone the mandated time-and-a-half for overtime) because he could not do all that was required during his shift, but the restaurant flatly refused to hire more help. Sandy asked him pointedly: was he not infuriated by this abuse? No, he said. It was standard practice in the industry. | >
> | Each week Sandy would be scheduled to work 32 hours at a certain three star restaurant in Manhattan. She would clock into an automated system, work at least her full shift if not a little more, and clock out. Each week she would rip open her paycheck expectantly and see a precise 31.00 hours logged. Every week she would rationalize a reason why this was so – miscalculation on her part, perhaps, or by the restaurant in recording the totals. But each week the same – 32 plus hours worked, 31 hours flat paid. It seems Sandy was not the only one either. After discreetly bringing the topic up with other employees in the kitchen, it became clear that her case was mild by comparison. One employee on the day shift consistently worked two extra hours without pay (let alone the mandated time-and-a-half for overtime) because he could not do all that was required during his shift, but the restaurant flatly refused to hire more help. Sandy asked him pointedly: was he not infuriated by this abuse? No, he said. It was standard practice in the industry. And no one would put their job at risk by speaking out. | | | Needless to say, I was shocked. First that this abuse was happening on a systematic basis and second that I knew very little about how to help my friend deal with it. Should I look up New York labor statutes? I had the idea that the law would be on her side, but to what effect? Presumably the reason other employees submit to this “standard practice” is because they think they will lose their jobs if they complain. Feeling powerless, I fell back on my two-option strategy for dealing with questions I do not know the answer to: make a topical joke to change the subject or turn the conversation political. I chose the latter. |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |