Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Obstacles to Overcome So Attorneys Can Train Others
Last month's article, Training the New Crop of Incoming Associates, addressed adult learning theory at a 30,000-foot level. This article delves deeper into what firms can do to support their attorneys who lead training initiatives such as on-boarding new associates, delivering substantive knowledge, designing skill development training or any other aspect of professional development in the legal field. As noted in the previous piece, training lawyers has its own set of issues to overcome.
Time
The number one impediment to getting attorneys to participate in training is time. In the corporate world, oftentimes employees are given dedicated time to complete training. Even in today's virtual world, these entities support employees in disconnecting from work. The Association for Talent Development's 2020 annual industry analysis notes the average number of employee training hours was 55.4 in 2020. Aside from CLE requirements, most firms have no hours requirements for continuing to develop skills and ability in one's career. In fact, it is common for lawyers to cancel attendance last minute or to bring client work into the learning environment.
The opportunity lost due to the billable hour weighs heavily on individuals asked to participate in or conduct training. One way for a firm to support attorneys in taking time to deliver or attend training is to give billable or investment credit for training time. Add a time category for professional development to account for time spent in training. This demonstrates the firms support and allows attorneys to feel more comfortable participating during their work hours.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?