Happy holidays, Clawbies nominations and 2012

2011 is rapidly coming to a close and The Youth and Work blog is going to be taking a short break for the holidays. We will be returning in 2012 and time permitting I may write a year in review post. Below are my nominations for the 2011 Clawbies. I read all these blogs on a regular basis as they track interesting developments in Canadian workplace law and provide practical information for readers. 

Doorey's Workplace Law Blog: David Doorey writes the one of the best workplace law blogs in Canada. He combines his experience as a lawyer and law professor to provide cutting edge analysis on emerging issues in the areas of employment, labour and human rights law. Beyond the content, the blog also contains spirited debate from his readers and extensive legal resources. It's a must read for anyone with an interest in workplace law, labour market policy and critical analysis.

Québec Labour Law Blog: Gabriel Granatstein, a lawyer with Norton Rose's Montreal office, writes an excellent blog about the legal developments coming out of Québec. This province has a vibrant culture of industrial pluralism and has avoided a lot of the stagnation that characterizes labour law in other provinces. The content ranges includes practical advice, discussions about legal developments and updates on new case law. It's an engaging read and highly recommended.

All About Information: This is one of Hicks Morley's in-house blogs that covers the intersection of workplace law and privacy. It contains a lot of practical information that's useful reading if you deal with privacy issues on a regular basis. I like the blog because it tackles a niche area in a fairly thorough manner that's easily accessible.

Those are my nominations. In closing, what would the holidays be without music and seeing as I'm a huge music nerd I thought a bit of Cancon would be in order. Below is a recent clip of Toronto's Fucked Up singing Jingle Bells (I was at the concert); they're coming off a banner year and if you still need a present for someone special their recent David Comes To Live album is highly recommended. Enjoy.

Why can't we all get along: social media, privacy and labour law

Students at GDHS aren't happy.

Here's an interesting story that appeared yesterday and continues this week's theme of social media blunders in the workplace. The story revolves around Georgetown District High School and the forced transfer of two teachers to other schools. 

Following a series of unknown events, Eleanor Wallace, a beloved music teacher and head of the arts program, was transferred to Robert Bateman Secondary School and Lee Banks, a music teacher, went to White Oaks Secondary School.  These transfers were clearly disciplinary in nature. Typically this type of discipline would only occur when there has been a serious transgression of the employer's policies combined with the existence of just cause.

This story is interesting because what happened after students discovered Ms. Wallace's removal. Students started a rather effective social media campaign demanding the return of Ms. Wallace. The campaign, which only started on Monday, has been characterized by mass emails, posters being produced, Facebook pages, articles in the Toronto Star and outreach to regional media.

The campaign has witty posters.

These transfers sit at the intersection of labour relations, privacy law and social media. Students can criticize the actions of the Halton District School Board, but the board can't publicly defend the actions it took as it would violate the terms of the collective agreement with the OSSTF and the internal privacy policy. This situation presents a dilemma for the board as it has to bear the barbs directed at it and can't get ahead of the growing online criticism. This public relations problem was apparent last night when Superintendent Nick Varricchio tepidly replied "The issue you are inquiring about is a personnel matter and therefore we will not discuss it with members of the media. Personnel matters are private as they are between the employee and the employer. We will not respond or provide any information regarding this matter."

The problem being is that now these private matters are anything but. In an earlier era a labour relations issue such as this could have been easily addressed, but in the era of social media public opinion on a seemingly minor issue can rapidly coalesce and cause a major public relations disaster. Organizations need to do their best to anticipate problems before they arise and have effective procedures in place to tactically respond to criticism. Social media isn't going away and organizations need to learn to adapt to this new normal. For my earlier posts about social media blunders see here and here.

A couple Youth and Work Blog updates

A couple updates for the readers of the blog. First, I'm happy to report that Doorey's Workplace Law Blog has nominated the Youth and Work Blog for a 2011 Canadian Law Blog Award (aka the Clawbies); furthermore, last month my blog was nominated for a Canadian Blog Award in the Best Law Blog category. A big thank you goes out to David for the nomination and to my readers for the incredible interest they've shown on youth labour market issues. 

Second, I've rolled out a "Links" section of the website. This is the start of a longer term move to address information asymmetries and the lack of workplace law resources aimed at young people. The next project will be the development of a section on internships in Ontario; this is aimed at giving young people information about this growing segment of the youth labour market. If anyone has suggestions about additional resources that should be included on the website, please send me an email and we'll chat.

Another day, another blunder: social media, blogging and reputational optics

Zach loves red ties.

My last blog post discussed the the dangers that social media can pose to organizations when millennials mess up. Today a homegrown example appeared, with the media discovering a bizarre blog entry by written by Max Naylor attacking Zach Paikin over internal differences within the youth wing of the Liberal Party of Canada. This situation serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers that social media presents to reputations of organizations and individuals. The actions of a renegade individual can take centre stage if an organization lacks the appropriate safeguards and social media policies governing conduct. 

So does Max.

What started as a disagreement over politics between friends morphed into a very damaging national story. Mothers have gotten involved, disparaging tweets have been exchanged and anyone remotely connected to the story has been left with egg on their face. The conduct has not only been damaging to the fractured political party they claim membership in, but also to their individual reputations. This sort of behaviour shouldn't be tolerated in any organization, be it political, corporate or charitable as it shuts down communication and represents a public relations disaster.

Young people should realize that what they write online will probably be permanent and might impact on future opportunities. Public attacks can seem like a good way to score some cheap political points, but in the long-run what good will come from having embarrassing information sitting a Google search away from potential employers, mates or business contacts? It pays to keep a clean profile, avoid online bickering and keep the language of comments akin to that of Disney films. Anything less might leave a disturbing trail that will be difficult to clean up and hard to explain away as a product of youthful indiscretion. Simply, the polity doesn't care about internal machinations of the junior Machiavelli league and will only be alienated through the public airing of dirty laundry.

Hide your phones, hide your booze!

Social media is one of the most fascinating emerging areas in workplace law. There's an incredible range of scenarios to mine and last week was no exception. Congressman Rick Larsen (D-WA) fired three staffers in Washington, D.C. office after they unleashed a torrent of drunken Twitter posts. This episode will go down as a cautionary tale for millennials in the workplace, which as a generation clearly doesn't have a grasp on how dangerous social media can be for their careers.

Last Thurdsay after the NW Daily Marker wrote an article on the tweets, the political careers of these young employees came to an abrupt end. The content of the tweets wasn't particularly offensive, but it did cover a range of sophomoric subjects. Seth Burroughs apparently didn't like his boss too much, tweeting: "I really like DC, but could have used another day away. The silver lining is that I don't have to see my idiot boss." Ben Byers and Elizabeth Robblee followed close behind in the stupidity race with tweets about drinking Jack Daniels in the office, failing sobriety tests and walks of shame.

I'm a big fan of Twitter. Social media is an incredibly transformative tool for organizations and individuals, but it's a pandora's box of sorts. A single errant tweet or Facebook post has the power to do incredible reputational damage in the absence of appropriate controls. The danger generally lies with in the actions of a single employee; left to their own devices individuals can make inappropriate choices on social media, leaving the wider organization to bear the brunt of the damage.

Organizations can reduce the probability of social media disasters by engaging in proactive planning and risk management, consider the following tips: employee training in social media can be useful in exposing the possibilities and pitfalls. Developing proper protocols and policies on social media usage is useful. Designating a senior employee with communications or public relations experience as the social media lead is good strategy to harness the power of social media. Don't get left behind, social media isn't going away and ignoring it can have a negative impact on your bottom line.

Is slashing the number of law students the solution to Ontario's articling crisis?

The complaints office for jobless articling students.

The Law Society of Upper Canada has been examining the articling crisis in Ontario. Earlier this year it established the Articling Task Force to trace the dimensions of the crisis and advance solutions. It recently released a consultation report and opened a period of public consultation. This post is going to survey the dimensions of the articling crisis, explore whether the increase in enrollment is the cause of the articling crisis and then offer some ideas about how the situation can be addressed.

Articling in a Nutshell

Some of my readers might be confused at this point, so let me explain what articling is. It's essentially a period of apprenticeship that all law students have to complete to become lawyers. After law school students must work for ten months under the supervision of a practicing lawyer, complete a professional skills and responsibility course and pass two comprehensive exams about law covering a range of topics. The articling process is overseen by the Law Society as part of its mandate.

Articling is a difficult process, but a fair one that exposes law students to the realities of legal practice; however, it should be noted that the quality of the articling experiences varies considerably and I've heard horror stories ranging from sexual harassment (common) to not paying minimum wage (uncommon) to lawyers literally beating students (rare). 

I've reviewed the report and it's well-researched. The Articling Task Force has asked a series of probing questions that will no doubt garner a significant amount of discussion and response. The report suggests a spectrum of solutions, from keeping the status quo all the way to abolishing the articling requirement completely. It's encouraging to see a greater range of options being explored, but I remain unconvinced that the critical mass exists to make the changes that are needed.

The dimensions of the articling crisis are complicated, but not overly complex. In a nutshell: the legal profession is getting older and becoming highly urbanized; amid a moribund economy there's little opportunity for growth; the legal industry is facing stiff competition internationally from globalization, consolidation amongst large corporate firms and outsourcing; legal education has become increasingly commodified amid funding cuts adopted under a neoliberal public policy; and, finally, at the core of the articling crisis there's a demand problem with too many students competing for too few entry-level legal jobs.

Is the articling crisis a result of a cash grab by universities?

The 99% want a tuition refund.

A couple issues from the report jumped out at me in relation to the exponential increase in the number of students seeking articling jobs. First, there is the growth of internationally trained students enrolling in the articling process, this issue has two dimensions: Canadian students going abroad to obtain legal education and immigrants to Canada seeking recognition of their foreign credentials. This is an area that the legal profession has limited control over as it can't erect extensive barriers to entering legal practice, although there anecdotal evidence that these groups face increased difficulty entering the profession.

Second, the enrolment rates at most of Ontario's law school have posted small increases from 2001 to 2011 (increases in actual numbers and percentages are: Windsor, 26, 8.2%; Osgoode, 6, 2.1%; Western, 23, 13.9%; Toronto, 34, 15.4%; Queen's, 2, 1.2%; Ottawa, 98, 33.2%). The University of Ottawa's Faculty of Law is the exception, posting the largest increase over the the last decade with the number of students shooting up to 295 in 2011 from 197 in 2001. Regardless of the unique structure of the faculty with separate civil and common programs, this problematic increase falls far outside of the growth rates seen at Ontario's other law schools.

It's no secret that law students have greater value than most types of students under the funding formula used by the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities to set university operating grants. In the wake of fee deregulation the suggestion has been made that tuition from law students is used to financially prop up university operations. If this is actually what's occurring at the University of Ottawa and other law schools then quite a bit of effort is being expended by the legal profession to address a problem that's really the chronic underfunding of post-secondary education rather than one arising out of the labour market.

Should the Government of Ontario adopt an interventionist approach?

There's an "easy" regulatory fix to the articling crisis that wasn't contained in the report for unknown reasons. Placing hard caps on enrollment isn't a new idea as both education and medical faculties in Ontario currently have enrollment caps in place. Given the limited short-term growth prospects for the legal profession it might be time to decrease the number of spots available at Ontario's law schools as the supply currently outstrips demand. 

Here are some arguments for enacting enrolment caps. It would rapidly reduce the number of students competing for articling positions. It would alleviate the need for more radical reforms of current articling process. It would address the unfair tuition fee deregulation that has law students financially supporting other university operations. It could be structured in a reflexive way that allows for enrolment growth to be linked to economic and population indicators. Finally, considering the tension between the government and the law society

Criticisms of enacting enrolment caps cover a number of disparate arguments. A cap would impinge on the self-regulatory nature of the legal profession (albeit in an indirect manner) and it would interfere with the internal operations of law schools. A cap is a interventionist public policy response into the labour market that might be viewed as a form of economic planning, although governments generally shy away from this sort of public policy. Reducing the pool of law students could have implications for access to justice and the diversity of the profession. Finally, with many foreign institutions offering legal education, students may simply leave Canada for law schools in Australia, the United States and England.

Despite these criticisms, decreasing enrolment at Ontario's law schools represents sound public policy if enacted as part of a wider strategy that includes responses from the law schools, government and the law society. No one stakeholder has a lock on the solutions required to address the articling crisis in a comprehensive sustainable manner. It's clear that law students are getting a raw deal from the law schools, law society and the government - this has to end. 

What's worrying is the fact that the government, law schools and law society are working at cross-purposes, consider: the new law school at Lakehead University; a lack of current labour market information that might dissuade students from attending law school; law schools increasing enrolment amid a poor labour market; the limited regulatory oversight from the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities over the enrolment policies of Ontario's law schools; the law society's short-sighted previous attempts to address the crisis; and, the minimal support given to students who haven't found a job. 

It's clear that something has to give and hopefully the law society and other stakeholders will actually enact the measures that are necessary. I'll continue to report on the developments in relation to the articling crisis and if you have any comments please leave one or send me an email.

Further Reading on the Articling Crisis

I've culled a number of resources tracing the dimensions of the articling crisis. Osgoode Hall's Dean, Lorne Sossin, wrote an excellent article earlier this fall. The Law Times has run a series of articles, see: here and here. The Globe and Mail recently ran an article about the issue. Canadian Lawyer has a run a couple feature length articles, see: here, here and here. I've previously written about the articling crisis, check out this article where I ask if law students are being sold a bill of goods and this interview with two candidates from the recent Benchers Election.

Youth and Work Gets Nominated for a Canadian Blog Award

The Youth and Work Blog has been nominated for a Canadian Blog Award! We're in the running in the Best Law Blog category. You can vote here and please share the link with your friends so we have a competitive chance of winning. Thanks so much for your support and keep visiting the blog for continuing coverage about youth labour market in Canada. 

Journalism, illegal internships and precarity: a primer

Perhaps the worst offender in the unpaid internship scam is journalism. This industry is addicted to exploiting young people through unpaid internships and rarely does any critical commentary appear on this practice. In the past year a number of great articles about this practice have appeared: Bethany Horne wrote a heartfelt critique about unpaid internships in the media, the Ryerson Review of Journalism analyzed how much interns are worth, Maclean's covered the growing backlash against unpaid internships and The Star's Public Editor wrote a great article about the practice.

The rise of internships is part of a wider trend in the labour market over the last thirty years that has shifted the cost of training new employees from the employers onto taxpayers, families and students. This parallels the trend of downloading of the cost of maintaining the post-secondary education sector onto students and their families amid an era of unprecedented credentialism where possessing a Bachelors degree most likely won't land you a interview. Both of these developments are examples of the strategic abandonment of youth people by governments vis-a-vis the public policy adopted during the era of neoliberalism.

Guy Standing, in his new book, The Precariat, makes a poignant observation, "Internships are a threat to youth...Even if a payment is made, the interns are doing cheap dead-end labour, exerting downward pressure on the wages and opportunities of others who might otherwise be employed. An internship may give positional advantage to a few young people, but it is more like buying a lottery ticket, in this case involving a private subsidy, usually paid by the intern's family." 

What's occurring is that the price of entry into a career in journalism is shooting up as debt-ridden students are required to engage in vast amount of unpaid work to even reach the stage where their competitive for paid positions. This severely limits the number of diverse perspectives in the profession by making it more difficult for students from historically marginalized communities to gain a foothold.

The widespread use of unpaid interns in the media mirrors the rise of precarious employment in wider society. Internships can be placed on the spectrum of precarious employment, with little chance of a permanent job, benefits, training or even pay. This precarity inserts a tremendous amount of stress into the lives of young people entering the workforce and students finishing their education. Also, there's a link between the depressed labour market and the exponential increase in the mental health issues facing Canadian youth.

What irks me about this particular situation with the media industry is the use of unpaid internships by organizations that either espouse progressive politics or cater to youth demographics - as unpaid internships inherently cast young workers as a disposable commodity who just don't matter. Be it This Magazine, Rabble.ca, BlogTO, Spacing or The Grid, these are organizations that have no excuse for violating the provisions governing the use of trainees under sub-section 1(2) of the Employment Standards Act, 2000.

Beyond the breaking of the law and lacking the ability to critically assess their own human resources practices, this situation also highlights the general inability of the Canadian media, particularly progressive voices, to provide coverage, commentary and critical analysis about the vast changes that are occurring within labour markets. Citizens need to understand what's occurring, yet that's not happening. Consider this: if a extraterrestrial arrived in Canada and started digesting our media, they would be left with the impression that unionized employees are responsible for every social ill imaginable. That's bizarre, but so is the practice of not paying young employees, perhaps it's time that CEOs of media conglomerates start working free for four month stints - that would make a good headline.

For my previous articles about internships, see: here, here and here.