Here’s what we do know: the Law Society of Upper Canada is conducting some type and/or number of investigations into document reviewers working in Ontario. What we don’t know: pretty much everything else.
On another front, here’s what we do know: the now-former dean of the University of New Brunswick voluntarily resigned from his position last month. What we don’t know: Pretty much everything else.
What these two situations have in common is that the silence surrounding them has sown a tremendous amount of confusion, anxiety, and distrust — most prominently affecting vulnerable people. That is vulnerable in the sense these individuals don’t have a tremendous amount of control over their destiny which is controlled by entrenched legal institutions.
In Ontario, the investigations into document review work and the ongoing lack of clarity over whether it is, or when it is, considered legal work continues. It is at the heart of a multimillion-dollar class action a group of document reviewers has launched against Deloitte LLP. After buying law firm ADT, a provider of document review services, it told all the contractors the work they were doing was no longer legal work thus not requiring professional liablity insurance. The members of the class claim the work they were doing was exactly the same and had previously been categorized as legal work requiring insurance.
The debate over whether document review is or isn’t legal work isn’t new, but it is pivotal in the lives of those young lawyers stuck in the middle of this debate and relying on relatively low-paying contracts to get by. They’re not in a position to negotiate with their “employers” nor do they have much sway at the law society. They are, however, the ones under the microscope of LSUC investigators. And, as with every law society investigation, there is absolutely no information available. There’s no shortage of rumours and innuendo, of course. While that provides a starting point for journalists to start digging, it does nothing to quell the anxiety and misinformation individuals have about their futures.
Rumours and innuendo are always the result of engrained secrecy and culture of closed doors. The students at the University of New Brunswick’s law school are learning this first-hand. Dean Jeremy Levitt’s unexplained leave of absence in February sent the school into turmoil. That was followed shortly by associate dean Janet Austin resigning her position. It all reached a crescendo when Levitt resigned his deanship March 17. Faced with other professors taking off on sick leave, students left waiting for marks, swirling rumours about harassment, and any number of other tales of a toxic environment and “epic battles” between the dean and faculty, the university chose to say nothing. It continues to say nothing.
UNB commissioned University of Windsor law professor Neil Gold to do an independent report on the situation at the law school. That report is being kept under wraps and the school is refusing to comment on it. As it begins its search for a new dean — this will be the fifth in three years — students are practically begging for more transparency.
There are any number of reasons and excuses organizations proffer for remaining silent and maintaining secrecy but there are oftentimes when openness would serve them better. A wee bit of institutional skirt lifting may lead to some embarassment but can go infinitely further to building trust and confidence. Both the LSUC and UNB should have learned that lesson by now. And yet they haven’t.
Clarification: Article amended to address comments regarding rumours of harassment at UNB.
