Suchergebnisse

I am the arch-villain of Professor Schiltz's article-not just a partner at a big firm, but the Hiring Partner. Because I have spent part of my career in government service and teaching, I may be uniquely positioned to react to Professor Schiltz's article. After get- ting out of law school in 1976, I clerked for a federal judge for a year and then went to a big firm in Washington, D.C. In 1980, became an Assistant United States Attorney, working as a criminal prosecutor for three-and-a-half years. I then went to Vanderbilt Law School where for two years I taught criminal law, criminal constitutional law, evidence, and antitrust. In 1986, I came to Dechert Price & Rhoads where I have been ever since, except for four months in the fall of 1995 during which I acted as Chief Counsel to the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee that conducted the Ruby Ridge hearings. While at Dechert, I have done a lot of high impact pro bono litigation. Because I have acted as co-counsel in these cases with various public interest organizations, I have first hand knowledge of how these organizations operate as well. Finally, for the last eight years, I have been on my firm's Hiring Committee and for the last two years the Chair of that committee. I am concerned that, in an apparent effort to paint the darkest possible picture of life at a big firm, Professor Schiltz has overstated the minuses and understated the plusses of working for a big firm. Moreover, he has blamed the big firm for an imbalance between work and the rest of one's life when the real culprit (if there is one) is an individual's drives and needs-traits that are by no means restricted to large-firm lawyers. Professor Schiltz's position is especially dangerous because he may influence law students not to go to a big firm when a big firm may be the best place for them to start-if not to finish-their law careers. I firmly believe that a first rate big firm is the best place for a new lawyer to apprentice-to learn how to be a lawyer. Big firms also present the best ...

Although persons with disabilities compose a growing portion of workers, when compared with other aspects of diversity (e.g., race/ethnicity or gender), disability has received relatively little research attention. In a between-subjects experimental design with more than 600 participants, we evaluated the roles of disability type (AIDS, cerebral palsy, and stroke), stigma, and employee characteristics in acceptance of a coworker with a disability. Stigma largely mediated the relationship between disability type and acceptance. Employee characteristics had direct effects on some aspects of acceptance. Exploratory factor analysis of stigma revealed six factors; however, only a "performance impact" factor was consistently related to acceptance, suggesting that perceived implications of the coworker's disability for job performance are critical.

This book examines how freedom of expression can be defined, shared, acted upon and responded to globally. In curating this volume, the editors collected works on freedom of expression and communication, culture and identity from a broad swath of viewpoints. Scholarly contributions come from a variety of disciplines, including communication, literature, linguistics, translation, journalism, cultural studies, art, and other humanities and social science perspectives. This compilation addresses ideas such as censorship and free speech, minority and migration discourse, language and translation, mass media, including social media and advertising, and humour and political satire

Approximately 17% of military service members are obese. Research involving army soldiers suggests a lack of awareness of healthy foods on post. Innovative approaches are needed to change interactions with the military food environment. Two complementary technological methods to raise awareness are geofencing (deliver banner ads with website links) and Bluetooth beacons (real-time geotargeted messages to mobile phones that enter a designated space). There is little published literature regarding the feasibility of this approach to promote healthy behaviors in retail food environments. Thus, we conducted a formative feasibility study of a military post to understand the development, interest in, and implementation of EatWellNow, a multi-layered interactive food environment approach using contextual messaging to improve food purchasing decisions within the military food environment. We measured success based on outcomes of a formative evaluation, including process, resources, management, and scientific assessment. We also report data on interest in the approach from a Fort Bragg community health assessment survey (n = 3281). Most respondents agreed that they were interested in receiving push notifications on their phone about healthy options on post (64.5%) and that receiving these messages would help them eat healthier (68.3%). EatWellNow was successfully developed through cross-sector collaboration and was well received in this military environment, suggesting feasibility in this setting. Future work should examine the impact of EatWellNow on military service food purchases and dietary behaviors.