Inside Track: GE + UnitedLex = Big Savings? | Teaching Tomorrow's GCs
What do top law schools offer students in the way of preparation for in-house practice? Are there lessons in the legal spending habits at Starbucks and GE? And how should companies with operations in China handle employee device policies?
March 28, 2018 at 06:00 PM
10 minute read
Welcome to this week's edition of Inside Track. I'm Law.com in-house reporter Stephanie Forshee.
It was another busy week in the in-house world. We took a look at what some of the top law schools in the country have to offer their students in the way of preparation for in-house practice. We also got a look into legal spending habits at Starbucks and GE and asked how companies with operations in China should handle employee device policies.
If you have tips, story ideas or other feedback, email me at [email protected] or find me on Twitter: @InOtherNewsNow.
Want to receive Inside Track as an email? Sign up here.
|
What's Happening –
Educate Yourself. After Law.com released its 2018 Go-To Law Schools List, editor Rebekah Mintzer was confident these students were being prepped for firm life but wanted to see what the top five law schools had to offer future GCs.
Here's what she found out: The schools had some classes on in-house practice taught by big time GCs from places like JP Morgan and GE. “Taking a class with one of those people would truly be an awesome experience for any student,” she told me. “I want to be in that class myself!” (Same.) The schools also bring in legal department leaders to speak on campus on the regular. Another plus.
Does that mean law students are really prepared for in-house roles? Not necessarily. Rebekah observed that while there is in-house training, much of it “seemed to be catered more to the general population” rather than aspiring in-house lawyers. But why? “Although the idea of going in-house earlier in one's career seems to be getting more popular, it's still not popular enough to spur specific concentrations or tracks that are all in-house, all the time,” she said.
But…Rebekah's sources told her that there is a whole lot more available now for future GCs than a few decades ago.
Something Pricy Brewing. My colleague Caroline Spiezio chatted with Starbucks' legal ops boss this past week about how the coffee chain is looking at spending in legal. Starbucks' Lisa Kremer Brown recently led the charge for a comprehensive and formal assessment of inside and outside legal spend.
I was curious, though, is such an assessment something that only large Starbucks-esque legal departments are working on? I asked Marc Allen, senior director at HBR Consulting, for insight. In his opinion, any legal department with outside spend topping $10 million could stand to benefit from an assessment.
➤ He said there was a “big wave” of assessments of outside counsel spend during the Great Recession and we're now on a second wave as “corporate law departments analyze and execute on opportunities for continued cost and operational efficiencies.”
➤ Worth it? “Law departments really get to know their spend at a more granular level, which positions them to better manage that spend going forward,” Marc told me.
➤ He said “the law departments that are operating best-in-class outside counsel management programs are not looking at spend assessments as a single, one-time-only event, but rather a component of ongoing spend management.”
Digital Lawyering. This past week, GE and UnitedLex announced they had entered a multiyear contract to give GE access to the service provider's technology and resources. My colleague Sue Reisinger looked into how this partnership could reduce GE's legal spend.
Here are some main takeaways from her story.
➤ According to the announcement, legal spend is anticipated to decrease by 30 percent.
So how much are we talking? Well, the companies wouldn't publicly say, but a source familiar with the deal told our sibling pub The American Lawyer that spend could be reduced by about $40 to $50 million and as many as 75 in-house lawyers could be “repurposed.”
➤ Sue spoke with the GC at DXC, which already inked a massive agreement with UnitedLex last year. William Deckelman told her that he is “a believer.”
Before the UnitedLex deal, DXC had 525 lawyers. Now that number is 125, and another 225 “rebadged” and joined UnitedLex but still work with DXC. “We are doing the same amount of high-quality work with 40 percent fewer resources,” he told Sue. “The productivity is much greater than I even expected.”
What do you think, folks? Would love to hear your thoughts on these types of deals. Drop me a line…
Quote of the week –
“The Federal Circuit's opinion upholds fundamental principles of copyright law and makes clear that Google violated the law. This decision protects creators and consumers from the unlawful abuse of their rights.”
Oracle General Counsel Dorian Daley in a statement following Tuesday's ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that said Google could owe Oracle billions of dollars for using Java programming code in its Android operating system.
|
Social Butterflies –
Here's a look at what was said by and about general counsel on social media this week:
This week's question:
Digital messaging platforms like WeChat are becoming increasingly popular in China, even for work purposes. How should companies with a Chinese presence craft employee policies around privacy and device use to stay compliant with evolving Chinese laws?
Data privacy rules in China broadly require obtaining a data subject's informed consent before obtaining personal information from the data subject. As such, the data from an employee's WeChat account on a personal mobile device cannot be directly accessed by employers without an employee's consent. At the same time, the recently issued U.S. Department of Justice's FCPA Corporate Enforcement Policy makes “[a]ppropriate retention of business records, and prohibiting the improper destruction or deletion of business records, including prohibiting employees from using software that generates but does not appropriately retain business records or communications” one of the requirements for full remediation to be eligible for “mitigation credit” in a resolution.
Companies with employees in China should craft employee policies around privacy and device use with the following considerations in mind to stay compliant with rapidly evolving Chinese rules while maximizing their ability to preserve WeChat data, a potentially significant source of relevant information in an investigation:
➤ Update provisions in employment contracts and IT use policies. Because Chinese rules around data privacy have evolved quickly in recent years, employers should review and update provisions in employment contracts and IT use policies that give the company has the right to access, monitor, review, and disclose to third parties information on company-owned IT assets.
It is important to ensure that the policy is available in Chinese and to adopt the policy pursuant to the PRC Labor Contract Law. Placing prominent notices (in Chinese and any other working language) around the workplace and/or online can also help to mitigate risk of violating privacy rules in China.
➤ Conduct a communications risk assessment. Companies are starting to conduct communications risk assessments to understand the nature and extent that their employees in China use WeChat or other messaging platforms.
Based on the results of these assessments, companies then tailor their IT use policy to balance critical business priorities enabled by messaging with the need to ensure that communications can be accessed for investigative purposes, and if limitations (such as restrictions on transmitting sensitive information) or an outright prohibition is warranted.
➤ Request consent to collect data from mobile devices. As noted above, Chinese privacy rules make it difficult for companies to copy an employee's personal mobile device without consent. But many do give consent when asked, and sometimes data on those devices can be useful in investigations.
New Kind of Software. The former GC of IP management software company Lecorpio, Doug Luftman, will be stepping into a new role. He's diving into fintech, an area he told me he thinks has major growth potential. Luftman starts with Nomis Solutions on April 9.
Rolling Along. Lyft's former VP of government relations David Estrada just landed at electric scooter company Bird. Estrada will be the first chief legal officer for the company that helps people to locate and rent motorized scooters via app.
Second Act. There's a new legal chief at Miramax. Robert Osher will return to the company, after stepping away for more than a decade. He'll be the general counsel and chief operating officer of Miramax, which was founded by Harvey and Bob Weinstein.
Call Me On My Cell Phone. Swedish telecom company Ericsson announced Xavier Dedullen will be the next CLO and head of legal affairs & compliance. He replaces Nina Macpherson who is retiring at the end of the month.
|
Don't miss –
Tuesday, April 3. Global Leaders in Law will hold a roundtable in Tel Aviv titled “What Makes a Great Leader.” It will also hold a session on “Changing Corporate Culture” in Shanghai on Wednesday, April 11. GLL is an invitation-only membership group, offering GCs a global platform for in-person collaboration to exchange ideas and receive advice and guidance from peers. For more information, contact Meena Heath at [email protected].
Thursday, April 19. Corporate Counsel Forum Middle East is back. This year the Ritz-Carlton, Dubai will host a full day of peer to peer networking, discussions and interactive workshops on topics like competition law, leadership, cybersecurity, AI and fintech.
Sunday-Tuesday, April 29-May 1. The In-House Counsel World Summit in Toronto is themed: Beyond Borders: Business and Law in the Global Village. The Canadian Corporate Counsel Association's national conference is meant to embody the present and future of in-house counsel — both in Canada and abroad.
Thursday, May 17. Siblings Cornell Boggs, former GC at Toys R Us, and Paula Boggs, former Starbucks GC, will be discussing how they both ended up with a love for the in-house life during the 3rd Annual National Bar Association General Counsel Invitational event in New York. (Don't miss the Boggs' cute throwback photo below).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGlobal Lawyer: Big Law Walks a Tightrope But Herbert Smith Freehills Refuses to Lose Its Footing
8 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250