In-House Counsel at the UN: A Q&A With Alex Puutio
Alex Puutio spoke with Corporate Counsel about what exactly an attorney in his position does, some of the staffing challenges at the United Nations, and how technology helps in his day-to-day work. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
August 23, 2018 at 05:02 PM
6 minute read
Alex Puutio did not go to law school thinking about one day becoming a lawyer for the United Nations. His idea was to work his way up from an associate to partner at a traditional law firm in Scandinavia. However, he took an unexpected break from private practice to work for the U.N. in Thailand and liked it so much that he decided to stay. Fast-forward eight years and Puutio is working in New York as an attorney in the U.N. in the Department of Management, Procurement Division.
Teemu Alexander Puutio spoke with Corporate Counsel about how he started working at the U.N., what exactly an attorney in his position does and the legal technology at the U.N. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Corporate Counsel: What made you start working as an in-house attorney at the U.N.?
Puutio: My career started in Asia/Pacific. I was working in the Bangkok headquarters, which is the regional headquarters for the secretariat for all of Asia/Pacific. It was never my intention to work for the U.N. I kind of ended up here. I've enjoyed my time here, but it was never in the cards. I was supposed to be on a tenure track from a lawyer all the way up to partner back in Scandinavia. I was working for Roschier Attorneys. I had to take a break in service for two months and I took those two months to visit the U.N. office in Bangkok. I was there in the trade and investment division.
What are some of the responsibilities of your current role?
For some background, here in New York I believe I am three to four steps away from the secretary general's office. A lot of my work goes into helping out other entities with the contracts and transactions that we have in place and our experiences and in some cases giving legal advice from our office of legal affairs. For example, if a government wants taxes on something and we're supposed to be immune from them, we'll have to figure out what kind of paperwork we need and who do we need to show it to.
As the headquarters, we're the end of the funnel for the field missions. All of these peacekeeping missions we give a certain amount of flexibility in terms of how they arrange transactions and we typically do that based on roles. So there is a chief of a mission who can sign off on X amount, and then there is another person below him or her that can sign off on a lower amount. Whenever something happens for more than $200,000, they have to go all the way up the chain to headquarters to get approval, advice and, in some cases, practical implementation of that. That's a big part now that I've moved to headquarters.
In Bangkok, I was originating some of these requests and working on their end results. Here, it is as if you are internal compliance combined with financial audits combined with a little bit of strategy advice. That's rather unique. I believe the closest example would be a highly centralized decision-making body for an international conglomerate where the branches do have some reporting back on certain types of transactions. For me, that's the most exciting part because it's where I get to put the lawyer and the economist hat on to try to make sure we're getting the best value for our money and trying to abide to the principles of transparency and accountability.
The [other] part is mostly strategy. It could be engagement strategy, it could be product strategy. It could be the structuring of an investment vehicle or a supply chain strategy. Our clients, the missions, will ultimately have to come to us for vetting and approval of whatever they do. It is in everyone's interest if we're involved as early as possible. We do give a lot of strategy advice. We sit and talk with them about what the market looks like, how can we structure this so that you actually get what you need in the timeline and budget you require. That's a very interesting and exciting part of the work. That's something I didn't have in private practice.
In a corporate setting, an attorney is typically called in when something is on fire. I try to make sure that I'm as available as possible to make sure you don't have the kindling there. Once deals go through and once they're operationalized there is nothing that can go wrong because we've already given as much input as possible in the inception phase.
How many people do you work with?
In the current Department of Management we have about 200 to 300 people worldwide. I'm the only one with legal credentials in New York and I'm moving up the chain in a few months. Within the organization, no one really knows we exist unless they deal with us directly. Those who deal with us are very high up. Everyone else doesn't have a reason to engage with us unless something's gone really wrong on their project or if they're cooking up something that's worth billions of dollars.
In terms of people who do exactly what I do, there are 10 to 15 people working in different parts of the U.N.
What kinds of technology do you use?
We have back-end software that makes working with extremely complex orders easy. We might have orders in 50 to 60 different countries and they're all ordering and paying in different currency and without export control. We have software for that. In addition, we've created a lot of our own. When we go out to the market and try to seek legal tech, it could just as well come from any country. Some of the stuff you're better off making yourself because you get exactly what you want and you're not beholden to anyone.
In terms of the overall picture, we're a good five to six years late. All of us are struggling to cope with the fact that when we talk to our colleagues and friends and they show us all of the gadgets they have.
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
© 2024 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 AllGoogle Fails to Secure Long-Term Stay of Order Requiring It to Open App Store to Rivals
'Am I Spending Time in the Right Place?' SPX Technologies CLO Cherée Johnson on Living and Leading With Intent
9 minute read'It Was the Next Graduation': How an In-House Lawyer Became a Serial Entrepreneur
9 minute readRenee Meisel, GC of UnitedLex, on Understanding and Growing the Business
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1King & Spalding E-Discovery Director Jumps to Nebraska Women-Owned Firm
- 2Nation's Largest Utility Parts Ways With CLO Who Helped It Navigate Bribery Scandal
- 3Advocates Renew Campaign for Immigrant Right to Counsel in New York
- 4From ‘Unregulated’ to ‘A Matter of Great Concern’: PFAS Regulation under Biden
- 5Public Interest Lawyers in NY Fear Rollback of Federal Loan Assistance in '25, Ask Gov. to Add $4M to State Program
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