Minnesota Law Review

Lawyers, Not Widgets: Why Private-Sector Attorneys Must Unionize to Save the Legal Profession

The Article argues that practical labor issues and ethical issues are inherently intertwined in the legal profession. Despite the widespread acknowledgment that there is an underlying tension between how private practice is conducted and the values lawyers hold, the issue of how to remedy modern legal practice ethically is misunderstood and often analyzed on a rule-by-rule or individualized basis. This approach misclassifies the core of this problem as resting in individual action. As a result, it impedes meaningful creative problem-solving. Instead, the Article applies the framework of new institutionalism—widely and fruitfully used in the sociological and economic literature—to legal practice and legal ethics.

Applying this theory reveals that the ethical crisis at the heart of the current private practice system is an institutional and systemic flaw, rather than one in the purview of any one individual, bar association, or even firm. The inevitable tension between the conscious acts—or inaction—of individual lawyers and the institutional norms of private practice that facilitate unethical behavior have led to an ethical crisis. Understood institutionally, one can begin to craft meaningful and workable solutions to restore a sense of professionalism, agency, and integrity to the legal workplace. The question changes from, “how can individual lawyers act ethically,” to “how do lawyers change the institution itself to compel ethical behavior?”

The Article argues that only a structural change in firm institutions, a seismic shift, can reorder the legal workplace to being one conducive to professionally responsible practice. Past solutions, such as piecemeal amendments to the Model Code of Professional Responsibility, or relying on firms and individuals to self-police, are ineffective. Similarly, banishing the billable hour is neither pragmatic nor likely. Agreements between lawyers regarding pay are antitrust violations. Labor discussions between individual lawyers and their firms reflect extreme leverage inequalities, lack enforceability, and are subject to client and economic pressures to be competitive with other firms. As such, the Article proposes the only remaining alternative: private-sector attorneys should unionize, not only to change their own lives and working conditions, but also to uphold their ethical obligations as lawyers.

:: View PDF

De Novo

  • Case Comment: Bhogaita v. Altamonte

    EVERY DOG CAN HAVE HIS DAY IN COURT: THE USE OF ANIMALS AS DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS Kyle R. Kroll, Volume 100, Online Managing Editor In Bhogaita v. Altamonte, the Eleventh Circuit recently decided whether to allow a dog in the courtroom as a demonstrative exhibit.[1] Although the case presented many serious [...]

  • Revisiting Water Bankruptcy

    REVISITING WATER BANKRUPTCY IN CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH YEAR OF DROUGHT Olivia Moe, Volume 100, Managing Editor This spring, as “extreme” to “exceptional” drought stretched across most of California—indicating that a four-year streak of drought was not about to resolve itself[1]—Governor Jerry Brown issued an unprecedented order to reduce potable urban water [...]

  • Defying Auer Deference

    DEFYING AUER DEFERENCE: SKIDMORE AS A SOLUTION TO CONSERVATIVE CONCERNS IN PEREZ v. MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION Nicholas R. Bednar, Volume 100, Lead Articles Editor* On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association.[1]F The Court overturned the D.C. [...]