{1}
##LOC[OK]##
{1}
##LOC[OK]##
##LOC[Cancel]##
{1}
##LOC[OK]##
##LOC[Cancel]##
Register
|
Login
The News
Inside Info
Jobs
Training Contracts
Blogs
Discussion
Useful Stuff
My Profile
About Us
Cookies
UK Firm of the Year
Aussie Firm of the Year
UK City Firms
UK Regional Firms
Aussie Firms
Firm of the Year Stories
Your Firm
>
Inside Info
>
Law Firm Europe News
Follow RoF
For all the breaking news, follow RoF on Twitter and Facebook
Asia-Pacific
Check out this week's top Asia-Pacific news on the
Asia Pacific Headline
page.
Law Firm News Stories
DAC Beachcroft understood to have suspended lawyers for email misuse
21 September 2012
Rate it
0
DAC Beachcroft
has suspended a number of lawyers for unacceptable use of email, according to an insider source.
RollOnFriday has been told that DACB has launched an investigation into the use of the firm's email system by staff members. According to the source, the firm has been reviewing certain email accounts, including those belonging to staff thought to be spending too much time on office 'banter'. Anyone deemed to have stepped over the line is reportedly whisked into a meeting room to explain themselves. The firm refused to comment on claims that a number of fee-earners have been suspended as a result over recent weeks, pending a further meeting with HR to decide their fate.
Inappropriate use of email yesterday
A spokeswoman for the firm would only say:
"In exceptional circumstances it may be necessary to search the e-mail archive. This search will only be initiated at the request of a partner (or support group head) to the Head of IT
". She added that anyone in breach of the rules on acceptable email conduct would be subject to disciplinary proceedings.
Obviously the newly-minted DAC Beachcroft is a lot less forgiving of employees' indiscretions than legacy
"arse-beer"
Beachcroft.
<
Previous Story
Next Story
>
Comments
Feel free to enter your comments on the news story below, subject to our
terms and conditions.
Please note that comments are subject to moderation and so will not appear immediately.
Please keep it nice. Thanks.
Order By:
Date
Rating
anonymous user
21/09/2012 06:46
Rate it
52
Report as offensive
Law firm in cynical ploy to discipline staff it might want to ditch in the future if things don't pick up non-shocka.
anonymous user
21/09/2012 07:20
Rate it
7
Report as offensive
Golden turd 2013?
anonymous user
21/09/2012 12:12
Rate it
33
Report as offensive
Laing O'Rouke successfully got rid of about 100 people last year in one such similar email sweep (rude jokes, images etc).
Soft targets
anonymous user
21/09/2012 14:18
Rate it
58
Report as offensive
Yep just a way of cutting numbers without having to pay redundancy.
Despicable.
anonymous user
23/09/2012 06:37
Rate it
-1
Report as offensive
Spellbound 4 Buzz
Lydia
25/09/2012 09:21
Rate it
-4
Report as offensive
So much nicer to work for yourself.
Soe might be staring into space doing nothing (no penalty) and some office banter. I am not sure there is much difference.
anonymous user
26/09/2012 13:48
Rate it
4
Report as offensive
Captain Spaulding ; )
anonymous user
27/09/2012 06:27
Rate it
-1
Report as offensive
When a firm struggling to maintain its PPM merges with a firm with a lower PPM, the results are predictable.
anonymous user
09/10/2012 11:37
Rate it
3
Report as offensive
Because we know that Beachcroft don't "do" redundancies do they ?
Bet they've been trawling through the Clin Neg dept PCs in Manchester as they've managed to bring in about £10 and a bag of marbles between them since arriving (DOA) from Halliwells.
anonymous user
09/10/2012 20:50
Rate it
3
Report as offensive
Is this the new Beachcroft approach for getting rid of staff rather than their traditional method of overloading caseloads to breaking point? They must have finally learnt that only leads to stress sickness liabilities.
anonymous user
11/10/2012 14:25
Rate it
1
Report as offensive
The word on the street is that the DAC merger was a merger too far and Beachcroft have bitten off more than they can chew and are struggling. Call me cynical but this does appear to be redundancy in disguise (and cheaper).