A partner at Reed Smith has sent an impassioned plea for all London associates and trainees to attend the firm's Christmas party.

Real Estate lawyer Andrew Jenkinson sent the desperate email during the week of the party, requesting that as many junior lawyers attend "if only for a swift one".

Explaining the true meaning of Christmas, Jenkinson said that associates were wrong to think the event isn't for them as Reed Smith is "one firm and one office whether we are business or legal services".

Channeling everyone's dad at the Christmas discotheque he also described the party as an opportunity to "share some fun".

"And yes I will be asking the partners to lead by example", he confirmed, risking a boycott.

Reed Smith

"The popularity of Reed Smith's office Xmas party has declined in recent years, but I didn't think it was this bad" a source told RollOnFriday. "How many other law firms literally beg their staff to attend a party?"

A spokesman for the firm said "Testament to Andrew’s strong leadership I can confirm that his rallying cry led to a well-attended Christmas party. Over 300 people attended.”


 

The Pied Piper of Reed Smith tempts junior lawyers to attend


It can be tricky for firms to strike the right balance between a dismal party and an overly refreshed one. If you've been to a firm's bash at either end of the scale, do tell RollOnFriday.

Tip Off ROF

Related News

This Week’s News

Comments

Sumoking 13 December 19 08:01

contrast

"one firm and one office whether we are business or legal services"

with 

"this is one of the few opportunities we have to share some fun with our colleagues" 

 

Grinch 13 December 19 08:35

I suspect male partners will be on their best behaviour at this years' Christmas parties, with the highly publicised cases where they have fallen short in their behaviour recently.....not least a certain [redacted by ROF] global head who was well known for shamelessly smooching the young ladies on the dance floor most years (save for the years he was banished to the middle east following "the pregnancy").

Anonymous 13 December 19 08:38

Cannot comment about Reed Smith as I've never worked there, but I've been to my fair share of poorly attended firm events.  It is sad for those that organise events when no lawyers turn up.  The events just end up getting canned the following year.  It's the same lawyers who then smash the firms on ROF for not putting on anything social and having a poor office morale.  If you want a firm to have a good atmosphere you need to take some responsibility for it yourself.   

No-name 13 December 19 08:59

Come on ROF, is there really no news out there that this is all you could find this to report on? Pity the weirdo at Reed Smith who sent it on.

Party Time 13 December 19 10:14

No need for concern, I have posted this on facebook and told people it is definitely invitation only and not to tell anyone else. Cue 6,000 teenagers to smash the place. No need to thank me.

Grinch 13 December 19 13:20

Yes there is evidence anon 1022. Put an email address you can access on this thread and I will email you the video taken on iphone from last years bash where you can see the shameless smooching   

Anonymous 13 December 19 14:01

You don't need peoples' personal details Grinch to share it if the evidence exists. You would need to make sure all the alleged smoochers know that you're filming your colleagues kissing and posting the results online and get their permission first though or redact the footage. That would only evidence part of your claim however, the rest would remain unsubstantiated.

Anonymous 13 December 19 15:01

Was there really any need for both the expressions "swift one" and "quick scoop" to appear? Are these the drink choices of rival Reed Smith clans?

Anonymous 13 December 19 15:26

While this seems to be the Nuremberg trials defence, it seems the partner was just following orders.

Anonymous 13 December 19 15:56

Not clear how such a video, if it exists, would be evidence of your claims Grinch.

Grinch 16 December 19 13:53

Anon 1401, it was not me who made the video. Neither was the focus of the person who made the video the partner smooching the associate,  it is however very apparent in the shot as the video pans across the dance floor. So your attempt to paint the person who made the video and caught the indiscretion as a voyeur won’t work. And I don’t know what law school you went to, but I can assure you that you do not need the permission of anyone to record the Christmas party on your phone. 

Anonymous 17 December 19 08:52

One can see how male partners might be reluctant to attend events if they are open to being spied on, gossiped about or possibly even made the subject of a false accusation. There needs to be a way where everyone can safely enjoy themselves.

Anonymous 17 December 19 11:32

Your latest comment still doesn't answer the questions Grinch: 1) are your colleagues aware that they were being filmed and that you are offering to share the alleged footage? and 2) how would the footage, if it exists, substantiate your original comment at 8.35 on 13th December?

Grinch 18 December 19 03:20

Anon 1132, you repeatedly ask for evidence that the partner had acted in an inappropriate manner and when it is offered you feign moral outrage that someone took clips at the Christmas party on the iphone. In fact, lots of people take photos and video clips at the office parties. No one asks “consent”. Be careful what you wish for as you might just get it. The point is no partner should be acting in a manner which brings embarrassment or more to that partner or his or her firm at the office parties. Your repeated bot like requests for “evidence” on every story where this type of theme comes up over the last few weeks on ROF, when you must know that ROF will have to redact further details to protect themselves and so that evidence can’t be given in this forum, makes me wonder if you are a management figure at one of the firms facing criticism over its handling of one of these incidents.

Anonymous 18 December 19 10:45

Grinch, you still haven't answered the questions: 1) are your colleagues aware that they were being filmed and that you are offering to share the alleged footage? and 2) how would the footage, if it exists, substantiate your original comment at 8.35 on 13th December?

You haven't offered any evidence of your allegations,  which feign moral outrage. You also appear cavalier with the notion of "consent" when it comes to filming of your colleagues without their permission.

Anonymous 18 December 19 11:04

@Grinch - your repetition of a ludicrous sounding story over the last few weeks without any evidence to support it, and a refusal to provide evidence when asked, despite evidence being easy to provide, makes me wonder if you are trying to get someone sacked so that you might get a promotion.

Anon 18 December 19 11:27

Grinchs’ message seems fair comment to me Anon 1132. You cannot repeatedly demand evidence and then criticise him or her when he or she says there is some and he or she says it can be provided.

I noticed too 18 December 19 11:48

I noticed too Grinch that there is indeed an individual (or maybe more than one) who over the past couple of months keeps demanding evidence, sometimes with 10 or more messages in each post, in response to every ROF story and comment relating to examples of bad behaviour by male partners. I am all for due process Anon and get the point that is being made, but it is tiresome Anon when the bleating goes on and on. Grinch has evidence it seems and then you criticise him or him for offering to provide it to you, presumably so you will be able to take a look and then hopefully put a sock in your megaphone (from what I can tell, Grinch was not threatening to release it generally but in reply to your request, said it can be provided to you if you leave an email address).

Grinch 18 December 19 12:29

Anon, I clearly cannot provide evidence on this thread as ROF will not allow it to be posted. Leave an email address you can access (and that no one else can access) and I will ensure it gets to you. 

Anonymous 18 December 19 13:07

What Grinch is offering isn't evidence because it wouldn't  substantiate their allegations even if it existed 11.27. Grinch has also failed to say whether their colleagues knew that they were being secretly recorded and agreed to Grinch sharing the footage.

Anonymous 18 December 19 13:17

If you're all for due process, 11.48, then you'll recognise the importance of substantiating allegations and realise that allegations of bad behaviour by male partners isn't the same as 'examples of bad behaviour by male partners'. There would be no need to request evidence if it was provided, but don't be under any illusion that what Grinch is offering in any way constitutes evidence of their allegations.

Anonymous 18 December 19 13:49

Grinch, what you're offering still isn't evidence. You also still don't say if your colleagues were aware they were being secretly filmed or that you are proposing to share it. You don't exactly inspire confidence with regards to sharing email addresses!

Please provide evidence to substantiate your allegations of a global head 'smooching most years' and being 'shipped off to the middle east' available to anyone reading your allegations. Failure to do so means your allegations can't be believed given that you've been asked multiple times to substantiate your allegations but have consistently failed to do so.

Grinch 18 December 19 14:06

There was no secret recording Anon, there are a number of people apparent in the clip taking pictures of eachother and at least one other person apparent in the video herself taking a video on her phone of her colleagues having fun at the party. It’s quite a normal thing to do and there is nothing sinister about it. People post pics on their Facebook and Instagram of parties all the time. The firm itself released pics of the party. Anyone looking at the video would conclude immediately I am sure that the person taking the video was not spying on the smoochy partner (who anyway made no attempt to hide his actions), it is just caught in the background as the video pans. I have no intention as another poster also observed of “releasing it” other than to you. And only to you because you keep on shrieking for “evidence”. So give your email and I will send it to you. 

Hmm 18 December 19 14:23

Anon @1349, many reading this thread would conclude that you either are the partner Grinch alludes to or are trying to protect him. I have no idea of what Grinch suggests is true but if that is the case, the story is meaningless to everyone so best just drop it. Rollonfriday will not allow evidence to be posted identifying who it is or more detail. 

Anonymous 18 December 19 14:24

That wouldn't be evidence of your allegations though Grinch. You haven't provided proof that your colleagues knew they were being filmed and don't object to you sharing the footage. You won't be getting an email address or any personal details, I would advise anyone you ask not to provide them to you.

You still haven't provided evidence to substantiate your allegations of a global head 'smooching most years' and being 'shipped off to the middle east', made available to anyone reading your allegations. If you can't it's because they're not true!

Anonymous 18 December 19 15:25

@Hmm - many would conclude that you are Grinch or trying to protect the accuser. Roll on Friday do allow more detail to be posted if it doesn't identify individuals, that isn't the reason Grinch won't provide it. As you say, without evidence the accusations are meaningless so best to drop them or not raise them in the first place.

Hmm 19 December 19 12:55

I can assure you I am not Grinch Anon so best direct your accusations about the original story to him or her. Be careful not to develop paranoia that anyone who disagrees with you “must be the Grinch”. Like I said if you read my post I don’t know whether the accusations are true or not. I am however puzzled why you have this overwhelming desire to constantly challenge the story, attack and question the motives of every poster who has a different view to you and demand evidence constantly (which as you know cannot be provided on this post). I will let other readers (if there are any left) form their own views about who you might be. Have a good Christmas and I hope you get over your obsession with the Grinch.

Anonymous 19 December 19 16:19

Hmm - it's probably due to your paranoia in suspecting anyone doubting Grinch's tale must be the accused partner or trying to protect him. There are no comments attacking people for having different views. As you say, you don't know if the accusations are true or not, and as you say, without evidence they are meaningless. As you know, not having evidence is not the same as not being able to provide it. Other readers may as a result have lost interest but I'll let any remaining form their own views about who you might be. Merry Christmas to you too and better luck next time.

Hmm 20 December 19 08:16

You protest about the story an awful lot for someone who is not involved I must say. I wonder why. Are you just a random Guy who came across it? You are not a global group head by any chance who spent some time in Dubai?