Lawyers Representing Their Own Employees: Ethical Or Not?

Lawyers may represent themselves or their employees in certain situations, but it is not always advisable due to potential conflicts of interest. In the case of Empire State Towing and Recovery Association, Inc. vs. Commissioner of Labor, an attorney, Peter O'Connell, was deemed an employee by the New York Court of Appeals, despite operating his own law firm. This determination was based on the level of control exerted by Empire State Towing, for whom O'Connell also performed administrative services as their executive director. While this case demonstrates that lawyers can be considered employees in certain contexts, it is important to note that conflicts of interest may arise when a lawyer represents themselves or their employees, particularly in situations where there is existing antagonism between the parties involved. In such cases, it may be challenging to adequately serve the interests of all clients and maintain client-lawyer confidentiality.

Conflict of interest

For example, a lawyer may not act as an advocate in one matter against a person they represent in another matter, even if the matters are unrelated, without the informed consent of each client. This is because the client is likely to feel betrayed, and the resulting damage to the client-lawyer relationship is likely to impair the lawyer's ability to represent the client effectively.

Similarly, a conflict may arise when a lawyer is required to cross-examine a client who appears as a witness in a lawsuit involving another client, as when the testimony will be damaging to the client who is represented in the lawsuit. In such cases, the lawyer must obtain the informed consent of the client.

A conflict of interest can also arise when a lawyer simultaneously represents parties whose interests in litigation may conflict, such as co-plaintiffs or co-defendants. This could occur due to a substantial discrepancy in the parties' testimony, incompatibility in positions in relation to an opposing party, or significantly different possibilities of settlement of the claims or liabilities in question.

In determining whether a conflict of interest exists, a lawyer should adopt reasonable procedures, appropriate for the size and type of firm and practice, to identify the persons and issues involved in both litigation and non-litigation matters. If a conflict arises after representation has begun, the lawyer must ordinarily withdraw from the representation unless they have obtained the informed consent of the client.

It is important to note that a lawyer's conflict of interest is generally imputed to the entire law firm, and one attorney's conflict of interest can have serious consequences for both the lawyer and the client.

Employee rights

Employees have a range of rights that are protected under federal and state laws. These rights encompass various aspects of the employment relationship, including wages, working hours, and working conditions. For instance, employees are entitled to a 30-minute uninterrupted meal break for every 30 hours worked, and issues surrounding this right, such as meal break waivers, have been the subject of recent litigation. Employees also have rights pertaining to overtime pay, minimum wage, and compensation packages, as outlined in the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Another critical area of employee rights relates to workplace discrimination and harassment. Federal and state civil rights laws, such as those in Florida, prohibit discrimination based on age, gender, race, nationality, sex, pregnancy, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, and sexual identity. Employees are protected from discrimination or harassment on any of these grounds, and they are also safeguarded from retaliation if they raise complaints about such issues.

Employment lawyers assist employees in understanding and enforcing their rights. They can help employees determine if their rights have been violated and advise them on the options for legal recourse. These lawyers are adept at navigating the complex web of employment laws and can provide valuable insights into specific areas, such as medical leave, the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), disability law, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Additionally, employment lawyers can facilitate dispute resolution between employers and employees. They can explain the rights and duties of both sides and work towards a mutually agreeable solution, preventing the need for costly litigation. This collaborative approach fosters a more harmonious relationship between the parties and can help maintain a positive work environment.

Employer rights

An employer's rights are distinct from an employee's rights. While an employee may need a lawyer to help them navigate employment-related problems, an employer may also need a lawyer to handle employment disputes.

An employer may need to consult an employment lawyer in the following situations:

• When an employee has hired a lawyer to represent them against the employer.
• When an employer is facing serious claims that could result in large awards of damages.
• When other employees or former employees have made similar allegations.
• When an employee has indicated that they intend to file a lawsuit.
• When an employer is planning to lay off some workers, change pension plans, or discontinue an employee benefit.
• When an employer is facing classification issues that could affect a large portion of the workforce and increase liability.

It is important to note that employment law can change rapidly, and courts and government agencies may issue new opinions that interpret these laws differently. Therefore, it is advisable for employers to seek legal expertise to ensure they are complying with the latest regulations and to protect themselves from potential conflicts of interest.

Attorney classification

In the Empire State Towing case, Peter O'Connell, an attorney with a law practice in Albany, New York, was hired by the Empire State Towing and Recovery Association for legal and lobbying services. The association represented towing firms, and O'Connell's role extended beyond legal services as he also served as the association's executive director. This dual role raised questions about his employment status. While O'Connell maintained his independence, had his own law office, and set his own schedule, he also performed administrative tasks for the association, maintained a bank account with check-writing authority, and had an assistant provided by the association.

The New York Court of Appeals ultimately ruled that O'Connell was an employee of the Empire State Towing Association, which had implications for unemployment insurance assessments. This case underscores the importance of attorney classification, particularly when it comes to the financial obligations of employers and the rights of employees. Misclassification of employees can lead to costly lawsuits for businesses, as they may be held liable for denying employees their rightful wages, benefits, and protections under employment laws.

To avoid misclassification and the associated legal consequences, businesses often seek the expertise of labor and employment attorneys. These attorneys guide companies in properly classifying their workers, ensuring compliance with state and federal laws. For example, Mohsen Parsa, a labor and management classification attorney in California, assists small businesses in navigating contract laws, labor laws, and employee classification regulations. California, known for its stringent employee classification laws, has implemented the AB5 legislation to address the misclassification of full-time employees as independent contractors.

In summary, attorney classification is a critical aspect of the legal profession, impacting both attorneys and their clients or employers. Proper classification of attorneys as employees or independent contractors helps prevent legal disputes, ensures compliance with labor laws, and safeguards the rights and benefits entitled to employees. Labor and employment attorneys play a pivotal role in helping businesses navigate the complexities of attorney classification, thereby reducing potential liabilities and fostering harmonious relationships between attorneys and their employers.

Attorney-client privilege

In the corporate context, the attorney-client privilege typically exists between outside counsel and the corporation. The company is considered the lawyer's "client" and, as such, the company "owns" the privilege. This means that the company can decide whether and when to waive the privilege. Attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between a company's lawyers and its employees for the purpose of seeking or providing legal advice. This includes communications with current and former employees, as long as they relate to the employee's conduct, knowledge, or communication with counsel during their employment.

However, when a lawyer represents multiple clients, conflicts of interest may arise. In such cases, the lawyer must identify the conflict, determine whether they can still undertake the representation, and obtain informed consent from the affected clients. It is important to note that if two parties are represented by the same lawyer in a single legal matter, neither client can assert attorney-client privilege against the other in subsequent litigation related to the same subject matter.

Additionally, the application of attorney-client privilege can become less clear when dealing with in-house counsel, as they often wear multiple hats within a company. While the privilege would extend to any legal advice rendered, it typically does not protect strictly business-related communications. Courts may examine the role of in-house counsel and the content of the communication to determine whether the privilege applies.

Frequently asked questions