: Your mid-sized firm invested $500,000 recruiting four to five new students last year. By year five, 91 percent are gone. Your per-person investment was roughly $100,000 to $125,000. Add salary, training, and mentorship. Then they leave. The question worth asking is whether you hired the wrong people, or whether you didn’t integrate them. The data suggests the latter. When the National Association for Law Placement Foundation surveyed departing Canadian associates, 29 percent cited work quality concerns. Sixteen percent pointed to productivity standards they felt they weren’t meeting. Thirteen percent said the advancement path was unclear. Thirteen percent mentioned fit. Another . . . [more] The post Beyond Day One: The Onboarding System Firms Still Haven’t Built appeared first on Slaw
: This is the sixth article in my series on RECLAIM, a cultural operating system for law firms built on how human beings are actually wired. Having covered Respect , Equity, Clarity , Learning , and Autonomy , I turn this month to the I: Inclusion. A few years ago, I coached an associate in the real estate group of a large firm. She could have written a recruiting brochure for her team without exaggerating a word. The group did the biggest deals in the city, and they knew it. They were proud of the work, and prouder of how they . . . [more] The post RECLAIM: I Is for Inclusion appeared first on Slaw
: Over the past several years, artificial intelligence has moved steadily from the margins of organizational life toward the centre of ordinary operations. It now appears throughout the systems organizations rely upon and the work their people perform, frequently arriving without any deliberate decision to adopt it. For a growing number of organizations, the question is no longer whether artificial intelligence will appear in some form. It has already arrived, and that development carries real implications for boards of directors. I have spent a fair amount of my career in and around boardrooms, working on questions of corporate governance, non-profit governance, . . . [more] The post What the Minutes Show: Boards and the Governance of AI appeared first on Slaw
: UT ref: UA-2026-000083-PIP In the Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber 28 October 2026 Before: Stewart Wright Judge of the Upper Tribunal Between: LC -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Anonymity Order Appellant: LC Respondents: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Tribunal: First tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) Tribunal venue: Scarborough Tribunal Case Nos: SC231/24/00181 Tribunal decision date: 29 August 2025 NOTICE: Any breach of this order is liable to be treated as a contempt of court and may be punishable by imprisonment, fine or other sanctions under section 25 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The maximum punishment that may be imposed is a sentence of two years’ imprisonment or an unlimited fine. It is ordered , under rule 14(1)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal Rules) 2008, that, without the permission of this Tribunal, no one shall disclose or publish the name, or any part of the address, of the appellant in these proceedings or publish [...]