Law Firm Leadership: Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way

This article originally appeared in the November 2018 issue of ABA Law Practice Today. You can read this article, and many more law practice management articles at: ABA Law Practice Today


Law firms need leadership, and not everyone at the firm is going to contribute. We know that. But every successful law firm needs inspiring leadership to be the voice of the vision and guide others to move forward into an uncertain future.


Understanding the Difference Between Leaders and Managers

People are often confused about the difference between leaders and managers. This is understandable, as there can be overlap in responsibilities where one or more people at a law firm have multiple responsibilities. However, just because you are in management doesn’t make you a leader.

Steven Covey aptly described the difference: “The leader is the one who climbs the tallest tree, surveys the entire situation, and yells, ‘Wrong jungle!’ … Busy, efficient producers and managers often respond … ‘Shut up! We’re making progress!’”

A successful law firm needs both leadership and management. Here is a quick breakdown:


  • Operations
  • Reporting and finance
  • Infrastructure and technology
  • Marketing
  • Business development
  • Hiring and retention
  • Professional development
  • Risk and compliance
  • Case management


  • Create and shape the vision
  • Socialize the vision throughout the organization and get buy-in
  • Identify and anticipate trends in their industry
  • Identify and anticipate changes in the political and economic environment
  • Understand their clients’ journey
  • Validate all of the above back into the vision and course-correct when appropriate

In short, managers direct their staff to make the horse buggy whips, the fastest, cheapest, or highest quality, as dictated by their pricing model. It is up to leaders to determine when it’s a good time to stop making whips for horse buggies and transition into something different.


A Law Firm is a Business

Equity partners in law firms need to recognize that they are business owners. As business owners, their primary measure of success is client satisfaction that translates into a sustainable, profitable and ethical business. Too often, lawyers start with the premise that they are in a profession that is capable of generating fees, so, therefore, they must have a business. The perspective of law firm leaders must distinguish the legal services capabilities from the business itself. A law firm is more than just putting a wrapper around attorneys that bill for legal services—a law firm is a business that has identified a need in the market and is able to solve problems for their clients through the delivery of legal services.

To recall the buggy whip analog, leaders must look outwardly to read the tea leaves of where the market is going. When corporations began to push back on the cost of legal services by dividing up their legal work across several law firms to get them to compete on price, the market spoke. Big law firms that previously had little economic incentive to push for efficiency in a billable hour model were now forced to reckon with increased competition and efficiency. When clients pushed for flat-fee and price-certain fees, law firm leaders had to respond with a change to their business model to compete for client business.


Benchmarking Other Businesses

To look for changes in the marketplace, leaders often look to their peers to see what they are doing. Benchmarking peers is valuable in assessing your own position relative to your market, but it doesn’t necessarily indicate when or how the market is going to change. You may be comforted by being positioned safely in the middle of the flock, but it does not position you to be an innovator or a first-mover. When change happens, you will be responding from a reactionary posture.

Leaders who look to other industries to evaluate macro-trends would be well served. Looking for analogs in other industries and anticipating how those innovations are changing customers buying behaviors and expectations for service delivery will be leading from a pro-active posture. Leaders also look inward at their own clients and have candid conversations about where their firm, and the industry in general, is falling short of changing expectations.


Clients as the Ultimate Validation of a Business

Viewing the client journey as a valid and valued perspective can reveal a much different picture of your law firm. Think about the typical complaints that attorneys make about their clients: they call too often; they don’t understand the complexities of the statutes; they have no clue about how long litigation takes; they complain about the cost, and they don’t appreciate how busy you are with other clients.

Leaders in today’s law firms understand that these client views are not interruptions or inconveniences to their business—they are the business. As soon as clients find law firms that understand the client journey and value the expectations in a changing service model, one law firm will have lost a client and another firm will have gained one.


Developing Leadership in a Law Firm

Hungry, motivated, and productive attorneys in a productivity model law firm will most likely follow the cheese. Your “A” players will be rewarded for their productivity on casework and revenue generation. Generally, the next level “ask” of the attorney is to make firm contributions to new client acquisition in the form of business development. Here is where firms must decide between the carrot and the stick: 1) “It’s easy money if you bring in the clients” or 2) “It’s required if you want to be successful with us.” While client acquisition benefits the entire firm, it is still closely related to the core delivery of legal services for that respective practice area.

The next level “ask” often is for the attorney to help make the firm better for others. This can come in the form of general marketing, speaking engagements, volunteering with legal or community associations, mentoring, recruiting, internal training, strategic planning, special projects, process improvement, automation, management meetings, and even social media promotions for the firm. One measure of a firm’s commitment to building leadership is the extent to which those services are recognized and compensated.


Greed is Good

At smaller firms, attorneys out of necessity must balance client work with firm-building. Client work generally takes the higher priority to the detriment of firm-building. At larger firms, professionals with firm-building expertise do not have to be attorneys with divided responsibilities for both, however, management needs to find ways to bring in attorneys with case-load experience as valuable stakeholders and tap into their leadership insights and capabilities.

It is disingenuous to simultaneously ask your team to meet and exceed revenue goals while not properly compensating them for participation in firm leadership. Arguably, firm leadership could be one of the highest-paid activities at a law firm. Its contributions have the greatest potential impact on whether a law firm dies, survives or thrives. If the very existence of a law firm depends on executive skills to read the market and adapt for the future, the compensation of leadership should be commensurate with market-based compensation of similar revenue-producing and risk-based businesses in other industries.


Leadership Succession Planning

Another measure of leadership in a law firm is the quality and commitment to succession planning. Often a much-talked-about, back-burner issue, succession planning also could be viewed as an indicator of the current quality of leadership. The activity of succession planning in and of itself necessarily shifts the conversation from individual-based to role-based. The professional development of internal future leaders is an act of firm growth as well as an ongoing selection process for future leaders. High-performing leaders in law firms can mask the lack of preparedness, because the impact of a key departure may be difficult to measure until it has already happened. One proactive measure in this space is the degree to which strategic decisions get made in isolation. If firm-building leadership activities are highly consolidated, then tactical decision-making may be bottlenecked and could be a red flag for succession planning preparedness.


Summing It All Up

Leadership in law firms today requires a vision that embraces facing challenges at a faster pace than previous generations. Today’s leadership must navigate challenges to the billable-hour model that increase transparency on the measures of quality and cost of legal service delivery. Today’s leadership must adapt to a new generation of lawyers that may have different attitudes about compensation, mobility, teamwork, and authority. Today’s leadership must have a vision that accounts for the irreversible impact of technology on how legal services are valued, managed and delivered. That vision must be forward-looking in dealing with developments in artificial intelligence that are widening the gap between the tech haves and have-nots.

Today’s law firm leaders get to decide how they develop, shape and socialize their vision to attorneys who are working heads-down on cases, as well as their openness for input into the vision, and ultimately, whether to weed out those that are not fully aligned with the firm’s vision. It’s a choice.

So lead, follow or get out of the way.


About the Author

Josh Kalish is a leader at The Noble Law Firm, an employment litigation law firm in North Carolina.

Posted in Noble Notes |

NC Employment Lawyer Laura Noble Discusses #MeToo Movement With USA Today


CHAPEL HILL, N.C., Oct. 5, 2018 – Laura Noble, partner of The Noble Law Firm, was featured in USA Today’s article, “#MeToo one year later: Cosby, Moonves fall, sex harassment fight at work far from over.” As the first wave of cases filed in the #MeToo era reach their days in court, the article addresses the impact of the movement on society’s perception of sexual harassment in the workplace.

“I think the next 12, 18 months, when these verdicts come back… we’ll have a better sense of where the public really is, on whether there has been a social shift and mindset in how we deal with sexual harassment victims,” Noble noted.

In the final three months of 2017, The Noble Law Firm saw a 500% increase in calls about sexual harassment. While the movement has raised significant awareness of an issue often swept under the rug, Noble commented that #MeToo has not necessarily resulted in an easier path for women to get legal help.

In the year since the onset of the #MeToo movement, laws have been passed in states like California and New York to mandate training and build awareness. Businesses have been quicker to address the issue and make changes, with companies like Microsoft and Facebook altering their corporate sexual harassment policies.

While the #MeToo movement has dominated the media for the past year, outdated laws and lack of legal protections have made it difficult for the movement to gain traction in the courtroom. While many people expected a more prompt response from state and federal lawmakers, only a handful of states have made strides toward positive change.

Noble, along with partners Nicholas Sanservino and Katie Abernethy, have responded to this movement by conducting a 50 state review of sexual harassment laws including federal law Title VII. The assessment provides an overview of the legal protections for sexual harassment in the workplace and identifies gaps in the laws leaving more than 8 million people unprotected. This 50 state report will include recommendations for improving sexual harassment protections for employees at the state and federal levels. The firm will release the report in the next two weeks.

Read the full article from USA Today here.

Posted in Noble Notes |

Laura Noble Sits Down With Emily Martin, National Women’s Law Center’s General Counsel at the 2018 Annual NELA Convention in Chicago; Pt. 2


Our attorneys recently attended the National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA) annual conference in Chicago. This year’s conference featured breakout sessions on “#MeToo: Hot Topics and Emerging Trends in Harassment Legislation,” “Don’t Be Afraid to Lose,” and the indispensable “Year in Review: Significant Developments in Employment Law.”

 One of the panelists for the “#MeToo: Hot Topics and Emerging Trends in Harassment Legislation” discussion was the dynamic Emily Martin, General Counsel and Vice President for Education for the National Women’s Law Center. I sat down with her for an informal discussion on her incredible

career, what drives her and the NWLC and what still needs to be changed as we move forward.


Part two of my interview with Martin continues below:


Noble: I have railed against Title VII in private and public sectors for a while. For the National Women’s Law Center, if you have to target three or

Laura Noble (left) & Emily Martin at the 2018 NELA Conference in Chicago, IL

five things that you can change – What are you looking at?

Martin: I would love to hear actually your input because this is the sort of moment where we are answering that question.  It’s some of the things that we have been talking about with lawmakers and with our coalition partners. Our coverage … not everyone is covered by Title VII. There are big chunks of employees who are not covered, which, I think is shocking to the person on the street – that federal law doesn’t have anything to say for a sexually harassed person who works for a company with only ten employees.


Noble: If you are in the state of North Carolina there is no state law. There is literally no way for you to get redress if you are sexually harassed and then fired for complaining about it.

Martin: Exactly.


Noble: In North Carolina, if you work for an employer with less than fifteen employees…it is shocking.

Martin: People are shocked when they learn that is the case. By the way if you know of individuals who might want to talk to the press about how they have no remedy, there are journalists who would love to tell that story.


Noble: I will definitely keep that in mind.

Martin: Independent contractors except for a very few states…you can call the police if there is a criminal issue and we can work on your tort law case, but the web of protections that we have created to address sexual harassment doesn’t cover you. We also have been thinking a lot about how to bring more transparency to the issue of harassers so employers aren’t empowered to impose secrecy and keep serial harassers on the job forever, while finding victims of secrecy over and over again. When we do things on the front-end of nondisclosure agreements that appear to reach harassment allegations – they should be explicitly invalid. I think the issues around nondisclosure and settlement are more complicated but I don’t think the status quo is the right answer. So, we have been talking to a lot of practitioners and lawmakers about ways to shift that balance, so, the confidentiality can’t be part of the price of any sort of remedy for victims of harassment. There are creative ideas that people in the state and federal level are working through about ways in which employers have to disclose settlements. For example, Senator Harris in California and Senator Murkowski introduced an act, a month ago or so called “EMPOWER Act” which among other things would require publicly traded companies to disclose to shareholders number of harassment settlements and judgements whether or not they were against the same person in the company. To just bring some sunlight even into these private settlements.

There are other interesting models being kicked around … a state enforcement agency that would have to sign off on a settlement even prior to litigation. Is there a third party who could set up a red flag if the same employer is settling the same thing over and over again? Is there some ability to say, “there seems to be a problem here”? We have also been thinking about how to increase accountability that includes ideally getting rid of damage caps on Title VII. I don’t think there is any principled argument for them. It is solely a matter of a compromise that was worked out a long time ago. Those numbers have not budged and that leads to a lot of employers thinking “well what is the risk really?”


Noble: For me as a practitioner, my concerns are onerous administrative burden of Title VII so having to go through underfunded and overworked government agency makes no sense to me when I am trying to sue someone for stealing my patent. I don’t have to do that – I can just go directly to federal court and have that access to justice. I think EEOC has a place. I can certainly see it do the work for pro se individuals or for larger collective actions, but for most individuals who have a plaintiff’s attorney…

Martin: This is a place you mark time until you get your Right to Sue Letter.


Noble: Yes…One, that delay only benefits the defendant employer. It does not help our clients at all. Two, the damage caps make no sense. Three, federal judges’ ability to dismiss a case on a standard of severe or pervasive should be a jury issue – that kills a high percentage of those good cases. Even after they get through the lengthy process of finding the lawyer that practices federal law, and getting through the EEOC process, and filing your complaint under federal law (along with the larger fees associated with litigation), going through all the litigation, you may end up getting to a judge who hasn’t been in a private employment law case for many years, having to decide what kind of conduct, usually against a woman, is severe enough to affect their workplace.

Martin: We have seen that sometimes even judges don’t get trained in complying with any sort of anti-harassment rules. Not only is their own frame of reference often decades out-of-date and skewed by the fact they were possibly a partner at a large law firm in a powerful position. They don’t even get what you would learn from periodically having to sit down and think about how this would look like in your workplace and what are the standards that are appropriate there. I agree that another important piece of the puzzle is trying to reset the ways in which the “severe and pervasive” standard has been applied in so many courts to be a hurdle…it can be incredibly difficult because of the way some courts parse each individual situation and say, “well that wasn’t much and this didn’t happen till a month later, so this is a whole different thing.” Frankly, I am still thinking about how the legislative language is to fix that problem. I think the key issue is that we need to make harassment laws actually remedy the harms.  The rest of the world who hasn’t had to be a plaintiff in these cases, assumes that it does.


Noble: Right, right… and the public awareness …I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had a client come in and having to explain to them “look, we can try to do this, but you are probably not going to meet the standard.” They are shocked and they say “Wait, this horrible thing happened to me and I’m having trauma and you are telling me the judge is going to decide that it does not?”

Martin: And it is so divorced from the public debate, which is – “well we’ve gone so overboard that a hug is unlawful in some way.”  In fact, it is really, really hard to get some sort of legal remedy for harassment – it’s very divorced from where people think the current conversation is.


Noble:  There is a media problem too, right because they are attracted to these big powerful men cases and then they leave the perception that all the victim has to do is raise our hand and say, “ten years ago this bad thing happened to me and then money rolls in and the corporation fires him and everybody gets training” and that just doesn’t happen in the private sector. The exact opposite happens – these days she gets fired. I keep saying it over and over again.

Martin: One of the other things the TIME’S UP Legal Defense Fund does… is communication support. To help individuals tell their stories publicly and we try to do that sort of public education through individual stories of what harassment looks like, what are the dynamics, what does it mean for the individual who experiences it, so that people have better understanding of what this looks like and what are the real obstacles.


Noble: That’s great.  That’s really great.  So, my last question… you are being honored tonight for your work at the gala… what drives you professionally?

Martin: I am incredibly lucky to get to do the work that I do. What drives me is righteous indignation and anger.  We need to fight for the people who have the fewest resources to fight for themselves. What else drives me is I think that I am more hopeful on some days than others. Overall, I think there is still, even given the really frightening context in which we find ourselves, there is tremendous reason for hope as we have seen through the women’s marches and the outpouring support for TIME’S UP Legal Defense Fund. We are seeing all the women running for office this year. There is opportunity to use that energy to make lasting progress. That also keeps me going.


Noble: Keeps me going, too. Thank you so much for sharing part of your evening with me and for sharing your thoughts on these important legal issues affecting woman in the workplace.



Read Pt. 1 of Laura Noble’s Interview with Emily Martin here



Posted in Noble News |

Laura Noble Sits Down With Emily Martin, NWLC General Counsel and Vice President for Education and Workplace Justice, 2018 NELA Annual Convention, Chicago

Our attorneys recently attended the National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA) annual conference in Chicago. This year’s conference featured breakout sessions on “#MeToo: Hot Topics and Emerging Trends in Harassment Legislation,” “Don’t Be Afraid to Lose,” and the indispensable “Year in Review: Significant Developments in Employment Law.”

One of the panelists for the “#MeToo: Hot Topics and Emerging Trends in Harassment Legislation” discussion was the dynamic Emily Martin, General Counsel and Vice President for Education for the National Women’s Law Center. I sat down with her for an informal discussion on her incredible career, what drives her, the important work at the NWLC and what still needs to be changed to affect workplace harassment.


Noble: Emily Martin, can you give us a brief background on your career and how you ended up at the Women’s Law Center?

Martin: I am really lucky in that I am the one percent of attorneys who went to law school saying, “this is what I am going to do and I ended up getting to do that thing.” I went to law school with the thought that I wanted to do women’s advocacy and I wanted to do impact work and basically, that is what I have done.  I was a fellow with the National Women’s Law Center and then I was at the ACLU with the Women’s Rights Project for about eight years or so, where I mostly did litigation on the range of issues including employment, education, and accommodation issues. In 2009, it was the beginning of the Obama administration, so I went to D.C to be part of that exciting moment. I was ready for

Laura Noble (left) & Emily Martin at the 2018 NELA Conference in Chicago, IL

a shift out of litigation into something else.

I’ve been at the National Women’s Center since then. I have been doing mostly, but not only, policy work on different sets of issues, but much of my time has been spent on workplace issues for women  such as pregnancy discrimination and unequal pay.  In the last year, there has been a lot of harassment work including building our legal network for gender equity and implementing systems that make the TIME’S UP Legal Defense Fund work.


Noble: Is the TIME’S UP Legal Defense Fund one a kind?

Martin:  It is certainly at this scope and size. We are aware of some very small funds that provide some support for costs on the plaintiff’s side, usually on impact cases, but the availability of fee support as well as costs at this scale, and without it being a profit-making venture, is pretty unique.


Noble: It is remarkable, particularly in these times.

Martin: For people in organizations like mine, one of those silver linings of tough times is the development opportunity. There is a lot of work that needs to be done, but at least there is also some real commitment from people and funding to help make that happen.


Noble: What do most people not know about the Women’s Law Center?

Martin: If you are not in D.C. most people probably don’t know us period!  We have been around for more than forty-five years, and for much of our time we have been a very D.C.-based and focused organization and most of our policy work historically has been federally focused. Over the past few years, we have definitely been more purposefully engaging in state policy work across the country, making investments in making sure we have the staff and the ability to do that work and build those coalitions and relationships in a meaningful way.


Noble: What are some of the accomplishments of The National Women’s Law Center you are most proud of?

Martin: The National Women’s Law Center has been around a long time.  It has been engaged in work on The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, the Civil Rights Act of 1991, and the Davis case where the Supreme Court held that damages are available for student on student sexual harassment under Title IX.   There have been a lot of successes over The National Women’s Law Center career.


Noble: What are you most proud of about your work at The National Women’s Law Center?

Martin: During my time here, I have been most of proud of having been part of the issue of pregnancy accommodation and ensuring that employers provide the same sort of accommodations that are needed for pregnancy that they provide if accommodation is needed for disability. I am especially proud that this work has led to success not just in blue states, but in red states as well. South Carolina just passed a pregnancy accommodation law that we were deeply involved in drafting. West Virginia and North Dakota passed pregnancy accommodation laws and these states have been part of the new wave of law-making around this issue. That has been really affirming to see progress in a variety of different places bringing together people from a lot of different ideologies. And, obviously, the TIME’S UP Legal Defense Fund is a big moment for the National Women’s Law Center. It is a $22 million initiative, which really gives the opportunity to make sexual harassment law better, as well as making representation available for women, and possibly men, who would not otherwise have been able to have attorneys.


Noble: What are your particular challenges now at the Women’s Law Center?

Martin: Well, you know it is a challenging federal policy environment. Congress is hard. The administration is hard and the Supreme Court is also difficult. I think the challenges are finding ways to build progress in the face of a lot of deeply polarized oppositions. Whether that is with states, including states that are not necessarily progressive, but where maybe there is not the same deep distrust and dysfunction as at the federal level. Whether it is  trying to create new relationships with corporate leaders, where there are corporate voices saying, “We think this is what we need to do and we are going to do it,” it is building the seeds for longer-term progress.  We are doing work now with some of our champions in Congress to help craft the next generation of sexual harassment laws. It is going to be the model that many states hold themselves to. It is going to be the thing that people can organize around. And, in the long term, I believe it is going to be a legislative change that will happen.


Noble: Who are you working with on that?

Martin: Well, it is still underway. There are definitely a variety of senators and house members who are really committed to using this moment to make sure that the goals that we are pushing for are goals that will really make a difference.


Part two of our discussion with Emily Martin will appear next week online. – LN

Posted in Noble News | Tagged , , ,

Strong Brew: National Employer takes a shot at Facing Bias

If you are bummed your local Starbucks is closed today for anti-bias training, consider this uncomfortable, inconvenient feeling as a reminder of the part we all play in the cultural epidemic of racial and sexual harassment and discrimination our country is struggling to come to grips with.  This is a very small price for coffee consumers and the company to pay,[1] but it is a great leap forward in terms of raising awareness and investing in an ounce of prevention.  Some are dismissing today’s effort as a publicity stunt, and it is definitely keeping this coffee company in the news, but even if it is designed to bolster their status, this is a positive development and other companies would do well to follow suit.

As Employment lawyers, we deal with the unfortunate, and sometimes, unintentional consequences of unconscious or implicit bias every day.  This is not a problem that can be solved with one training session, but studies[2] show that increasing awareness of bias, coupled with action-oriented strategies and thoughtful practice in confronting and addressing it, are effective steps in

Jennifer Bills – Attorney, The Noble Law Firm

working towards making American workplaces safer for women, older people, people of color, LGBTQ individuals, people with disabilities, and others.

Whether waiting at a table at Starbucks[3] or applying for a job or promotion as a bank executive, people of color are frequently denied equal opportunities to participate as full citizens in the United States.[4]  Some individuals face unlawful arrest or worse.[5]  The clients we represent suffer pay disparities,[6] hostile and discriminatory work conditions, harassment, denials of promotions, or even being pushed out of the workplace entirely, sometimes to accommodate the unconscious bias, or alleged comfort, of their white co-workers.  We also advise Employers who, like Starbucks, want to make efforts to improve their business environments.


Implicit Bias in the Workplace

When someone does not act in a neutral manner, but with a preference for or an aversion to a group of people, they have bias.  Implicit bias is when a person has thoughts, feelings, attitudes and perceptions, without being aware or conscious that they are affecting one’s behavior and actions.  Bias leads to different treatment when actions are based on assumptions about people based on their membership in a group or a single characteristic, such as their race or sex, accent or political party affiliation.  Although biases negatively impact our communities and workplaces, only certain biased conduct is subject to legal limitations.


Impact vs. Intent

In 2018, many Americans want to believe that we are not deliberately acting upon racist stereotypes or prejudices, but sadly, the reality for too many people of color belies this wishful thinking.[7]  All too often, there is a disparate impact even when no negative intention is present.  When enough power is behind implicit bias, the consequences can be dire.  The impact of bias and victims paying the ultimate price has been making headlines spurred, in part, by the Movement for Black Lives.[8]  In the employment context, the #MeToo[9] and #Times Up[10] movements have brought increasing awareness to workplace gender bias, but the problem of combatting discrimination remains elusive.  For employers, managers, and supervisors, the power of implicit bias can mean the difference between keeping or losing a valued employee and impacting someone’s career.[11]  Some courts are starting to recognize implicit or unconscious biases as a basis for discrimination,[12] so there is no benefit to putting our heads in the sand any longer or tolerating the status quo.

To understand examples of implicit bias, imagine the supervisor who, after years of observing stellar performance by his lone female engineer, just finds her a bit too aggressive to work with clients and passes her over for a promotion.  Consider the hiring manager, who reviews applications from five equally-qualified candidates, and picks the one from his neighborhood, or the same college, or with a name that sounds familiar rather than difficult to pronounce.  Then there’s the young, Caucasian sales representative, who keeps remarking that he thinks his African-American co-worker is so “articulate” and cannot understand why his colleagues of color do not want to work with him.  Conscious awareness of the potential for biases to show up in the workplace, and practicing different behaviors are good antidotes.  In other words, training, training, training.


What is an Employer to do?

In order to reduce the unintended and harmful consequences of implicit biases in the workplace, Employers can take straightforward and relatively simple proactive, preventative actions to begin to address this serious and complex problem, minimize risks of liability, and assure a fairer environment for all employees.


Noble Law’s Tips for Employers to Address and Reduce Bias

  1. Acknowledging the problem is the first step to addressing it. Name it; talk about it; and show Employees that you want to discuss it.
  2. Schedule Implicit Bias (anti-discrimination, harassment, and retaliation) Training in advance and on a regular basis. Training on policies and expectations should be a part of onboarding all new employees, and it should be repeated on an annual basis.  Training should be interactive, rather than passive.  The opportunity for people to practice identifying improper motives and interrupting bias is key to success.
  3. Update personnel policies, investigation and complaint procedures, and ensure that managers and supervisors know how to respond appropriately to incidents and complaints.
  4. When an Employee reports an incident or makes a complaint, place her on administrative leave while the Employer conducts an investigation.
  5. Conduct a prompt, thorough and objective investigation to determine whether the Employee violated company policies.
  6. If the Employer determines policies have been violated, the employee should be subject to discipline up to and including termination.
  7. Make it clear to all employees that retaliation will not be tolerated, and pay attention to early warning signs. Encourage employees to come forward about their own experiences and to report behaviors they witness.


Employers can make a huge impact in addressing, preventing and redressing implicit bias and discrimination and reduce their potential liability!  Employees can make a difference by speaking up and not remaining silent bystanders.

Contact the Noble Law Firm for training, advice or a consultation on your workplace rights and responsibilities.


[1] (Starbucks claims training will cost tens of millions.)



[4] A recent Harvard Business Review study confirms racial discrimination stubbornly persists.


[6] The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and Bureau of Labor Statistics continue to document persistent pay disparities by race and other factors.  African-American ($639) and Hispanic/Latinx ($594) employees continue to earn considerably less than Caucasian ($816) and Asian-American ($953) workers.

[7] (92% of Black Americans recently surveyed say discrimination against African-Americans is alive and well in the United States.); (At least half of African-Americans surveyed reported experiencing discrimination themselves.).





(Customer complaint about employee’s rap music leads to firing and then bold company response.)  (Company leaves University to preserve the company’s “brand independence without conditions.”)

[12] See, e.g., Woods v. City of Greensboro, 855 F.3d 639, 652, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8011, *29-30  (2017) (There is… a real risk that legitimate discrimination claims, particularly claims based on more subtle theories of stereotyping or implicit bias, will be dismissed should a judge substitute his or her view of the likely reason for a particular action in place of the controlling plausibility standard.”)

Posted in Noble Notes |

Laura Noble discusses challenges facing sexual harassment survivors in the Carolinas with WBTV

May 15, 2018

In the WBTV article, “Why many women aren’t able to file sexual harassment lawsuits in North Carolina,” Laura Noble discusses the legal road blocks many women in the state face when trying to report sexual harassment.

Laura Noble with Molly Grantham on WBTV

Since the #MeToo era began, the Noble Law Firm has seen a 500% increase in calls from women claiming sexual harassment in their workplace. Despite making the decision to report the harassment, though, there are often limitations in the law that prevent these women from taking legal action.

“Awareness is there,” Laura told WBTV. “The problem is that state laws – in particular, the Carolinas, haven’t kept up with where I think the national mindset is in the workplace.”

Laura discussed two major challenges facing women in North Carolina: the six-month statute of limitations on filing sexual harassment claims under Federal law and the fact that North Carolina has no specific state law against sexual harassment.

Laura noted sexual harassment is, in fact, not actually about sex, but rather about an assertion of power.

“Study after study has shown it’s based on power,” she said. “CEO’s of companies don’t usually get harassed.

Noble offered advice to any woman who feels she is being sexually harassed in the workplace. She encourages them to document everything, tell a trusted ally or mentor and follow the guidelines set in employee handbooks.

“And remember,” she emphasized. “The time for filing your claim is only six months.”


Read the full WBTV article here.

Posted in Noble News |

Laura Noble at Pink Petro’s HERWORLD2018 Energy Forum

Laura Noble will be at the Pink Petro #herworld2018 event in Houston, TX! Houston area friends should stop by the Norris Conference Center March 7th – 8th to participate in an innovative and inclusive learning event that addresses new frontiers in the energy industry where business, workforce, innovation and geo-policy intersect.

Go to Pink Petro TV to listen to a global think-tank discuss the future of the energy industry. #GRIT18 #ENERGYPROUD #TheNobleLaw

Laura Noble’s Pink Petro speaker bio:

“Laura Noble is managing partner of The Noble Law Firm, a firm who has represented thousands of employment law and sexual harassment cases. She is a former New York City prosecutor and workplace incident investigator. She is an advocate for updating federal and state laws regarding sexual harassment to be defined for modern times.”


Posted in Noble News |

Laura Noble Named a North Carolina Super Lawyer for the Second Year In a Row

 Chapel Hill, N.C., February 1, 2018 – For the second year, The Noble Law Firm’s Managing Partner Laura Noble has been named a 2018 North Carolina Super Lawyer, recognized as one of the Top Rated Employment Litigation Attorneys in the state.

The annual list is published by Super Lawyers, a rating service of outstanding lawyers in North Carolina who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Super Lawyers selects attorneys using a patented multiphase selection process which combines peer nominations and evaluations with independent research. Only five percent of the state’s top attorneys are selected to be awarded the distinction of Super Lawyer.

 “It is an honor to be named among such accomplished North Carolina attorneys and I am very grateful to be recognized by my peers,” Laura said. “For more than 20 years, I have dedicated my career to providing clients with exceptional personal and powerful representation, navigating complex issues into potential solutions for each and every one of them.”


Learn more about the Super Lawyers selection process here.

Posted in Noble News |

The Noble Law Firm’s Josh Kalish Named to NC Lawyers Weekly’s 2017 “Unsung Legal Heroes”

The Noble Law Firm’s Director of Marketing and Client Services Josh Kalish has been named to North Carolina Lawyers Weekly’s Class of 2017 of “Unsung Legal Heroes,” a recognition program honoring law firm staffers across the state for their dedication to duty. Josh was recognized as a Legal Marketing Professional honoree, one of eight professional categories the new program celebrates.

As part of a special section for the magazine’s December special issue, North Carolina Lawyers Weekly’s Tiara Benfield spoke with Josh to learn more about his career and professional accomplishments. Asked why he chose to pursue a career in the legal field, Josh shared he finds it very rewarding to help clients navigate legal processes to resolve workplace issues. “In my opinion, employment law offers a nice balance of solving client issues in the workplace with both creative business solutions and legal remedies” he added.  With the exponential increase of calls into the Firm by victims of sexual harassment and assault, in large part due to #metoo and #timesup movements, it is very rewarding to be able to offer top-tier legal representation and counsel to those in need.

Josh began his career at the American Bar Association in Washington, DC, working on public policy projects with three different attorneys. “I learned that coming straight out of college, you have to be humble and learn the basic office skills required to be successful in a professional environment,” Josh said. “I also learned the importance of good project management and authentic people skills to create productive teams.”

Reflecting on his work with the Noble Law Firm, Josh points to the “Client Journey Blueprint” as one of his proudest professional accomplishments. “We know that some people dread having to deal with a law firm, particularly when other things in their life are not going well,” he explained. Josh interviewed several clients, past and current, to learn from their perspective of working with the Firm throughout the lifecycle of their legal matter, identifying the key “moments” in these interactions that defined their experience.   Armed with this first-hand knowledge, Josh created unique internal service level agreements that set the standard for how the Firm and its attorneys engage with and support clients. “Our reward is that our clients tell us that working with us doesn’t feel like a ‘typical’ law firm,” he added.

Josh joined The Noble Law Firm full-time in 2015, after several years in an advisory capacity, to lead the development of Digital Capabilities.  He is currently Director of Marketing and Client Services where he leads the outreach efforts to promote the Firm’s growing legal services offerings.


Look for Josh’s full responses in North Carolina Lawyers Weekly’s special issue on December 25, 2017.

Posted in Noble News | Tagged , , , ,

Golden Globes: Time Is (Not) Up (Yet)

The 2018 Golden Globe Awards highlighted the national movement against sexual harassment with a multitude of actors and activists speaking out on the topic. Celebrities, many of who appeared in solidarity wearing black, seized on the movement’s momentum, pledging meaningful change.  The #metoo movement and the resulting “Time’s Up” initiative have underscored the urgency of the movement and seem to underlie an opportunity to define and desist sexual harassment in our country.

Laura Dern eloquently described a future where “we teach our children that speaking out without the fear of retribution is our culture’s new North Star.”  Oprah Winfrey said, “For too long, women have not been heard or believed if they dared to speak the truth to the power of those men. But their time is up. Their time is up.”

Inspirational as these speeches were, the cultural movement is greatly outpacing legal reform. Oprah told the Globes audience how, as a child, sitting on a linoleum floor in 1964 in her mother’s kitchen, she watched Anne Bancroft present the award for best actor at the Academy Awards to Sidney Poitier. Last night, as I watched the awards show and impassioned speeches with my own young daughter, I was well aware that 1964 was also the year that Title VII was created. Title VII is more than 50 years old and badly needs to be updated to reflect our society’s current challenges in defending against discrimination and harassment. Today, many states do not even have laws expressly prohibiting sexual harassment, much less providing a clear definition of and consequences for the courts to consider. Until these changes are made, time is “not up.”

In a speech that has since spurned calls for a presidential run in 2020, Oprah also said, “Speaking your truth is the most powerful tool we all have.” Speaking truth is, indeed, one of our core requirements for our judicial system to function equitably. However, noble as the truth maybe, the true power of justice comes from consequences and remedies prescribed by law, both as a way to establish our cultural morality and to provide a deterrent to the offensive actions. Absent a comprehensive, contemporary body of laws defining and governing sexual harassment, at both the federal and state levels, I’m afraid our time has not (yet) come.


Laura Noble is Managing Partner of The Noble Law Firm, with offices in Raleigh, Chapel Hill and Charlotte.  The Firm provides forward-thinking and trusted counsel to victims of sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace.  www.thenoblelawcom 

Press Contact: 919.724.9000

Posted in Noble Notes | Tagged , , , , , ,