Author: TSA Press

See, lawyers can do more than just the law. Greg Revera is a George Washington University Law School who is an intellectual property attorney but he is much more than that. Revera has the honor of being the photographer behind the U.S. Postal Service Forever Stamp  commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing.

The photo, taken in 2010 by Revera in his backyard. As Law.com reports, the soon-to-be-famous image was the result of Revera’s experimentations with digital photography:

In 2010, he said he was mostly still shooting with film. “I was still fighting the move to digital,” he said, but his wife had a new digital camera, and after seeing other citizen photography of space he decided to purchase an attachment that connected the camera to his telescope. With the setup, he began to photograph Mars, deep space and a few photos of the moon in various stages.

Eventually, he said he wanted to try to capture a full moon—a tricky endeavor, since depending on where you are geographically, full moons are only visible for a few hours on a specific night.

During the attempt, Revera said he was “fighting the equipment and fighting the weather.” But he managed to snap a few decent images. In post-production, he said the power of digital photos became clear: He was able to use “focus stacking,” a processing technique in which he took his best shots from the evening and blended them into one superior image that was sharp and detailed.

And since taking the picture back in 2010, Revera entered it in a Wikipedia competition (which he lost) and it was used as a reference image multiple times. Then about two years ago he got a call from the USPS, who wanted to use the picture, though they were unclear what it would be used for. It wasn’t until 2 days before the official press release announcing the stamp. And Revera is happy with the honor:

“I have so much love for the space program,” he said. “The Apollo mission, and stamps in general, are both part of our national heritage.”

“To have me contribute just a little bit to that is very humbling and really makes you smile,” he said.

Congratulation to Revera on the photographic accomplishment.

As technology has advanced and there’s been an increased push toward efficiency and cost-savings in the legal industry, the market for alternative legal services has grown exponentially. However, while there may be a lot of alternative legal service providers (ALSPs) out there, not all are created equal.

Too often with ALSPs, there’s no way to ensure the quality of the work you’re getting and you run the risk of outsourcing important tasks to vendors who just aren’t up to the job. You end up with anonymous freelancers doing your work with little accountability, when what you really need is the right team of lawyers with the right technology doing high-quality work in the right location and at the right price.

That’s where Mindcrest comes in. Strategically designed to bring skilled management and sophisticated technology to the world of alternative legal services, Mindcrest provides fully project-managed legal services and it excels at handling large-volume and increasingly sophisticated legal work with the levels of technology, process, and oversight that top clients need and expect. If you’re looking for a worthy law firm or in-house alternative, look to Mindcrest.

Specializing in What They Do Best

One of the things that differentiates Mindcrest from other ALSPs is that they don’t try to be a jack-of-all-trades, purporting to cover every niche area of law, plus HR issues, finance, technology development, and administrative issues to boot. Instead, they stick to what they know best and have been doing well for nearly 20 years.

Mindcrest offers services in four distinct and finely honed practice areas: compliance, contract management, legal analytics, and litigation and investigations. By refining and building up these specialty subject matters over time, Mindcrest has positioned itself to offer the best legal services available in some of law’s most critical practice areas. Successful legal practice requires focus and expertise, and Mindcrest has built itself around that notion.

The Secret Ingredient? The Mindcrest Method

Much of Mindcrest’s success can be attributed to what it calls the Mindcrest Method — the project management aspect of their services that they’ve refined over the years and are always continuing to refine in order to bring forth coordinated combinations of the right  lawyers in the right locations at the right price to best handle each specific client engagement. Mindcrest has devised a unique methodology for combining project management, process, workforce management, technology, analytics, reporting, and metrics on every project — and, if their satisfied clients across the globe are any indication, the method works.

Simply put, Mindcrest looks at every unique engagement individually and comes back with a tailored solution. Relying on highly qualified lawyers spread across Chicago, New York, London, and India, Mindcrest assembles the best possible team with expertise in the practice area involved, layered with the right project management approach and the right technology. This is alternative legal services that are not merely convenient, but actually built around the client’s needs.

Superior Training

Unlike many ALSPs, Mindcrest takes the time to invest in their lawyers and train them to the highest standards in the industry, in the process giving them career paths that allow them to grow within the organization. They do this through a thing called Mindcrest University — a massive initiative designed to offer learning and training for both new and experienced lawyers.

After passing a rigorous hiring process, Mindcrest hires are put through a stringent on-boarding program and trained in Mindcrest’s key practice areas and the way the company does business. The training program has been built and refined with input from clients, and today is unlike anything else in the industry. They also offer over 100 courses for lawyers within the company on substantive legal issues, leadership training, project management training, and technology training, both in-class and online. They even offer a fellowship for U.S. lawyers to go to India to help design the training and train the India-based team.

The result of all this training is that many lawyers who started as entry-level trainees with Mindcrest are today leading major client engagements. For the client, this means the ability to reap the benefits of years of investment and training in high-quality lawyers who bring the best skills and expertise to alternative legal services.

The Right Technology Makes All the Difference

Modern legal practice relies on technology, and Mindcrest is focused on providing the best of the best. A dedicated team, dubbed mTech, is devoted to reviewing new technologies and choosing the best third-party tools available to incorporate into their solutions.

Because everything Mindcrest does is driven by technology, they’re constantly evaluating tools and partnering with the right vendors that fit with the Mindcrest Method. These are not lawyers dabbling in software development — instead, they choose the best-in-breed product available on the market and build their services around that software, in order to produce the best possible result for the client.

The Takeaway

What really sets Mindcrest apart and makes them so good at what they do is their ability, honed over many years, to assemble the best possible team at the right price point to handle high-volume work that requires a particular skillset, complete with the right technology and superior management from start to finish. Mindcrest delivers the whole package in ways that most other providers can’t.

Mindcrest isn’t just a clearinghouse for contract attorneys or freelance lawyers looking to supplement their incomes or pick up some extra work between jobs. It functions in every engagement as a well-oiled machine, thanks to superior project management skills — a key element to successful, high-volume projects with lots of moving parts, and one that many law firms lack. Mindcrest is fully invested in their workers and their method, and what clients see as a result is high-quality work project performed by a highly skilled and managed team of lawyers who work efficiently and for the right price.

Not all ALSPs offer fully managed services that combine both project management and quality legal deliverables. When you’re looking for an ALSP, be mindful of what you’re getting. When you want it done right, you want Mindcrest.

If you’re a lawyer working in legal operations or in a leadership or supervisory role, sooner or later you will find yourself overseeing a document review. What you do at the outset of the review will determine how smooth the review process is and how successful the outcome will be.

Have a Plan

Given the enormity of some document reviews, it is hard to imagine not having a game plan in advance. So, whether your organization is involved in serial litigation or you’re undertaking document review for the first time, whether you’re putting eyes on every document or using the latest machine learning or analytics tools, here’s a few thoughts on developing a document review protocol.

Before any document review, the legal team should identify clear guidelines for determining relevance and responsiveness. Issues of privilege may be involved as well. A document review protocol can be a complicated document or a fairly straightforward list of guideposts that provide instructions to reviewers. A review protocol usually takes the form of a memo. A typical protocol includes the following…

Background

Begin with a summary of the nature of the dispute, the parties involved, and the specific claims and defenses. Anyone preparing to review documents should at a minimum first review the operative pleadings, discovery demands, any applicable court orders or confidentiality/protective orders, and any significant correspondence in the case. These materials provide context to anyone who is not familiar with the case.

Scope of Review

A document review protocol should outline the scope of the review. How many documents are to be reviewed? What is the timeline? What documents are we looking for? What does a relevant document look like? What is not relevant? This means identifying subjects and document types that pertain to the issues in the case. If, for example, it’s a contract dispute, then documents or communications involving negotiations, terms of the deal, interpretation or meaning of terms, may be highly relevant. It may also mean identifying documents relating to topics or issues requested by opposing counsel.

If there are any topics of particular importance — so-called “hot” documents — those should be defined in the document review protocol as well.

Keep in mind, too, that defining scope also means identifying things that do not fall within the scope — for instance, documents outside a certain date range may be deemed non-responsive. If there are subjects the document reviewer may disregard, those subjects should be identified in the protocol.

Coding Instructions

Specific coding instructions are essential to document review. Common coding designations are Responsive, Non-Responsive, and Privileged. Other designations may be used, and legal teams may use tags or designations that have different names; it really does not matter what they are called. What is important is that they are universally understood and applied consistently. The point is to give clear instruction to reviewers on how documents are to be coded.

Apart from responsiveness coding, a document review may require confidentiality designations or issue coding. Be sure to spell out the specific designations that need to be applied to the documents.

There’s a basic logic to document review that should be followed when coding documents. If a document is determined to be Responsive, it must then be determined if the document contains any privileged or other information that should not be produced. If it does, has privilege been waived? If so, the document should be produced. If not waived, can the privileged material be redacted? If it can be redacted, the designation should be changed to Redacted. If it cannot be redacted, then the Responsive designation should be changed to Privileged because the document will be withheld.

These coding practices are a common-sense approach to preserving attorney-client privilege and they reasonably ensure that privileged materials are not produced in discovery.

It is also a best practice to code families of documents consistently during document review. If, for example, an email (the “parent” document) is coded Responsive, then any attachments to the email (the “child” documents) should also be coded Responsive. The reasoning is simple: When the author of an email attaches a document to the email and sends the email and attachment, it is the intent of that author for the two documents to be viewed together as a single communication. This, combined with the general notion of producing documents in the manner in which they are maintained, support the practice of consistent coding within document families.

Privileged Documents

Most document reviews involve examination of privileged documents and work product materials. One good practice is to identify in advance attorneys and/or law firms involved in the matter so that reviewers are alerted to potential privilege issues. If color-coded highlighting is available, use that to highlight attorney names.

Just like responsiveness coding, it’s important to apply privilege designations carefully. Parties are frequently called out by opposing counsel and the courts for over-designating not just privileged documents, but also for confidentiality designations.

Conclusion

In the end, document review cannot be viewed as a rote activity. It is a crucial, fact-gathering, and case-building opportunity. It is also a collaborative effort. If time is spent thinking about the review, its purpose, and goals, and if the objectives are reduced to writing in a protocol, the review process will go smoother and you will ultimately save time during the review itself.

---

Mike Quartararo is the managing director of eDPM Advisory Services, a consulting firm providing e-discovery, project management and legal technology advisory and training services to the legal industry. He is also the author of the 2016 book Project Management in Electronic Discovery. Mike has many years of experience delivering e-discovery, project management, and legal technology solutions to law firms and Fortune 500 corporations across the globe and is widely considered an expert on project management, e-discovery and legal matter management. You can reach him via email at mquartararo@edpmadvisory.com. Follow him on Twitter @edpmadvisory.

A legal career is a marathon, not a sprint — and whether you’re a law student, associate, or partner, you always need to be thinking about the next turn in the road. You might have achieved a major career goal — getting into a top law school, landing a job as a Biglaw associate, making partner — but you can’t rest on your laurels (unless, well, you’re ready to retire). There’s always a new achievement to be unlocked.

In my new career as a legal recruiter, I have broadened and deepened my knowledge of the legal industry and job market. Based on my experience as a recruiter so far, as well as my 20 years as a practicing lawyer and then a legal journalist, here are five pieces of career advice. They’re most germane to Biglaw associates, but some of them apply to law students, partners, and even non-lawyers. I hope you find them helpful.

1. Be open to opportunity.

The job I held from 2006 to 2019, as founder and managing editor of Above the Law — “legal blogger,” “online journalist,” “digital journalist,” or whatever you might want to call it — didn’t exist when I was in law school. And when I was in law school, I certainly had no idea that I would wind up in it.

Careers take unexpected and surprising turns, often driven by luck. And you can “make your own luck” by keeping abreast of industry news (by reading ATL and other Biglaw-focused publications), networking (in person and online), and being receptive to possible opportunities (even if an opening might not initially seem like your dream job).

When in doubt, hear the pitch or take the meeting. It’s not like Persephone eating the pomegranate seeds; going to an interview doesn’t obligate you to take the job. But going to an interview, even for a job you ultimately decline or don’t get, could help you learn about a job that you do accept, make a valuable new professional contact, or land a client.

Going to a callback never killed anyone. You might get stuck in an elevator for a few hours, but that’s very, very rare.

2. Always be learning.

To paraphrase the old motivational phrase “always be closing” (made famous by Alec Baldwin’s star turn in Glengarry Glen Ross), you should always be learning, especially in a knowledge-driven field like the law. Laws change, industries change, and the only way to remain relevant is to stay on top of the changes.

If you no longer feel challenged or stimulated in your current job, or if you find yourself working on the same types of matters or performing the same types of tasks over and over again, then it might be time to start exploring. If you’re no longer learning from your job, then you’re just collecting a paycheck — and while collecting a paycheck is nice, you can do that while improving your knowledge and skills at the same time. (I can relate; a desire to take on new challenges and develop new skills drove my own recent career switch.)

3. It’s no longer all about the benjamins (or prestige).

When picking where to start their careers, many law students go for the firm offering the biggest paycheck and greatest prestige (which often just boils down to prestige, since most of the top firms pay on the same market/Cravath scale). This is an admittedly crude way to pick a firm, but it’s the approach of many students, including myself back in the day, and it has a certain logic: if you don’t know what type of law you want to practice, you might as well “start at the top” and keep as many doors open as possible.

But a few years into your career, armed with a better sense of what you actually want to do, it might be time to move to a platform that makes more sense for your specific interests. The uber-prestigious firm you picked for starting your career might not be the best place for you to build a practice based on the particular type of work you’ve selected as your specialty or the particular industry you’ve decided to focus on — perhaps with an eye to moving in-house in a few years.

4. Don’t go in-house too early.

Speaking of moving in-house, it’s the promised land for many Biglaw associates (and even some partners), and many can’t wait to make the jump. But don’t make the jump too early.

As Dan Cooperman, former general counsel of Apple, said on the Legal Speak podcast (around the 5:30 mark), the best time to go in-house is after four or five years at a firm. That’s the amount of time you typically need to become fully confident in at least one area of the law, which will serve you well as corporate counsel and help you get the best work.

(Speaking of the Legal Speak podcast, I recently appeared on it, speaking with host Leigh Jones about how Biglaw has changed over the past 13 years, the role Above the Law played in covering (and promoting) that change, and my new work as a legal recruiter. Check out the episode here.)

5. Don’t leave Biglaw too late.

The conventional wisdom is true: there’s a sweet spot for leaving Biglaw, falling somewhere between your third and sixth years. If you know that you don’t want to stick around to make a run at partnership, either because you don’t want or don’t think you’ll make partner, then figure out a good time to leave.

If everything is going reasonably well, it can be tempting to just stick around your current firm and collect a nice paycheck. And as long as you’re making money for them, your firm will be more than happy to keep you.

But beyond a certain point, your marketability will drop. If you search for jobs based on the desired year of law school graduation — one of countless searches you can run on the amazing Leopard Solutions, a resource I use every day — you’ll find a bell-curve distribution: not many jobs for lawyers with under two years of experience, lots of jobs for lawyers with two to six years of experience, and then fewer jobs for lawyers with six or more years of experience (although this will vary based on a number of factors, including your credentials and practice area).

(Beyond a certain point of seniority, you ideally want to be a partner with a big book of business. Partner hiring doesn’t rely as much on public job postings; instead, recruiters play a major role.)

**********

These tips are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg; the best career advice is individualized. If you’re an associate or partner at an Am Law 100 firm or elite boutique interested in reviewing your options, feel free to connect with me on LinkedIn, where I often post advice and opportunities, or to drop me a line by email. It’s always a pleasure to hear from ATL readers — no matter where they are in the great career marathon.

What David Lat Learned about Big Law—and Himself—at Above the Law [Legal Speak / Law.com]

---

David Lat, the founding editor of Above the Law, is a writer, speaker, and legal recruiter at Lateral Link, where he is a managing director in the New York office. David’s book, Supreme Ambitions: A Novel (2014), was described by the New York Times as “the most buzzed-about novel of the year” among legal elites. David previously worked as a federal prosecutor, a litigation associate at Wachtell Lipton, and a law clerk to Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. You can connect with David on Twitter (@DavidLat), LinkedIn, and Facebook, and you can reach him by email at dlat@laterallink.com.

Year in and year out, we watch law firm after law firm pay lip service to their commitment to diversity in the legal profession, with promises to put women attorneys on equal footing with their male counterparts, whether it be through hiring and retaining more women attorneys, promoting more women attorneys to equity partnership ranks, providing more leadership positions to women attorneys, or adopting more family-friendly policies to ensure that women attorneys are able to excel at their jobs while maintaining a stable work/life balance. Despite these continued assurances, and despite the fact that a number of firms have made great efforts to improve women’s stature in the law, there is still much more to be done.

Today, Working Mother released its twelfth annual list of the 60 Best Law Firms for Women. These law firms are considered pioneers in the field when it comes to attracting, retaining, and promoting women lawyers. These law firms not only stand out as being family-friendly workplaces, but they also ensure that women shine in their equity partnership ranks.

With on-campus interview season coming up soon, these law firms are places you might want to work. Which firms made the cut for this year’s ranking?

To earn themselves a spot on the Working Mother Best Law Firms list, self-selected applicant firms with 50 or more lawyers must complete an extensive application (more than 300 questions long) with topics ranging from attorney representation, schedule flexibility, paid time off and parental leaves, and development and retention of women. Working Mother then selected the 60 best firms based on data provided by those firms from the year 2018. According to Meredith Bodgas, editor-in-chief of Working Mother, “It’s heartening to see the progress women lawyers are making at firms committed to fully utilizing these attorneys’ abilities. The war for talent is increasing incentives for law firms to invest in retaining women lawyers, which is why we’re seeing more women’s initiatives and parental-support groups. By highlighting what our top firms are doing, we hope others in the legal community will follow.”

Here are some of the interesting results gleaned from Working Mother’s study:

[T]hese firms offer more extended parental-leave benefits, encourage more lawyers to work remotely and use flexible hours, and are increasingly offering reimbursements for egg freezing and other fertility procedures. A few key parental-leave, work-life balance and career-advancement initiatives taking place at firms featured on the list include:

• 15 weeks of paid parental leave is the average minimum;
• One firm on the list, which strives to set reduced schedules that enable both professional growth and work-life balance, reported that attorneys on reduced schedules comprised 33 percent of those promoted to partnerships as of the start of 2019;
• Several firms offer parent-resource groups, which support moms and dads;
• Many firms have expanded their women’s initiatives and programs dedicated to the mentoring, sponsorship and promotion of female lawyers, as well as diversity and inclusion programs.

Women have made great progress at Biglaw firms in recent years, but which firms have been most receptive to their advancement? On average, more than a third of lawyers at these firms are women, while 23 percent of equity partners are women. Here’s the list of the 60 Best Law Firms for Women in 2019:

Arnold & Porter
Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz
BakerHostetler
Baker McKenzie
Ballard Spahr
Bass, Berry & Sims
Blank Rome
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck
Chapman and Cutler
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete
Cooley
Crowell & Moring
Culhane Meadows
Davis Wright Tremaine
Debevoise & Plimpton
Dechert
Dentons US
DLA Piper
Dorsey & Whitney
Drinker Biddle & Reath
Faegre Baker Daniels
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner
Fish & Richardson
Foley & Lardner
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz
Fredrikson & Byron
Gibbons
Gray Plant Mooty
Hanson Bridgett
Haynes and Boone
Hogan Lovells
Holland & Hart
Jackson Lewis
Katten Muchin Rosenman
Kirkland & Ellis
Latham & Watkins
Littler
Lockridge Grindal Nauen
Lowenstein Sandler
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips
Marshall, Gerstein & Borun
Mintz
Morrison & Foerster
Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart
O’Melveny & Myers
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
Perkins Coie
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman
Quarles & Brady
Reed Smith
Seyfarth Shaw
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton
Shook, Hardy & Bacon
Sidley Austin
Squire Patton Boggs
Steptoe & Johnson
Stinson
Waller
Wiley Rein
WilmerHale

For analysis of issues pertaining to women in the Biglaw workforce by the numbers — like percentage of equity partners who are women, percentage of new hires who are women, and whether firms offer formal sponsorship for high-potential women lawyers — click here to see the study’s aggregate data summary.

Congratulations are in order for all of the firms returning to the list this year, as well as the firms that are new to the 2019 list. Way to represent your women attorneys!

Now we’ll turn this discussion over to our readers. If your firm didn’t make the cut, do you think it should have? If your firm did make the cut, was it deserved? What can be done to improve work/life balance for women and working mothers? If you’d like to let us know what you think, you can email us, text us at (646) 820-8477, or tweet us @atlblog. Congratulations to all of the law firms that made this important ranking!

The 2019 Working Mother 60 Best Law Firms for Women [Working Mother]

---

Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Continued inflationary pressures and a significant loss of value of existing wages coupled with the introduction of the mono currency resulted in employees requesting for an urgent review of the current minimum wage. Official inflation climbed by 40% since the last review, with food index inflation rising by over 60%.

Employees Position

Employees stated that prices of basic commodities had “skyrocketed” and the current wage was insufficient to purchase a basic basket of groceries. Transaction charges in the form of the 2% IMTT and bank/e-wallet charges were also eroding the value of their wages. Prices of goods and services were still being priced at parallel rates and not the official exchange, movement of which itself had caused further price increases since May. The current wage was proving insufficient for basic health care and schooling. In consideration of all these factors the employees demanded a minimum wage of ZWL$400.

Employers Position

Employers being farmers, recognized the importance of the welfare of their key asset i.e. labour force and the impact inflation continues to have on purchase power of the minimum wage. However, the employers themselves had not been spared in the following ways :

1. There is no capacity to award higher wages. Most of the farmers in the general sector are struggling to pay the existing wages and allowances. A large number are in arrears and any additional wages will result in downsizing.
2. A significant number of farmers are providing additional incentives e.g. basic food packs which takes the minimum employment package to close to ZWL$200. An increase in the wage, could see some employers removing this food pack or reducing the items.
3.  Payment for produce is done in a weakening RTGS currency with marginal profit and at times at no profit at all.
4. The current ZESA load-shedding has badly affected production e.g. winter crops and already there has been a significant impact on yields on the wheat crop. Shortages of diesel and the cost of running high capacity generators have made the situation worse for farmers.
5. Most agricultural inputs are either not available locally or are available at very high prices, e.g. ZWL$8000 for a tonne of fertilizer
6. The government has  issued SI 142 of 2019 banning the use of forex as a legal tender. Farmers need to fully understand this piece of legislation and see its effect on the pricing of goods, services and farm inputs.
7. Government introduced statutory 145 of 2019 which stipulates that “No person or statutory body or company or entity shall sell or otherwise dispose of any maize except to a contractor or to the Grain Marketing Board.” The impact of this is unknown.
8. The RBZ has rapidly moved the exchanges rates from 2.5 to 5 to 8.7 over short periods of time. This has resulted in inputs being priced at new exchange rates, yet many farmers sold their produce at an average rate of 5. This has hampered farmers’ ability to re-tool.
9. With the introduction of SI 142 of 2019, usual funding of export crops in USD currency have been stopped and other forms of funding and support have been unclear.
10. Contractors are currently reviewing the impact of SI 142 of 2019 and unstable exchange rates on their future investments with farmers, and as a result some have  concerns over commitments for the 2019/20 season funding model.
11. The Government has forecasted in the coming months a slow down inflation and a significant decline in prices of goods and services.
12. Prevailing economic fundamentals are currently too unstable to make any informed decisions at this moment.

In light of all the above, employers would like to appeal that wage reviews should be put on hold until there clarity on the government’s efforts to bring sanity in the economic environment.

 

Negotiation Process

After further dialogue and listening to the heads of arguments made by employers, employees reduced their wage demand to ZWL$350. As employers we remained at a nil review of the wage but offered a cost of living allowance (COLA ) 11%, in light of the increased inflation on basics food items and medical care.  The employees, though appreciating the COLA, rejected it demanding an increase in the wage. After further engagement, the parties reached an agreement. A new minimum wage of ZWL$195, effective 01 July 2019 was settled on.

The impact of the wage means that employees B4 and above will be subject to PAYE, which will be an administrative headache for employers. We are engaging with the Ministry of Finance to have the tax bracket widened in order to protect these workers and prevent additional administrative work.

It was sad to note the split in employers positions during the negotiations. Following restructuring, some employers representatives are new to the negotiation process while some sent representatives not knowledgeable in the processes involved. This left the initial united employers position exposed and weakened.

We acknowledge that the wage is much higher than what was forecasted however hope the economic fundamentals become stable and wage reviews will revert to being once in a year.

There are no changes to allowances.

There will be reviews of all sectors wages.

Zimbabwe Tobacco Association

Post published in: Agriculture

16.7.2019
15:08

by Staff Reporter

Can there be Safe Schools for children if Teachers are not safe? A report on violations against Zimbabwean teachers during industrial action in 2019.

The US$250,000 refurbishment – completed last month – was done to keep pace with the
growing popularity of this “must do” Victoria Falls dining and entertainment experience,
which opened its doors 27 years ago.

Africa Albida Tourism (AAT) chief executive Ross Kennedy said: “The levels of business
experienced in 2018, coupled with the growth in the previous two years, led us to make the
appropriate investment decisions to equip The Boma for the next five to ten years.
“Keeping pace with the latest equipment and service delivery expectations, whilst
maintaining the tastes, sights and sounds of The Boma – Dinner & Drum Show, were key
factors in this major project,” he said.

“The machine that delivers The Boma experience has been modernised. We set out to
update The Boma without detracting from its essence.

The main kitchen, which guests don’t see, and the main cookhouse, were gutted and rebuilt,
new equipment installed, and structural changes and enhancements made to the serving
areas, such as new granite surfaces and refrigeration of the salad and dessert bars.”
Interior designer Belinda Jones said the concept for the décor came from the traditional
cooking huts, and it was an amalgam of different Zimbabwean tribes.

“The Boma staff love it, because it reminds them, especially the entrance, of their
grandmothers’ huts,” Jones said.

“It’s where the woman’s cooking utensils are proudly displayed. The traditional art form of
decorating the walls and shelves with bright pigment goes back a while, but it is now being
revived as a new art form,” she said.

“The women translate the rhythms of their lives into abstract patterns, but now include
motifs from nature, both floral as well as animals,” she said.

AAT operates a portfolio of properties in Victoria Falls – Victoria Falls Safari Lodge, Victoria
Falls Safari Club, Victoria Falls Safari Suites, Lokuthula Lodges and The Boma – Dinner &
Drum Show, as well as Ngoma Safari Lodge in Chobe, Botswana.

Post published in: Featured

The government on 5 July 2019 gazetted the Freedom of Information Bill [H.B. 6 of 2019]. 

This is the first of three official Bills meant to replace the much-criticised Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA). AIPPA is the omnibus law that currently caters for access to information, protection of personal information and regulation of the media. 

When passed into law, the Freedom of Information Bill is meant to give effect to the access to information provisions enshrined in Sections 61 and 62 of the 2013 Zimbabwe Constitution. Section 3(a) of the Bill reflects this when it states that one object of the Bill is, “to give effect to the right to access information in accordance with the Constitution…” 

Unfortunately, despite this noble declaration, the Bill in its current state fails to give effect to either the letter or spirit of the right to access information found in Section 62 of the Constitution. 

The Bill is regressive when compared to the previous draft version of the Bill shared with and discussed by stakeholders during engagement meetings held by the Ministry of Information Media and Broadcasting Services in December 2018 and March 2019. In fact, it is a total departure from most of the positions agreed upon between the ministry and media stakeholders. 

The ministerial draft Bill circulated by the ministry closely resembled the African Union’s Model Law on Access to Information. However, the gazetted Bill has similarities with the condemned and outgoing AIPPA. 

Few of the recommendations submitted by civil society and other access to information activists were incorporated into the gazetted Bill. This shatters government’s narrative that this Bill is the result of a valid, wide, and balanced consultative process. 

Below is a summary discussion of the key provisions in the current Bill. 

Scope of the Bill

This Bill will set procedures for Zimbabwean citizens and permanent residents to access information held by public institutions. It also deals with procedures for the accessing of information held by any person and private entities if such information is necessary for the exercise and protection of a right.

It also puts in place voluntary mechanisms of disclosing data and information controlled by public institutions. Private institutions, on the other hand, have the discretion to voluntarily disclose any information within their control. 

This means the right to access information will apply differently to citizens and differently to non-residents and non-citizens. Yet the right to access information is a fundamental right enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and must therefore, be applied equally to all people. 

Furthermore, there is no justification for imposing compulsory, voluntary disclosure mechanisms only on public institutions and not private entities as well. More so, when one considers the amount of information controlled by private entities such as mobile network operators, medical service providers, private financial institutions and property developers. 

Just like AIPPA, the Bill also sets out the scope of limitations on the right to access information. Some of these limitations are reasonable, for example, the right to access information may not be relied on to access organisational trade secrets. 

However, some limitations are not justifiable in an open and democratic society that Zimbabwe aspires to be. One such limitation is the one on access to information on government borrowing. 

The Bill also sets out additional functions assigned to the Zimbabwe Media Commission (ZMC). The ZMC, will in terms of this law, be responsible for overseeing the fair application and exercise of the right to access information in Zimbabwe. Furthermore, the ZMC will receive and decide appeals against refusal of requests for the access to information. 

The ZMC has been assigned this function on the strength of Section 249(1)(f) of the Constitution which says one of the ZMC’s functions is “to ensure that the people of Zimbabwe have fair and wide access to information.” On the surface, this is a valid argument. 

However, it is more favourable to give the responsibility to oversee the enjoyment and exercise of the right to access information to the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC). Indeed, this was the case in the ministerial draft of the Freedom of Information Bill. 

In terms of Section 243(1)(a) – (d) and (f) of the Constitution, the ZHRC is tasked with the promotion, protection, development, and attainment of human rights and freedoms. These human rights and freedoms indubitably include the right to access information. 

The right to access information applies to everyone and goes beyond the media fraternity. MISA Zimbabwe contends that placing the administration of such an important right under a Commission dedicated specifically to the promotion of media freedoms and rights will narrow the exercise and enjoyment of the right to access information.

MISA Zimbabwe recommends that the position espoused in the ministerial draft be restored. 

Summary analysis of the Bill

Section 3(b) and 5 of the Bill seek to cultivate a culture of voluntary disclosure of information by public entities and statutory bodies. Section 5 of the Bill imposes a duty on such bodies to produce a written information disclosure policy. The rest of the Bill is silent on the practical steps necessary to enforce or strengthen these voluntary disclosure mechanisms. This is indeed disappointing. 

The ministerial draft of the Bill contained comprehensive provisions on the voluntary disclosure of information controlled by public entities. MISA Zimbabwe recommends that those parts of the ministerial draft be revisited and incorporated into the current draft of the Bill. 

The Bill compels public institutions to designate information officers. These are organisational officers responsible for the handling and processing of requests for information. 

The Bill states that requests for information may only be in writing, this means that oral requests for information are not valid. This restriction on how information may be accessed will unjustifiably inhibit the blind and illiterate from being able to seek information. 

There is no justifiable reason to restrict requests for information to written form only. The draft ministerial Bill had made provision for the submission and processing of oral requests for information. No justification is given for its removal from the current Bill. 

Requests have to be finalised within 21 days calculated from the day the request is submitted. An entity may extend this turnaround period by an extra 14 days. If there is no response to the request for information within 21 days, Section 10 of the Bill regards that as deemed refusal to give the requested information. No explanation will be necessary in those circumstances. 

There is no mechanism in the Bill that would prevent the abuse of these deemed refusals. The only recourse an applicant has to a deemed refusal is to appeal the refusal with the ZMC. 

Appeals to the ZMC must be lodged within 30 days of the date of notification of the decision being appealed against. The Secretary of the Commission may condone the admission of late appeals, but this is at the Secretary’s discretion. The ZMC must finalise appeals within 30 days of receiving appeals. 

Under the ministerial draft of Bill, the High Court was the final appellant body on issues of denied access to information requests. The participation of the High Court in this process is desirable because of the court’s ability to enrich the promotion and protection of fundamental rights including the right to access information through its pronouncements, rulings, and judgments.

The issue of miscellaneous fees that may be charged when seeking information is another clawback contained in the Bill that will ultimately inhibit the right to access information. While fees associated with making copies of requested documents may be sensible, the charging of search fees, coupled with inspection fees is not justifiable and is open to abuse in a way that actually prevents people from seeking information. 

Lastly, once passed into law, this Bill will wholly repeal AIPPA. This is problematic because AIPPA is an omnibus law that also deals in part with the protection of privacy. This means that if the Freedom of Information Act repeals AIPPA before a Protection of Personal Information Act or a Data Protection Act is gazetted, that will create a gap in Zimbabwe’s data protection legislative landscape. 

A gap, that based on past experience, might take years to fill given Zimbabwe’s lethargy in coming up with a data protection law that it has been working on since 2013. 

In conclusion, the process to repeal AIPPA, gives government an opportunity to adopt a progressive law that reflects the principles of access to information found in the African Model Law on Access to Information and the progressive 2013 Constitution. 

It is unfortunate, that government has failed to seize this opportunity to give life to constitutional provisions and international best practices on access to information issues by choosing to retain the same restrictive measures currently plaguing AIPPA.

Post published in: Featured

While the leasing company, South Jet, says Air Zimbabwe needs to pay for the planes, the carrier maintains that they were a donation and that South Jet need to release the paperwork to allow them to repair the planes.

One of the Air Zimbabwe A320s, Z-WPM, parked up at Johannesburg. Photo: [email protected] via FlickrAir Zimbabwe is in a tug of war with the Isle of Man company South Jet over two Airbus A320s. The planes, which are apparently parked up and not suitable for use right now, were acquired by the airline in 2012. However, the circumstances of the acquisition are muddy.

The carrier claims that the planes were donated to the Government of Zimbabwe by authorities in the Isle of Man, and subsequently passed to the airline. However, South Jet maintains that the aircraft are dry leased from them and have taken Air Zimbabwe to court over its failure to pay the leasing fees.

Where did the A320s come from?

The two Airbus A320-200s, registered Z-WPM and Z-WPN, we arranged to go to Zimbabwe in a deal spearheaded by China Sonangol International. At the time, the Chinese partner was looking to bail out the Mugabe regime and help revive the debt-laden national carrier.

The deal was brokered through two Isle of Man ‘special purpose vehicles’, known as South Jet One and South Jet Two. Z-WPN entered into active service for a while, but Z-WPM has been parked at Johannesburg O.R. Tambo since the start of 2014, according to CH-Aviation.

Z-WPN was flying for a while for Air Zimbabwe. Photo: Michael Ward via Flickr 

The reason both aircraft are now out of service, Air Zimbabwe says, is because they are unable to access the software to perform necessary repairs to the planes. An official of the airline told Bulawayo that,

They are due for tests and we cannot service them because we need access to the software and computer platform. The access is closed because it is saying you (Air Zimbabwe) are not the owner. So we want to resolve this ownership issue so that we are able to use those Airbuses. One is here and the other is in South Africa for maintenance.”

The official said that Air Zimbabwe is keen to sort out the ownership paperwork because they do want to fly the planes. However, South Jet has another side to the story.

Who owns the A320s?

South Jet claims that the A320s are both dry leased to Air Zimbabwe and that the carrier has not been paying the leasing fees on the planes for some time. A speech back in 2016, by the then Minister of Transport, Joram Gumbo, seems to confirm these claims. At the time, CH-Aviation report that he said,

“The aircrafts[sic] were not purchased, but are being leased from China Sonangol since 2012. These were part of efforts by Government to support the turnaround process of Air Zimbabwe.”

However, now the Zimbabwean state claims that the two aircraft were donated in 2013. A senior official told the Zimbabwe Independent that,

“The Airbuses were a donation which was made to the Government of Zimbabwe which then gave the planes to Air Zimbabwe.”

However, the legal representative of South Jet, Honour Mkushi of Sawyer and Mkushi Legal Practitioners, has categorically denied that any such transaction took place. Bulawayo quotes him as saying,

“I represent South Jet One they are my clients. The two aircraft belong to South Jet and they are not operating at the moment because there are a lot of arrears to be paid in respect of the rentals. So, in a nutshell, the aircraft belong to them. If the airplanes were theirs how could they fail to service them?”

Losing these two aircraft and having the backdated lease account imposed on their accounts would only add to the challenges Air Zimbabwe are facing. It is currently estimated that the airline is in debt by more than $350m. Sole owner, the Zimbabwean government, has tried to resurrect the airline by appealing to investors, but as yet no entity has been willing to take a gamble on the beleaguered carrier.

Other missing planes in Zim

Aside of the two A320s, Air Zimbabwe has recently landed in hot water for three aircraft which have apparently gone ‘missing’. Three MA60 aircraft, which were purchased from China in 2005 for $12.5m each, are no longer present on the airline’s audit documents, as reported in Bulawayo.

Questions were raised over some missing MA60s too. Photo: Wikimedia 

At the time, the Auditor General of Zimbabwe said that none of the planes were accounted for in the airline’s financial statements. Assumptions quickly turned to the possibility that they had been ‘stolen’. However, the airline fervently denies the claims, saying that they know where they are and that ‘anyone is free to come and see them’.

As well as this, there was an aviation drama in December last year, when Air Zimbabwe was supposed to be buying four Boeing 777s. The deal, as reported in Aerotime News, began as a covert government initiative, and developed into a national scandal after the airline failed to make payments on two of them, letting the deal fall through.

Air Zimbabwe had to shut down for several days in January as they had no planes to fly. View From The Wing reports that their Boeing 737-200 needed extensive maintenance, lasting around 45 days, while their only other aircraft, a 767, needed a component upgrade which would take several days.

African aviation is a tough game to be in right now. Could the outcome of the South Jet wrangling be the final nail in the coffin for the Zimbabwean flag carrier, or can the airline resurrect itself despite the current challenges?

Post published in: Business