The Janitorial Law

With the presidential elections coming up I began to wonder about the qualifications. As this thought passed through my ever curious mind, I found that there is one very important qualification missing. It is a qualification that should be known as the (Janitorial Experience). In order to have this as a qualification, we must first have it as a law, therefore I have written
this article to inform people of why a janitorial law should be enforced.

The law should read as follows: anyone person applying for a political chair must have four years of janitorial experience.

When applying for a janitorial position one must have these qualification.
1. Be a high school graduate/ GED. College, Treading Course or others are optional.
2. Be 18 years of age or older.
3. Be bonded
4. A citizen of the U.S.A.

The reason for the education is so that when a person in the janitorial position is requested to preform an act of duty, he/she will understand the request. There is also the belief that a person with at least 4 years of high school, is capable of communicating with those he/she is working with. Which is a plus to everyone. 18 years of age is a legal matter when it comes to hiring someone for full time work. It also protects both employer and employee. Being bonded provides thee employer with legal proof that the employee is not a thief. Which in the case of a janitor is very important. These people in such a position have full excess to the company store. They are trusted with the keys from the front door to the back door. They have access to the funds for purchasing supplies. It is the belief of those who hire them that they will make the right choice wisely. It is also a show of respect by the employee, and gives confidence to the employer.

Once the janitor is on the job, those that work indirectly with him/her, come to rely on them. Which leads to the diplomatic manner of the janitor. The reason this occurs, is because all of those that work within the company store come to think that the janitor is there for their benefit. Which is true, and leads to the assumption that the janitor will fit it, and in most cases they do, and they do so with a pleasing attitude. They are diplomatic.

It is because of these qualities that the janitor learns thee importance of being economical, the need to solve problems with satisfactory results to all concerned, and thee ability to keep the company in the best position to advance with success.

Now the only three qualifications one person needs to enter the elections for Presidency are as follows:
1. Must be 35 years of age on the day of inauguration.
2. Have lived in the United States for 14 years
3. Be a natural born citizen of the United States.

Yes there are unwritten qualifications, such as he/she should have an education, should be knowledgeable of economics, and should understand the need of being diplomatic. Now that does sound good, but the point being, they are not required to hold any of these qualities to run for the top office of the United States.

We also have learned in history that because of our neglect to back check all those who run for office, we have placed thieves in the white house, we have found some to be greedy, we have also become accustom to being mislead by double talkers.
All of this should tell the American voters, even myself, that we need a janitor whom has proven that they can be trusted, and not another high priced under achiever whom has bought their way into office. Shouldn’t the one who is leading the troops into a satisfying for all out come, have the ability of being diplomatic? After all, when one speaks with the janitor he or she accepts to receive an answer at the time of the question. Not to be told, I’ll get back to you, or, you can only ask the questions you have been provide with. A janitor doesn’t have a staff writer who is paid to make his sound intelligent, they just need to know how to answer the question.

So what this all boils down to is one major fact, we the people want to make certain that there is always enough toilet paper to wipe up are behind, but we aren’t smart enough to prevent the mess in the first place. Remember that the janitor understands there are only solutions and not problems. A candidate always says, I can fix the problem.

There are three solutions that would eliminate their problems.
1. Remove greed, and you have sharing.
2. Remove envy, and you have fairness.
3. Show humanity, and you will have humbleness.

Now, let’s get out there and vote for the “Janitorial Law”. After all, who among us does not prefer a clean toilet?



Unique Connecticut Law Firm Celebrates 70th Anniversary

As far as law firms go, you can probably recognize the names of those you find plastered on buses, billboards or on late night television commercials. This article is not about those lawyers. Instead it deals with a firm that has relied on word of mouth for over 70 years. Founded in 1940, the law office of Podorowsky Thompson & Baron has been representing generations of Connecticut families. The firm boasts loyal clients that have been using their services since the early 1950s. Not ready to sit on their laurels, PT&B; continued to evolve and in 2007, opened an office in the heart of New Britain’s Polish District.

If you’ve never been to New Britain’s “Little Poland”, you might want to bring along your passport. Whether you are getting a haircut, looking for dance lessons, need to do some banking, or want a cup of coffee, you can actually conduct an entire day’s business entirely in Polish. Not to be outdone, Podorowsky Thompson & Baron entered the fray. The firm added a Polish speaking attorney and purchased a former biker bar from the city of New Britain through a neighborhood revitalization program. Entering the unassuming entrance of Podorowsky, Thompson & Baron, former bar patrons may be surprised to now find an elegant office with high vaulted ceilings, antique Victorian furniture and paintings from local artists. As soon as you walk in, clients are offered a cappuccino which they can sip while reading a selection of reading materials in a variety of languages.

Aesthetics and coffee aside, what matters is the firm does great work and has become a wonderful addition to the community. Each month, the firm conducts legal seminars for area residents and is active in charity work.
They also put out a legal advice column that is printed in English and Polish newspapers available throughout New England. Through the firm’s legal intern program, students from UCONN Law, Western New England, Pace and even Poland have gained an insight into daily law practice.

Practice areas include personal injury, criminal defense, immigration, real estate closings and family law. It may be the only law firm in New England that can provide real estate closings in your choice of English, Polish or Spanish. Unlike most law firms, Podorowsky Thompson & Baron is unique in that it offers optional payment plans and 24 hour-7 day a week access to their attorneys via an emergency hotline. I know this from personal experience. As one of the firm’s attorneys, I often man the hotline. It often means late night calls and a crabby wife.

PT&B; is located at 202 Broad Street in New Britain, Connecticut. For more information, you can visit them on the web at

The Contributor has a direct relationship to the brand or product described in this content.


Why Planning is Crucial in Garden Design

Some people drop their interest in a garden when the snows of winter come or when the grass turns brown and it doesn’t come back for awhile. This time of dormancy can be a great time to plan what your garden and outside landscaping are going to look like when warm temperatures return. Use the plan time wisely and you will be thrilled with the appearance of the results.

Once good place to start is to consider what type of family activities will be located near the garden site. Some families like to have a volleyball court or a badminton court close at hand. These require some extra room to allow for the chasing of errant balls and bad-minton birds. Or maybe you have a patio that would need extra space when guests gather around for an outdoor meal. Also, walkways to these sport areas should be planned so as to avoid the garden area.

What kind of garden is being planned? It is for flowers or perhaps a butterfly garden. Some people want the garden to be a food source while others Set a clear goal for your garden even If you must divide it into sections to include all you want or maybe to satisfy participating family members. Nearby trees or planned planting of trees should be brought into the planning because of the shade generated and the trees need for nutrients. Do a small survey of what is already present in the garden area like a vine covered latticework that could block the view of the flowers in the garden.

Will there be dogs or other pets likely to frequent the garden area? Having a way to prevent pets from damaging plants could be important.

Make a choice of what kind of materials you intend to use. Wood is always decorative but is sometimes costly and can deteriorate quickly in some conditions whereas a plastic will be cheaper and probably last longer. Is assembly convenience and function more important than appearance? Planning will help you end up with a satisfying and practical structural support for your gardening efforts.

The overall appearance of a garden can be decided by how things are fitted together according to size. Two identical bushes placed side by side is less interesting than two bushes of different but similar heights. A garden perimeter made up of railroad ties along with a wooden fence makes an appealing sight. However, a chain link fence is very functional but lease pleasing to view. Put things together that are complementary. If you have doubt, consult a local nursery or search the internet for some ideas.

Even when things are matched, most of us like to see a little variety. A good way to do this is to use different colors. Dark green shrubs can be brightened up by a light green ground cover.

Garden tools are available for almost any garden activity. Knowing what you need is a good thing to think about and plan for. Once again, the internet is a good place to search for different kinds of tools with a minimum of effort. Also, prices can be located on the internet and compared to local store prices, allowing or a potential of some savings. Good quality tools are usually the best value, so don’t scrimp on tool prices.

Taking pictures of a new garden area “before” and “after” is a happy slide show for many people. The pictures are helpful if you decide that year two of your garden will be a little different from year one. And of course your distant relatives may have an interest in what you’ve been doing with your garden space.

Sunlight is critical to plant growth so you must plan for the location of the most light demanding plants to have several hours of sunlight available. Think about how low in the sky that the sun traverses in the area where you live. Also, the location of your trees or a neighbors trees can affect where you place your garden.

There are quite a few choices to be made when planning a garden. Starting early is really a good idea so all or most of the bases can be touched. Starting early also gives you time to make changes as your plan develops. Plan with excitement and it will show in your growing plants.

The DNA of New Law

Remember those crime shows on television? You know the ones I mean. The bad guys committed the crime, the police investigated the crime, the forensics lab solved tricky scientific problems, and the DAs  prosecuted the crime, and the jury delivered a verdict. Everything was tied a neat bow. In one hour, injustice and justice combined.

Scientists got smarter and tests more sophisticated. DNA testing became commonplace. At first it took months to get the results, then day, hours, and now I am sure there is a show where they swipe the suspect’s hair on their iPhone and get the results before the police can raise the yellow crime scene tape.

DNA testing is the rage. Genealogy companies offer it as a service, you can get tested for health problems, and at least one company offers DNA testing as an employee benefit. I love the genealogy company commercials where the actor says he is part this, part that, and part the other thing. Confirmation that we all have a lot of everybody else in us.

We have the same DNA mixing going on in the legal industry right now. Four hot methodologies share common ancestors: lean thinking, agile (scrum) project management, design thinking, and lean startup. If we look closely, we can see the family resemblance.

Think Lean

Lean thinking sits closest to the roots of this family tree. Bits and pieces of what we call lean thinking started coming together in the 1850s, though of course nothing is new. We can find antecedents to many lean ideas if we look at how people solved nagging problems. But, most people point to the 1970s as the period when many ideas that became known as the Toyota Production System jelled. In 1996, Womack, Jones, and Roos published Lean Thinking. For most, this book was the tipping point. Lean thinking started growing in the United States. It now sits in all industries and as the most popular form of process improvement.

Manage the Project

Project management comes in two basic flavors: heavyweight and lightweight. Heavyweight is the traditional, waterfall approach to project management. Most people touch waterfall project management at some point in their careers. It requires significant planning, proceeds methodically from stage to stage, and works best if the situation calls for tight and sequential process control. Want to build a 100-story skyscraper? Waterfall project management will do the job. Lawyers have found waterfall project management a bit restrictive and not well-suited to a rapidly changing environment.

Lightweight is “agile” project management and includes several of flexible approaches. Scrum is the legal industry’s favorite. Scrum requires small amounts of planning, adapts quickly to changing circumstances, and focuses on doing only what is needed when it is needed. Lightweight project management was born in the software industry and has replaced heavyweight for many projects.

Think Design

Design thinking is gaining traction in the legal industry. It also has an interesting lineage. The version we see most often dates back to the 1960s (though it also has roots dating farther back). Brothers Tom and David Kelley developed it as part of their IDEO design business. As the wheel diagram shows, it has grown as the theories behind design have moved from user participation to users being an integral part of the design process. Design thinkers take a fresh approach to creating solutions, focus on the customer, and use rapid ideation and prototyping to avoid the slow and wasteful linear process to design.

From “A Brief History of Design Thinking: How Design Thinking Came to ‘Be’ ’” by Dr.Stefanie Di Russo.

Startup Lean

Eric Ries brought us The Lean Startup and the idea that new ventures should adopt principles that helped old manufacturers. Most lawyers forget that their practices are startups. Client demands evolve, law changes, competition introduces new ideas. A lawyer, regardless of where she practices, should think as an entrepreneur thinks. Avoid waste, prototype and pivot quickly, focus on what your client needs not what you want to deliver, build only what is needed, and stay nimble.

Sharing the DNA

All four methodologies focus on delivering what the customer needs when the customer needs it. This focus ties into a broader theme in business right now, typified by the one-to-one marketing philosophy. Rather than trying to sell a product or service that compromises in many ways to meet the needs of the average consumer, businesses try to sell products and services tailored to the desires of each consumer. The closer the product fits the customer’s needs, the less waste involved.

The following chart, which comes from a paper Roland M. Mueller and Katja Thoring prepared for the 2010 Leading Innovation Through Design Conference, briefly touches on some of the similarities and differences of design thinking and lean startups. Their paper, titled “Design Thinking vs. Lean Startup: A Comparison of Two User Driven Innovation Strategies,” gives you a flavor of how two of the four methodologies bear a family resemblance.

From “Design Thinking vs. Lean Startup: A Comparison of Two User Driven Innovation Strategies,” by Roland M. Mueller and Katja Thoring .

I can buy shoes and apparel that I’ve customized with colors and features. I can use websites to build my car or my furniture, selecting the specific accessories I want. Retailers are famous for marketing one-to-one, sometimes using a bit too much information to guess what the customer needs (the retailer offering discounts on baby items to the teen who hadn’t told her parents she was pregnant).

The four methodologies share a focus on speedy development and revision. In the past, businesses focused on planning. They built business models, planned for contingencies, and worked through as many angles as possible before they made a move. In the present, they try, change, try, change, and repeat. They get something out there, test it, and change direction as fast as they learn from customers. The lean-based methodologies I have named make that rapid approach possible.

We Know What We Don’t Know

The practice of law—the methods and techniques of delivering legal services—has received almost no attention from scholars. Why bother spending time on something everyone does the same way and no one will change? For decades, this omission distorted our understanding of law. How law is delivered impacts the substance of law as much as what law is delivered. Take a simple example. Contracts of adhesion. We sign them every day—every time we click through something that says “by clicking here you acknowledge our terms and conditions.” That method of legal services delivery impacts your rights (embedded somewhere in those terms and conditions) more than the theories of bespoke negotiated contracts.

The odd legal industry culture has received some attention, especially in recent years, as its idiosyncrasies have impeded progress in solving society’s problems (e.g., poor access to civil justice, quality issues, affordability issues). At this time, that culture—resistance to change, failure to adopt technology, lack of affordable legal services—has stirred resentment and anger among citizens. If someone cannot protect their legal rights and loses their job or their house, someone else is to blame. Lawyers play a part in those dramas. Ineffective legal services delivery has more importance than the substance of the law involved.

Four “Leans” and the Law

For the past five years, as interest in project management, process improvement, design thinking, and lean startups, has accelerated, we have seen a kaleidoscope of implementations. Few have a good grasp of how to combine these methodologies into a coherent program for delivering legal services, or choose which ones to emphasize and which to de-emphasize. Think of four musicians each learning a different instrument. One challenge is to learn the instrument, but the second challenge is to learn how to play as a band. We have inexperienced musicians who skip band practice.

This confusion has negative affects on law firms, law departments, and clients. Rather than providing coherent ways to deliver affordable legal services, based on concepts such as efficiency and increasing quality, they are seen as an extra burden to practicing law. Law firms and law departments have not learned how to make these methodologies work together. They have lacked the assistance of scholars to light the path. Some consultants have helped, but most focus on only one or two of the disciplines. A few of us work on researching, synthesizing, and explaining these disciplines combine in law, but it is—admittedly—a slow process.

This leaves the industry with a gap. Many lawyers acknowledge the need for change, but find it difficult to do so without significant help. Other lawyers need convincing. They want proof that if they change, they will succeed. Most stay on the fence. Clients, however, are not on the fence. They want change.

Getting the Band Together

How can we proceed? In the context of the four methodologies I have discussed, I will make some suggestions:

1. Collaborate and Share.Break down the historical barriers between the practicing bar and academia. Scholars need access to practicing lawyers, data, and clients. With this access, they can apply many tools and techniques to identify challenges and point to solutions. Scholars have strong interest in this work, and law firms, law departments, and clients benefit.

2. Focus and Share. A big challenge in evolving legal services is deciding where to focus your energy. Every month someone has a new thing to draw your attention. Metrics. Technology. Process. Project. Doing the basics of a law practice seems to take a full day. Add these new things to the old add-ons (e.g., marketing) and focus drifts. Nevertheless, you must focus. Go T-shaped. Understand your domain in depth, but become familiar with the other areas. If you spread what you need to know among many, the burden on each of you drops.

3. Bend and Share. Inflexibility. Lawyers do what they do because that is what their mentors did, and their mentors, and so on. Decades of doing the same thing worked well for most lawyers, until the late 1980s. The two-humped camel of the legal industry emerged. Large law firm lawyers to the right, everyone else to the left, and a valley between them. As real competition emerges in the legal industry, lawyers must learn to flex, to bend, to adapt. Sharing knowledge and techniques among themselves and with others will be key to coming through this transition and succeeding on the other side.

The Stakes Are Higher Than Large Corporation Legal Fees

Although the legal industry has existed for centuries, it is an immature industry. The business model that brought many lawyers fortunes was fixed a century past. Now, it has a stranglehold on us inhibiting change. The four lean methodologies I described are opening new business models, but we have a long journey ahead. We need to progress faster if we want to keep the profession from slipping deep into irrelevance. That is a worthy reason for change. The compelling reason lies outside the industry. A healthy, functioning, and responsive “legal infrastructure” (as Gillian Hadfield has named it) is essential to our society. Letting that legal infrastructure decay, the way our general infrastructure has decayed, brings a massive threat to all of us.