 |
| Anita Szigeti |
Here is why. First off, we elected the benchers to Convocation. We are allowed access to information we need to decide whether we want to re-elect any or all of them next time. We are entitled to information about whether their decision-making is prudent. Next, we pay more than $2,500 each a year to the society for services that for many of us start and stop with the mind-boggling LSO Connects portal, spot audits and bureaucracy weighing us down as we comply to support their oversight. Finally, with 33 years at the bar, at my Legal Aid rates of $150 per hour and the cost of overhead for my little firm, it could take me as long as a decade to see the kind of money the society was prepared to hand over in one year to Diana Miles. Make what you will of my math, the point is that the Law Society spent our hard-earned cash in a cavalier way, promising an exorbitant amount as salary and pensions for an essentially administrative leadership position within the organization. And then threw another big bucket of good money after bad.
When my colleagues learned of my intention to seek release of the accounting of the global cost of this scandal, many contacted me privately to warn me that I will never get this information. They all seemed to know how this would go: the Society would cite privacy of the service providers, maybe suggest a committee to reflect on the prospect of disclosure, vote me down or, even if by some miracle the motion succeeded, it would not be binding on Convocation. Everyone seemed a little sad for me that I’d be so naive as to imagine I might get somewhere. But of course, I am acutely aware that the chances of this motion passing are little to none. The good news is winning is not the goal. And if I only ever pursued cases I thought I would win, in my line of work, I’d never get out of bed. The important thing is to ask the right questions of the right people at the right time. Because sunlight is the best disinfectant.
So I have filed my motion. There was a bit of drama when at first it was rejected for having one more signatory’s support than the exactly 10 required, apparently including mine as the mover. The irony of the strict enforcement of the 10 signature bylaw put against the single signature that managed to bypass the bylaw requiring Convocation to approve the million dollar CEO’s salary is palpable. But putting that aside, here is the society’s chance to put its money where its mouth is, as it were, and just disclose what all this has cost us. Maybe there is a chance they’ll do it.
This is the second half of a two-part series. Part one: What has Ontario’s law society’s CEO salary scandal really cost us?
Anita Szigeti is the principal lawyer at Anita Szigeti Advocates, a boutique Toronto law firm specializing in mental health justice litigation. She is the founder of two national volunteer lawyer associations: the Law and Mental Disorder Association and Women in Canadian Criminal Defence. Find her on LinkedIn, follow her on X and on her blog.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.