I began my in-house legal career with ALLTEL. It was a valuable experience that I am very fortunate to have had. However, that doesn’t mean it was easy.
One day I was given a serious assignment. The EPA was investigating a group of wireless carriers, including us, for a matter that might include a large penalty. Given its seriousness, we hired a top tier Washington D.C. law firm to assist. Top tier means expensive, so my instructions were to do as much of work as possible. The D.C. lawyer directed me through arcane EPA regulations and “the ways of the world” in Washington. I worked to learn everything I could and was proud of my grasp of the entire matter.
One day I was called to update our General Counsel, who was exceptionally smart, and just as inpatient. He didn’t suffer fools and you’d best be on your “A” game when you spoke to him.
I gave what in my mind was a very informed, and succinct, update. He wanted to know how we would get the EPA to settle for no penalty. I knew that was not possible for several reasons. I started to explain, but was interrupted. I had committed blasphemy – that is, trying to explain that we would “lose,” and further aggravating my situation by using too many words (I think I said, “that’s not going to be possible. . . .”). This drew an icy stare and a gauntlet of questions designed to highlight my misdeed: “Who is assuming we are going to lose?” “How can you be so sure of the result?” “When did you become an EPA expert?” Without a chance to respond I was dismissively commanded to: “Get me somebody that knows what their talking about!” (emphasis in the original statement).
I was crushed. I knew what I was talking about, and I knew it well! I called our outside D.C. lawyer to let him know we were going to have a conference call in which he would explain to the GC exactly how this matter would play out.
While the D.C. lawyer understood the EPA and Washington – I understood the ways of ALLTEL. It wasn’t about the law, and it wasn’t about who was right. Rather, resolving a matter of this magnitude required convincing someone it was a great idea – and that it was their idea. But it could only be their idea after they had considered the points that made their idea great. This required them to think about what I already knew – that our settlement would be better than the competition (at least those before us), and would contribute to the business by minimizing both the cash outlay and the impact to the balance sheet. I walked the outside lawyer through each of these points, which he eagerly noted.
The next day I went back to the GC’s office and initiated the conference call. As planned, the DC lawyer walked through each point I had mentioned. He was using my play book and speaking as confidently as $450 an hour can buy (back when that was an outrageous rate). As he did, the GC developed his own idea of paying a fine that was large; but in fact, beneficial to the company. It was just coincidence that we all agreed.
After the call, the GC was satisfied with his idea. He gave me the knowing look of a mentor that had just taught the student a valuable lesson. And as he did, he pointed to the phone, and said:
“Now that’s a smart guy!”
Hokiejackson 
Leave a comment