Amy Dufrane: On today’s podcast interview, Joe and I would like to welcome Louis Lessig who is a partner with a law firm in New Jersey. His practice concentrates in labor and employment counseling, litigation, negotiations and training, and he has had a lot of interesting experience, especially with what’s going on around the Me Too movement and equal employment opportunity and the National Labor Relations Board. He is going to share his insight on what he’s seeing and an attorney from his perspective, and this was a really interesting interview to talk about some of these innovations that are happening around the future of work. We are excited to share our discussion with Louis Lessig and he is in studio now.
So welcome Louis. We’re happy to have you here and we’re really interested to talk to a super lawyer as yourself that is knee deep in all sorts of interesting discrimination, harassment, hostile work environment places that it’s interesting because I think the EEOC has seen a triple fold increase in their caseload of discrimination complaints that are happening in businesses. You think in 2018 that we would be much further along where we are in our organizations trying to move us into a more advanced way of thinking, and we’re still talking about how organizations fail so miserably at this. And it’s in the news day after day after day, organizations that successfully shoot themselves in the foot. So thank you for being here with that lovely introduction that I just gave of you, right? And the topic. So why don’t you tell us a little bit about where you see this state of employment from your perspective, in the place where you sit, the clients that you lead along the path. Where are we right now?
Louis Lessig: We are in a fascinating time to be very candid. I just spent, you mentioned the issues around the EEOC and for the better part of 2018 I’ve been traveling the country, meeting with our various clients at their particular locations, conducting the harassment training sessions and discussing some of the issues and it’s interesting no matter how much technology we end up getting involved with, at the end of the day the problems are always interpersonal. If we take a look at things like cyber security, what’s the number one issue? The number one issue is user issues and challenges on being polite, and someone who has my mother living under our roof as well, it is fascinating to try and explain to different generations what you need to do and it’s no different in the harassment area.
I think the scarier part for me is that when we start talking about what’s going on right now in the workplace, we have sort of this bleed in from politics which not necessarily is a good thing where everything is polarized. And I often tell people that from my perspective we need to have and support officials who are more centralized because that’s really how we get things done. And when we look at things from the harassment perspective, what I find is people are too busy watching the news and as great as Twitter and those kinds of things are, let’s be honest. It’s great and sensational to talk about pick your Matt Lauer, Bill Cosby type of people, and yet when I stand in front of a room of mixed folks, whether they be managers or employees, I’m having conversations saying, “Look, here is the spectrum, if you will, of an opportunity.” You have to understand that Bill Cosby’s of the world are not on the spectrum because they are so far beyond what we believe and accept in our organizations.
It’s just not something we’re going to do so you take them out and then you look at okay, where are we? And I think the challenge today is I think you’re right Amy, we spend more time today, still talking about the same things that we’ve been talking about for the last 20 years. Now I guess there’s a world where there’s a positive there from the perspective that we need to constant re-educate, although the downside is we have to re-educate. And as much as we move forward, people find ways to still do crazy things. Spend a lot of time talking on stages and different issues relative to employment law, and one of the things I’ve talked about a lot has been technology and how you discipline in the age of technology, and how many people understand the only difference between the three of us sitting in a room together, hanging out having a great time and skyping is the fact that it’s a different platform but the same things exist.
The same kind of interpersonal skills that we need to engage in if we’re face to face are no different here, particularly in the advent of Skype and Zoom and what have you, where we’re trying to close that gap independent of the distance. And I think organizations are struggling with that, particularly in a time where we have pick your craziness, whether it’s harassment, whether it’s marijuana in the workplace, whether it’s technology and how there are certain individuals who may see their jobs disappear. Meanwhile you have the increase in jobs that candidly, when I was in undergrad, there were certain classes I picked and let’s be fair, I love accountants but they do the math. I don’t do the math. And so the challenge is I avoided certain classes because I had to take accounting, wasn’t going to do that, and now we talk about data and analytics like everybody has got to do it and we can’t find enough people to do the data analytics.
So we’re in very interesting times right now.
Joe Mechlinski: Literally about to make an accountant joke as a lawyer. I was like, “Where is he going with this?” So employment law has, I think, certainly become an en vogue conversation. Amy’s point, we still look at the workplace. I heard an anecdote yesterday from my wife who runs a small business and she was watching a CEO who’s actually referencing Me Too and it was legitimately close to a Me Too moment. And he’s like, “No, no, no. Not me but this-” and he’s putting his foot in his mouth and so is there anything, not a magic bullet or a special pill, but is there some baseline level of stuff that if we’re really going to evolve we have got to do? And think maybe one click deeper or above the harassment training, diversity training, things that are just complex. I almost don’t even want to let you reference those because if you’re not doing those, please stop listening to this podcast right now because you’re, you just need another podcast. Are there some other things that you are seeing organizations do one step above those things that are just going to become the new table stakes to avoid having to call you?
I mean not that we wouldn’t want to call you. You know I would.
Louis Lessig: Well it’s funny. I think that like so many things, we end up having a pendulum effect. And right now it’s just one way pretty far. I’ve been spending a lot of time lately trying to explain, particularly to men, that you still need to be able to manage and when we talk about how you manage, it’s about managing in the right way. And I think you’re right, Joe, I mean, there are so many people that think they’re doing the right thing but can’t get out of their own way. And I think that’s, from my perspective, sometimes it’s as simple as a reminder, and sometimes it’s the way folks have been brought up, and sometimes it’s a recognition that it doesn’t matter how high up you are in an organization, if you can’t get out of your own way, you get you out of your own way.
Earlier this year I went in and I had to do an investigation for a particular entity and they were investigating their CEO. And he did not want to hear from me and he was 6’5″, 230, and I am all of 5’5″ and 160, and needless to say he’s a bit more imposing than I am and there is somebody leading an organization of several hundred people who sat their with the senior managers in 2017, I guess it was, rating all the female staff, and not on their work performance. And I’m blown away by that and yet that’s where we are. Now at the same time, I find that if I can sit down and talk to folks, particularly when you have [sweet 00:10:20] individuals that understand and get it. Sometimes it’s as simple as having them in the room and watching things flow down.
So for example, I had a meeting not too long ago with managers from a particular company, the CEO happened to be in the room and I started talking about LGBTQ issues. And she stops me, like almost mid-sentence, and says, “Actually funny you should be talking about that. I’m reading a book right now written by someone who is transgender.” And she goes on this five minute discussion about her perspective and how she personally feels about it, and yet everybody in the room reports to her, and that’s the kind of stuff that you want to be able to see. And I can’t even make that stuff up. And it would be fantastic if I could. But from my perspective, I think that’s a lot of where this comes from and how we’re going to get rid of it. Some of it is very industry based, let’s be honest. I think that there are… I am constantly finding industries that I am amazed allow certain things to happen, and in a day where we can sit there and the three of us understand what’s going on, and it’s as if it’s an old boy’s network and they don’t care and they’re not changing because everybody is making up money where it’s irrelevant. And it’s not.
It’s interesting Joe. My wife works for a hospital system and she had an issue where there was some, we’ll call it a hostile work environment. And it’s fascinating when they know what the husband does, how things stop. But that’s not why you want it occur. You just want them to address the situation and they didn’t necessarily address it the way I would advise clients. And I’m not sure, my hope is that we get far enough in our collective discussion that those people either age out of the workforce or we force ably remove them, that we don’t continue to have these challenges, but I think there are certain age old discussions we have, absence of power, and what happens there, that may be part of it. I hope not. I’d like to be much more optimistic but I’ll be candid, I haven’t necessarily seen that and I also think that different places around the country have very different ways of looking at it as well.
Joe Mechlinski: I have like 12 follow ups. Amy, you better jump in here before-
Amy Dufrane: I know. So there is a couple of anecdotal things. The timing of this conversation is so interesting because over the weekend I had a discussion with someone that’s in the construction industry. Was sitting in a table, here in Washington D.C., all men are around the table and there was a very inappropriate discussion that was happening, and a very young, 22 year old, highly educated person came in, woman came in and was part of this, not part of the discussion but sort of walked in and didn’t know what to do or say. And the person I talked to, he’s a man and I said, “Well what did you do?” He said, “Well I didn’t do anything.” And I said, “Shame on you.” Like you should have stopped that conversation from happening irregardless if this is your boss or not, stop it, because this young woman who is brand new to the workforce has come in and is seeing this happen and she’s going to leave your organization because of what just happened, and hey by the way, you’ve got some liability here. So you need to go tell someone and get on this straight away. I mean my HR antennae was at full force around this topic.
I mean it’s totally anecdotal and it’s just kind of been interesting based on the discussion that we’re having right now, but it’s, of course, it’s the industry construction. There’s a lot of men and conversations are maybe a little bit different in that space but anyway. I think about this and HR can’t be everywhere, they can’t be, and I think about different cases that have happened that have been all over the networks that we see. How does HR help the workforce, their workforce, to understand this, and I think it’s almost beyond harassment training, because it sort of quid pro quo and hostile work environment. What else can we do as not just HR leaders but business leaders to really help to illuminate to our entire workforce what’s acceptable and what’s not? Because it’s still happening. We all have examples. We’ve all been a part of this but what should HR be doing besides harassment training, what else?
Louis Lessig: Well I have to be honest. I think that if we look in the United States right now, you have, in essence book ends. You have California and New York who have basically led the charge in terms of the kind of training we have to provide and how we’re supposed to provide it. Independent of what I think of those particular laws, it’s sort of irrelevant, but it’s funny we’re having the conversation now.
Earlier this month I gave a candidate address on the Influence of You, specifically to HR leaders, and from my perspective, that’s really where it’s got to start. By the time we start having the conversations around harassment, there’s a reason why we’re there. And so what we need to be able to do is have people own things like what you do on a daily basis. And one of the things I said from the stage was, and I’m guilty of it to so I’ve got a set up here where I have two monitors and so I can be more efficient and my assistant will come walking in and asking me a question. And I won’t look up. I’ll respond to her and the problem is I’m saying something in doing that. And that’s not what I want to be saying.
And in the same way when HR is engaging, I think we…I’ve sort of seen two different types of folks in HR. One being your more junior person that is afraid of losing their position and they don’t want to bump the system and so they don’t, it’s not that they don’t have the personal integrity, they just haven’t taken that stand. And then I have the other folks that have a seat at the table but for whatever reason don’t feel strong enough to take that stand, but all of them have the opportunity independent of those moments and examples, as you’ve mentioned, that we all have to lead by example.
And I think it’s the same way, we talk about the kind of work that you do and that Joe does and that I do in my own space, this is what we have to do on a regular basis. You have to hold yourself up to a higher standard to let folks know this is what is acceptable and this is what is not acceptable, and when I try and explain to my eight year old why, as we get towards the holiday times, why are we going and doing things for the kids in [Camden 00:18:17], and it’s because you know what? People don’t have what you have or they don’t have the opportunities that you do and you need to be able to give back, and that’s why, yeah fine, eight days of Hanukah, but hey buddy, guess what? Four of those days you’re going to something for somebody else because you don’t need it as much as they do.
And I just think that we need to step back and look more. And it’s ironic, I’m sure the two of you will be somewhat amused that the attorney is going to start talking about this, but from my perspective anymore, this is all about culture. What is the culture of your organization? What do you want it to be? And rather than me walking in with a baseball bat that I have behind in my office, saying, “Here is what we’re going to do.” Let’s talk about how do we design the organization the way you want? Yes fine, the law is always going to lag behind us but how do we get to where we want to get to so that we don’t end up in this morale legal garbage because people don’t know any better? We’d rather train them up front because it’s costing us too much so on board people, and figure out how they can each help us be profitable. At the same time we’re looking at it and saying, “There’s a better way.”
Joe Mechlinski: Well I like to think the other side of that, there’s a lot to unpack here. I mean certainly when you talk about New York and California and the book ends. The country is probably more tribal than it’s been maybe ever. I’m not an historian but we certainly are losing the ability to just talk to each other. And I think in some way that residue in the workplace, when you speak of culture, it comes up for me in the Gotcha or Call Out culture where is if I, as a white man, say something that is not so PC or not so good, but no where near on the continuum of Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein, I don’t think we, and I’m searching for the answer, which is, what’s the protocol to put the foot, to take it out of your mouth and to learn and listen and engage in a conversation? And then move on? And so it’s not that it’s not acceptable but at the same times, it’s not acceptable to a totally different degree in some of the things that we’re going to talk about.
So when we think about culture, have you seen, I don’t know, I’ll keep asking you this because I think it’s important, which is culturally, is anyone you see doing that well? Or maybe at least starting to do that well? Which is how do we remove the foot from people’s mouths when we, and inevitably we’re all going to say something stupid, without thinking about it? You don’t have to be a white man to say it. Amy says dumb things all the time. Let me just tell you.
Amy Dufrane: Right. That’s right. I do.
Louis Lessig: I think you’re right though, Joe, I think the problem that we have right now is that because we’re in this Gotcha moment and where the pendulum is, it becomes difficult. I mean I have clients who, and I’ve certainly seen where something will occur and they’ll immediately deal with it. I think the problem is that so many people have been conditioned and I think we all hear it, you have men that don’t want to be alone disciplining or otherwise evaluating women because they’re worried about what’s going to happen. Well okay fine. Put another adult in there. I mean last time I checked, we’re all adults and if there are multiple people in the room, at least that makes it easier. However we want to create that opportunity to sort of lead by example. At the same time, we’re in a time of very much of a transition in a way that I think has not really occurred before. And I don’t just mean Millennials coming into the workforce. You have people today that don’t know any better or don’t necessarily want to know any better, and then you have people coming in to the workforce that are saying, “No, this is what I am going to accept.”
And so some of this is going to be Mr. Economics Major, this is going to be the idea of, “Hey, supply and demand. If you’re either going to get on board or you’re not.” And I think the question is going to be, if you want to be an employer of choice, what does that mean? And so I think it’s different for every organization. That’s why it’s hard to answer the question. I mean I will tell you that there are certain places I’ve been to particularly this year where I can go to corporate and they’re fine. They’re all good. They all buy but they grow by acquisition so when I go to a certain place around the country, let’s just say they’re a little different, and they have people in place and they purchase from somebody else, and the question is what does it take to shift the culture there to be more like the Mothership and sometimes that works better than others. I think we can all agree that one of the best ways to do that is by interpersonal interaction, and the longer that happens. So the question becomes how do we help the change by example even in those locations that may not be close together, for lack of a better term, and as we do more and more tele work, and remote access, if you will, what does that mean? And how do individuals interact?
For all you know, I could have my fuzzy slippers on right now and I joke with people about that all the time but there’s a difference when you’re on camera or off camera, and I think where we need to get, to really directly answer your question, is we need to have a space that at that office where people understand, “Listen, if I make a mistake and I immediately own it and then step back and move on, that needs to be okay because nobody’s perfect.” And I think that’s the challenge and before we got on this call today, I was dealing with a situation with a domestic issue that was connected to work. My position was pretty simple. Let’s just separate everybody and then figure it out. I’d rather keep everybody safe than have the appearance of condoning something that we’re really not.
Joe Mechlinski: You seem like a great lawyer by the way and I’m not just BS-ing you. I mean pragmatic, problem solving, I’ve heard you not disconnect yourself from the law, but just realizing that that’s only there in a time where we can no longer have a conversation to solve a problem, in some ways. Maybe not perfectly said, but that’s the way it sort of felt. Is there any employment law you don’t like?
Louis Lessig: Hmm.
Joe Mechlinski: Are you allowed to say that?
Louis Lessig: I don’t know. I mean I think there’s some bills right now that are challenging. When we talk about the Me Too movement and the idea of making all of the confidentiality agreements not so confidential anymore, I think that’s a real problem, and I think it’s a problem for the workplace. When you talk about wanting to have this open discussion and wanting people to feel safe, I’ve got [inaudible 00:25:42] say, “Hey Joe. Listen. I need to have a conversation with you and it needs to stop here.” And it doesn’t even [inaudible 00:25:47]. And sometimes in what I think we all see is, sometimes it’s the law by unintended consequences. And that’s what makes me nervous when we look prospectively. For example in New Jersey, just had paid sick leave pass. A lot of people like it but it’s going to have an impact economically whether we like it or not. So little things.
Amy Dufrane: So I want to follow up on the confidentiality agreements because I think that’s something that it’s to protect both sides, not just the employer but the employee, and not when there’s horrible, well I guess it could be horrible things, but where is this moving? How do you think that there will be this sort of veil lifted on the confidentiality agreement? So that an employer signs with a former employee?
Louis Lessig: I have to be honest that this entire area makes me nervous because I’ve done the investigation side and when I’m talking with individuals, particularly ones that are not involved but have seen stuff. And a lot of times anymore I go in the same way the EEOC talks about bystander intervention training, I tell people, “Listen, if you walk into a room and Joe and I are having a conversation and Amy, you’re listening to what we’re saying and the hair on the back of your neck starts to go up, that’s when Joe and I need to stop talking.” Now it could just be that we’re in a heated conversation and you need to break us up, but in the same way your perspective becomes important because he and I are engaged in this conversation. And so the whole point is to have the opportunity to allow that third party that isn’t really involved but wants to get involved or they were raised in such a way that they understand they need to come forward to make the organization better to the extent that they’re no longer safe, for lack of a better word.
I see that as a problem because I just feel like there’s a time and a place, there’s a reason why we do things and the problem is what we all see are the awful things. You mentioned Harvey Weinstein, things that, as I mentioned earlier, are not, from my perspective, on the spectrum of reality of what any organization would ever tolerate. But when we talk about that gray area where we all hang out, the real issue becomes there are times where we make business decisions either because they don’t want to pay attorneys or they don’t want the PR or whatever the reason is, it’s very depressing, but whatever the reason is you decide you want something to go away. You’re not admitting that you did anything wrong, and by the way, you many not have done anything wrong. We all certainly, and let’s be honest, 80% of the people that work for us respectively drink the Kool-Aid. They’re on board, they’re with us, they get it. 20% of the people make sure that folks in HR and people like myself have a job.
So if you figure out of that 20% some of those people are literally going to organizations to set them up. Well for that percentage of people, is it really fair to have it where it’s an open book and it’s interesting because when you flip it around, back in the day of we won’t talk about when I originally went to law school, the whole purpose of our criminal justice system is for 9 guilty people to go free so that the one innocent person on trial doesn’t go to jail, but here we don’t do that, and we take away the whole issue, don’t we make that worse?
Joe Mechlinski: We need to get you to run for office. This is really good.
Louis Lessig: Please, I’ll be down on the hill next month and I don’t know that I’m excited for it this year.
Joe Mechlinski: So when you think about the future of the workplace, we’ve been asking people this question, whether asking what will happen since we’re terrible predictors of the future, but there is enough data at this point, that we can start to speculate. Like we can speculate that it might be the case that a lot of people leave the W2 relationship with their employer and enter into this more gig based, or 1099 based economy. We can see the writing on the wall. That’s happened and happening. We can see that that might then lead to, as you say, the law of unintended consequences which is where I might be employed in multiple facets, which then might erode the 9-5 or when you think about sick time or paid time off relative to a W2 status. What are some of the things that you think will have to catch up here soon because of that particular part of the future of work? Which is just the way people are getting paid. What do you see as kind of the next wave of whether it’s regulation legislation, etc. that we need to catch up on?
Louis Lessig: Well it’s interesting. I think organizations like Uber have really pushed the envelope and I think you’re absolutely right. One of the areas that I find fascinating is gig employees in general. I don’t know about either of you but every time I go to a new city and I end up being in some kind of an Uber or a Lyft or what have you, I ask the drivers, what do you think? Do you like it? Why do you do it? And it’s interesting to me because it runs the gamete. I talked to one woman who owns her own business during the day but Ubers at night to raise money for an animal shelter that she runs on the side. Who would have thought? And so the problem is, though, those organizations are catching up to a degree, but the question becomes if you’re the kind of person that truly wants the flexibility that a gig employee would really be about, then that means that you need much more flexibility than the workplace is currently designed for while still providing the safety net. I think in the current economic times in which we live it’s a real question as to whether defined pension verses 401K in the long term, is that going to matter? But not for nothing.
I worry about that. I worry about that for my kids. I guess I could say I worry about it for myself, I’m not going to go there because I wonder what that means and what that means for us as a society, but certainly when we look towards overtime regulations at some time post March of ’19, I think one of the things we’re hoping to see is something to address some of that. And the problem we’ve got, as a practical matter, is that the law will always be behind all the technology stuff that we do. So where you totally push the envelope, Joe, I think we’re constantly going to play catch up and so people in my position are going to play in the gray and hope that we can figure it out but that’s not the only issue. At the same time we look at things, the federal government right now has marijuana listed as a Schedule 1 and yet more than half the states around the country have changed that.
There are rumors that New Jersey will be the next one to go recreational and yet there isn’t a single medical company or device manufacturer that’s figured out how to come up with the “breath-alizer” if you will for marijuana. And it’s a real issue because in the workplace what do you do? So unless you’re eating a brownie or you’re smoking in front of your boss, you’re safe? And we talk about productivity, it’s a challenge that I don’t have an answer to, but it’s a challenge.
Joe Mechlinski: Maybe. I mean they’re micro-dusting in the Valley and they’re suggesting that they’re 30% more effective. I mean this isn’t a pro or anti stance, it’s your exact point and I think this is the conversation which is of course I don’t want someone impaired driving a big piece of equipment. That’s not a use case anybody, any sane person is going to argue. And what does the creative do when they’ve got to come up with something? We sort of joke about it with designers and with writers and with really artistic people that they need to go off, have a glass of wine, smoke a cigarette, walk around the block, and yes at this point, smoke a joint. That’s just going to enter into the conversation into the point that I’m not, again, for or against, that’s not the point of the conversation, it’s just to your point, what do we do? And I think as a laggard, what I’ve found helpful in this conversation is I think a lot of times your industry and specifically your sector of the industry gets a bad rap, sincerely, but in today’s conversation it’s nice to hear a very pragmatic approach to the way that you’re looking at this, and that it’s nuanced, which I think is really healthy for us to just call out in a positive way so I appreciate that insight.
Louis Lessig: It’s also a little scary though because that’s not what business wants. Business wants black letter, here’s what it is. And it’s interesting because like you, I take the stage a fair amount and I love the new tech. I mean my God, the continuing ed that I’ve got to do where you sit in the room and they read you the slides as if I’m a five year old, and yet I was on stage the other day doing live polling and other activities where it’s 400 people, 500 people in the room and they’re all doing the activity. Like to me, that’s a level of engagement that we couldn’t do a decade ago that we can do now. That’s awesome.
Joe Mechlinski: Cool.
Amy Dufrane: That’s right. Well if you could share with us, what are you reading now? What blogs are you reading? We like to give our listeners names of people to go to a Ted Talk and listen to their talk or go read their blog, do you have recommendations for our listeners?
Louis Lessig: Hmm. It’s funny, one of the books that I constantly go back to is the Go Giver. I do a lot of servant volunteer leadership, for lack of a better term, and so I spend a lot of time going back to stuff like that. It’s interesting, I spend enough time in the car traveling that I’m doing more podcasts, necessarily than reading, so whether it’s interesting people that have a take, general issue, like Brian Fanzo, of a discussion, who I think is really interesting in the marketing space. But I think that I spend a lot of time trying to follow or being on the cutting edge of what’s going on, and so sometimes that’s following things like HRCI or those kinds of larger organizations if you will, but I try to listen to what other people have to share. I think I’m in the midst of Talk Triggers by Jay Baer which I find really interesting. And a lot of folks in…the one cool thing about being a part of NSA, with National Speakers Association, is so many forward thinking people that are there, and so I don’t know that I’m reading one book. I might be reading three, which I guess, like my friend Ian James would say, “Don’t do that. That’s the whole point of attention is focus, you can’t multi-talk.” But I’m trying it anyway.
Joe Mechlinski: Good for you.
Amy Dufrane: I do too. I have like this stack that you’re in different stages of, you kind of get bored of one and you go to the next one, and yeah, I probably, that’s not the way to read a book. But anyway, so I know that we’re coming to the end of our discussion and I go back to the beginning of our discussion where you talked about how you’re out there, you’re doing a lot more education than ever before, but it really comes down to an organization that’s focused on their values and their culture, and the importance of that, and how, as business leaders, we need to be establishing those values and communicating them in a way that people are embracing and understanding and able to ask questions and sitting at a culture that is one that we would want all of our kids to be, to work for, an organization that is collaborative and welcoming and caring, and so I think about those things and how important that is as business leaders, and in particular, HR, the call to action in this, and the call, or HR to really make sure that those values and that culture is ingrained in the tapestry of the fabric across the organization. I think that’s key and critical. Joe, I don’t know if you want to add anything else?
Joe Mechlinski: No, no.
Amy Dufrane: What?
Joe Mechlinski: No, I know. Oh, what is that? This is our third conversation that we’ve had today so I feel like we’re all a little punchy, but no. I would love to do a part two of this in about a year when we can come back to kind of where is that pendulum and how are we all adapting a new set, hopefully, of norms and behaviors. And you said it a few times, this interpersonal communication, I think is really key, so I appreciate your time.
Louis Lessig: It is my pleasure to spend time with both of you and hopefully we’ll have an opportunity to spend some time together in the future.
Amy Dufrane: That’s great. Thanks Louis.
Louis Lessig: Absolutely.