Career Clinic: Should I let on that I'm going to the G20 protests?

An interesting dilemma. Although, my initial thinking was along the lines of "if you even have to ask this question, perhaps your time would be best spent thinking about and considering whether you're in the right sort of job and if you've got any real future there", after a bit more thought, I can see (and appreciate) your wanting to be open, honest and candid with your employer, particularly given the widespread media coverage might just lead to a bit of unexpected exposure. That said, and despite being a big fan of honesty, I'm inclined to think there are some things better kept to oneself. Yes, we most definitely have a right to live our own lives and do our own thing, but I think it is perhaps somewhat naive not to realise that your employer is keen to project a certain sort of image and may very well have clients that are themselves the target of the protests. If so, I think it's fair to say they might not be terribly keen to have associates attending such protests - makes it rather difficult to trot said associates out in pitches and client development events...

Dorothy Gale -30 Mar 2009 | 10:51

Don't advertise the fact that you're going but you don't need to hide it either. Providing you don't get involved in criminal activity it's none of your employer's business. After all, who decrees that lawyers can't have a political conviction aside from an unfailing belief that everything in capitalism is great.

Anonymous -30 Mar 2009 | 10:57

Depends whether you are taking holiday or skiving off work to attend. If the former, and you don't do anything criminal, it's none of their business. If the latter, you should watch out as there'll be loads of press coverage and they might spot you. Either way, have fun and don't break the law!

GC Bank -30 Mar 2009 | 14:40

More power to your elbow, brother. Ths kind of news is best shared in an all users email to which you have attached a photo of you wearing an 'I am a hippy' T-shirt. Don't forget to copy in your clients.

Anonymous -30 Mar 2009 | 15:40

People like you deserve to be beaten about the head with a copy of Atlas Shrugged...

M Friedman -30 Mar 2009 | 16:15

Of course you should tell everyone you work with, surely you're not ashamed of what I'm sure must be a well considered and strongly held philosophical and political viewpoint?

Anonymous -30 Mar 2009 | 17:51

If you wear a beard, few will recognise you.....

Percy -30 Mar 2009 | 17:55

You don't mention in which area of law you practise, but if it is in a corporate/commercial/banking field then to attend the G20 protests, and set yourself against the interests of the clients you are paid to represent, would not be a smart career move. You should also consider whether in fact that area of law is really what you should be doing. However if you are dealing with, for example, exclusively private client work then I see no reason why your views should be incompatible with your work. Only you will be able to judge how your employers might react if you tell them (but you don't need to lie to them about what you are doing in your time off - assuming you have legitimately booked it as holiday you don't need to say anything). And try not to get arrested.

Anonymous -30 Mar 2009 | 18:22

Don't do it! That is unless you plan on wearing a long dirty beard and no shoes.

Dave -30 Mar 2009 | 18:28

www.writetothem.com - you can write to your MP and he can get anything you need to the G20 if needs must. What are you anticipating when you get there - to lobby, to sit in a public gallery, to network - what is your purpose? If you just want a holiday in Chile... it matters not what you go there for... but if it is the politics and any fallout - I would run it past your partners/colleagues.

ANON -30 Mar 2009 | 18:36

In a democracy you should never have to even ask such a question. Those of you who think going on a demonstration - or even being open about it - is risky, wrong, or just bad for your career, should really have a look at the last few hundred years of human history and have a serious ponder about where your line of thinking would have led us/kept us.

R u serious? -31 Mar 2009 | 12:12

Go, but don't use your BlackBerry whilst there!

Anonymous -31 Mar 2009 | 12:31

West End firms tend to be fairly traditional/conservative. I would seriously consider not going. If your firm finds out, your reputation at work might suffer. Although there will be individuals protesting for decent and understandable reasons, there are plenty of groups who will be attending with more sinister motives. You may find yourself caught up something rather unpleasant and dangerous (terrorists, anarchists, criminals etc) - and it would probably not be a good idea to be associated with 'that sort of thing'. There will be plenty of people protesting - I'm sure your presence isn't vital. If you do decide to go, don't tell work and try to hide from the cameras!

West end girl -31 Mar 2009 | 14:24

You are very hypocritical and need to address where you loyalties lie.

Anonymous -31 Mar 2009 | 14:26

And i bet your firm is also undergoing a redundancy consultation... to which you are of course averse to and saying how bad it is etc etc, and yet you are planning to attend something which, if the majority of the protesters had their way would mean that 'large West End law firms' were a thing only of the past. You need to take a long hard look at where you are, what you want out of life, whether you need the BlackBerry, PC etc etc that your job brings.

Anonymous -31 Mar 2009 | 14:32

Why not just write out your own P45? Cut out the middleman.

Anonymous -31 Mar 2009 | 14:52

I thought that the peaceful protest on Saturday was for those sensible people who have good jobs yet are left-leaning; whereas those protesting this week are just those who are up for a riot. Avoid the G20 protests - for your own safety if nothing else.

Anonymous -31 Mar 2009 | 18:26

It sounds horribly cowardly, but I think you should stay well clear. Apart from the issues to do with (potentially) being seen to have political interests which are diametrically opposed to those of your clients, and the possibility of appearing in the media, what happens if you inadvertently end up getting scooped up by the police? Remember, the cops can hold a suspect without charge for up to 24 hours, and, with them being short on manpower and long on arrestees you may well not be released until after your firm's clocking-on time the next day. Or, alternatively, what about if you get smacked around by an over-zealous policeman and stroll in the next morning with a broken nose? Either of those situations will take some explaining. I sympathise with your ethical dilemma, but I'd play it safe if I were you.

Anon -31 Mar 2009 | 20:47

I hope you didn't go. It's one thing protesting but the morons seem to have been destroying property and putting graffitti everywhere. They're not rebels with a cause, they're just yobs. If you are going to take time off to go to a protest then do something constructive for a sensible cause and keep away from these oiks who think it's ok to destroy taxpayers' property (since we own most of RBS and the other banks now). They disgust me and being associated with them should be career-limiting in any field, not just the law. I agree with peaceful protest and speaking up (I often feel the English/British are far too passive and let the government and other public sector(esque) organisations like rail companies and energy suppliers get away with treating people like they're something unpleasant they've got on their shoe) but this behaviour is just idiotic.

Helen -01 Apr 2009 | 18:09

A whole group of us went, we dressed up as police so that we could blend in. It worked a treat until the anarchists attacked us. It was still a great day out though.

Sir F G W -01 Apr 2009 | 18:39

Instead of participating in protesting - which really assists no one - why not go to the G20 to write your ideas on a list and submit the list to the G20 leaders! Be positive, be proactive, be progressive. Why waste energy protesting when you can use the same energy progressively?

ANON -02 Apr 2009 | 16:42