chru c tnxarltu re ocatCryoulrsy see ira=t seyt" ":e l epos ltngD nruulel aninh wuc;ereoahbra
tasot. nt eoeiefunttiobaarlpf,lsa"ods yo fOnti ps nidD"t tum nwdfce-t oM i1w1o
Some of this report is inconsistent with previous reporting, which said that Fisher Phillips had already been paid $150k and was now billing an additional $300k. Their contract on the city’s web site has a cap of $150k and apparently they are seeking to bill above that cap for a total bill of $450,000. This report as of 7/8/25 says that they’ve already been paid $500k and are seeking the additional $300k for a total of $800k.
In any event, these amounts are eye-watering for a sexual harassment investigation.
To hide behind “we were only looking at Thomas Cook” is a wildly incompetent position. Consultants should never have blinders on — that’s why you hire firms that have no connections. To not even share the full extent of the women’s reports was irresponsible and they should not be paid. And their fees are exorbitant.
No, neither a government nor a corporation should ever hire a consultant or a law firm without parameters, guidelines, as to the retention. Firms require engagement letters before working, so there is no dispute later as to what work was to be done. This firm was not hired to consult; it was hired to investigate claims of sexual harrasment by a high ranking former city employee, and to provide a governmental body a report as to its findings. A good law firm, like a good consultant, will usually add a section to its report with other findings not within the scope that may be topics for future investigation or work. But it would be negligent on the part of the City County Council, or a corporate management team or board of directors, to hire a firm and give it carte blanche to investigate what ever popped up.
The suggestion these fees are outrageous is uninformed. As any insurance claims examiner who deals with Employment Practices Liability (EPL) claims knows, litigation is very expensive. The firm was retained after an search, headed by Ms. Carlino, to make certain the firm had no connections with Indianapolis government officials. It was an outside firm. Senior partners bill between $450-$600 an hour for this sort of work; associates in the $300 range. Call it a blended rate of $400 per hour. $450,000 at that blended rate would be about 1125 hours of work. If there were three attorneys involved, that’s less than 400 hours each, or about 2.5 months of working only on this case. The firm worked on the investigation for 7 months. So 400 hours, over 7 months, is less than 60 hours a month. The bill seems reasonable. Especially in a high-profile case like this. A simple EPL claim against a corporation can easily run litigation expense of $200,000.
Is there more to this? Likely. But if the cost so far is deemed to high, then further expense will not be favored. Nor is it likely to produce actionable items. Those items were already reported upon, and in theory the change has been started. It would just be political fodder in a war that has already started, and it likely to not change anyone’s minds on the outcome.
Osili’s days in leadership are numbered.
Some of this report is inconsistent with previous reporting, which said that Fisher Phillips had already been paid $150k and was now billing an additional $300k. Their contract on the city’s web site has a cap of $150k and apparently they are seeking to bill above that cap for a total bill of $450,000. This report as of 7/8/25 says that they’ve already been paid $500k and are seeking the additional $300k for a total of $800k.
In any event, these amounts are eye-watering for a sexual harassment investigation.
To hide behind “we were only looking at Thomas Cook” is a wildly incompetent position. Consultants should never have blinders on — that’s why you hire firms that have no connections. To not even share the full extent of the women’s reports was irresponsible and they should not be paid. And their fees are exorbitant.
No, neither a government nor a corporation should ever hire a consultant or a law firm without parameters, guidelines, as to the retention. Firms require engagement letters before working, so there is no dispute later as to what work was to be done. This firm was not hired to consult; it was hired to investigate claims of sexual harrasment by a high ranking former city employee, and to provide a governmental body a report as to its findings. A good law firm, like a good consultant, will usually add a section to its report with other findings not within the scope that may be topics for future investigation or work. But it would be negligent on the part of the City County Council, or a corporate management team or board of directors, to hire a firm and give it carte blanche to investigate what ever popped up.
The suggestion these fees are outrageous is uninformed. As any insurance claims examiner who deals with Employment Practices Liability (EPL) claims knows, litigation is very expensive. The firm was retained after an search, headed by Ms. Carlino, to make certain the firm had no connections with Indianapolis government officials. It was an outside firm. Senior partners bill between $450-$600 an hour for this sort of work; associates in the $300 range. Call it a blended rate of $400 per hour. $450,000 at that blended rate would be about 1125 hours of work. If there were three attorneys involved, that’s less than 400 hours each, or about 2.5 months of working only on this case. The firm worked on the investigation for 7 months. So 400 hours, over 7 months, is less than 60 hours a month. The bill seems reasonable. Especially in a high-profile case like this. A simple EPL claim against a corporation can easily run litigation expense of $200,000.
Is there more to this? Likely. But if the cost so far is deemed to high, then further expense will not be favored. Nor is it likely to produce actionable items. Those items were already reported upon, and in theory the change has been started. It would just be political fodder in a war that has already started, and it likely to not change anyone’s minds on the outcome.