Lots of excitement erupted when the Guardian revealed that Clifford Chance’s female employees had an £90 allowance for underwear. However, it quickly became apparent that they weren’t trying to sex up their lady lawyers (in the spirit of fairnerss the so called ‘lingerie allowance’ actually applies to both men and women) and a specific policy with a £90 allowance was denied.

A spokesperson told Above the Law If an attorney is working hard and working late — perhaps at a client’s office that is miles away from their home — then the firm will reimburse them for a hotel room. If they need a shower or a shave or, yes, a new pair of “knickers,” the firm will pay for that. Frankly we think it’s what any good firm or company would do.”  Jolly sensible.

With such levity in the air you’d be forgiven for thinking things were getting back to normal. Unfortunately though, its the small firms that are probably more in need of a change of underwear – rumours abound of firms shutting down in the run up to PII renewal reports the Gazette . The news is not unexpected after it became apparent that many small firms were reeling from a triple whammy of reduced work flow, an increase in the threat of negligence claims and a corresponding increase in insurance premiums.

On a slightly brighter note, no new redundancy announcements have surfaced this week, although Shoosmiths has reportedly (via: rollonfriday) asked all staff to take a pay cut or face more axe swinging.

And for any legal Jedis out of a job in need of a mission  here’s something to consider – The Mail reports that:

The founder of the Jedi religion inspired by the Star Wars films has been thrown out of a Tesco supermarket for wearing his distinctive brown hood.

Daniel Jones, 23, who has 500,000 followers worldwide, was told his hood flouted store rules and was ordered to remove it or leave the supermarket.

He claimed he had been ‘victimised over his beliefs’ and left ‘emotionally humiliated’ by the supermarket in Bangor, north Wales.

Mr Jones, from Holyhead, is considering legal action against the dark forces of the grocery empire (could this recent discrimination ruling be useful?) claiming his religion dictates that he should wear the hood in public places.

Tesco disputed this remarking: ‘Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda and Luke Skywalker all appeared hoodless without ever going over to the Dark Side and we are only aware of the Emperor as one who never removed his hood. Helpfully adding, ‘If Jedi walk around our stores with their hoods on, they’ll miss lots of special offers.’