Part Time in Big Law: Is it Really Possible?

To get a sense of the factors that affect the quantitative part-time data, it is useful to examine the part-time policies that law firms report to NALP. In addition to noting how many men and women partners, associates, and other lawyers work part-time at each office, NALP asks firms six questions about firm part-time policy that are relevant to this discussion: (1) Is part-time allowed? (2) Is part-time available to entry-level lawyers? (3) Do you have a written part-time policy for associates? (4) Do you have a written part-time policy for partners? (5) Can associate be promoted to partner while working part-time? (6) Can a partner work part-time? Law firm answers are summarized in Figure 3.

Law Firm Part-Time Policies

Source: NALP 2011

The law firm policy data show that while most Southern California forms allow part-time work-- at least on a case-by- case basis-- they are reluctant to allow entry-level lawyers to work part-time. Further, part-time works appears to be more problematic for partners than for experienced associates. While nearly two-thirds of law firms have written part-time policies for associates, only 43percent have written part-time policies for partners. These figures are problematic given that creating a written part-time policy for partners is one of the best practices for eliminating the stigmatization of part-time work.Further, although all law firms state that they allow lawyers to work part-time at least on a case-by-case basis, fewer firms unequivocally state that associates can be promoted to partner working part-time, or that partners can work on part-time schedules. Also significant is the fact that three of fourteen firms (21percent) provided no answer to questions about formal part-time policies and the effect of part-time work on partnership. If the firms who failed to answer do not have written policies or allow lawyers to work part-time without an affect on partnership, then part-time work is probably not a viable work-life balance tool for most lawyers. On the other hand, if those firms do have written policies and permit new and experienced partners to work part-time, the lack of data suggest that firms might discourage part-time schedules by failing to advertise that they are an option. Under these circumstances, too, part-time work is not a useful work-like balance tool for most lawyers.

While the NALP data do not indicate the number of parents who work part-time or whether family obligations are there primary motivation, both NALP's work/life information "comments" and law firm websites give legal employers an opportunity to provide more information regarding their part-time policies. This information can be a useful indicator of how law firms view part-time work generally and the lawyers to whom they target their part-time policies.

The most surprising thing about the NALP "work/life information" comments is that only half of the firms used this section to elaborate on their part-time policies. Of the seven firms that offer additional part-time information, only four provide substantive information about their part-time policies or the intended uses of these policies. Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, for example, states that 36percent of female lawyers were promoted to non-equity partner and 26percent were promoted to equity partner between 2004-2008. Including these figures under "work-life information" (rather than diversity or partnership data) suggests that Manatt views work-life information and part-time arrangements primarily as women's issues. Maybe Manatt's lawyers got the message: though six of the firm's thirteen part-time lawyers are partners, all of the Manatt's part-time lawyers are women. Although there could be a connection between Manatt's emphasis on part-time work as a women's issue and the fact that only women at Manatt work part-time, it is difficult to attribute causation based on this isolated example. Further, because so few firms provide additional work/life information on NALP, it's hard to draw greater conclusions about firms' treatment of part-time work and demographics of part-time lawyers.

Law firm websites also provide very little information about part-time work arrangements. Of the fourteen Southern California firms considered, only four firms reference part-time or reduced work schedules on their websites. Two of these four firms, Sidley Austin and O'Melveny & Myers, mention part-time or reduced workload schedules under their lists of employee benefits. Sidley Austin states, "Normally, associates work full-time. Under certain circumstances, however, we do allow associates to work part-time, for example, in connection with our maternity leave policy." Seven of the eight part-time attorneys in Sidley Austin's Los Angeles office are women.O'Melveny & Myers websites' part-time information is more vague: it only states that the firm's "signature benefits" include a reduced workload and flexible schedule arrangements.Five of the seven part-time lawyers in O'Melveny's Los Angeles office (71 percent) are women, compared to 80 percent in Southern California firms overall.

Jones Day and Gibson Dunn also mention part-time work arrangements on their websites, however, neither of these firms references part-time work as a benefit. Jones Day is the only firm to provide extensive information about its part-time policy and the lawyers who use it. Its "work-life balance" page notes that many of the firm's lawyers work part-time, and that associates may propose part-time arrangements to fit their particular needs. It also states that associates have been promoted to partner while on part-time schedules and that partners in senior management have worked part-time during their careers. Jones Day expressly states that lawyers feel comfortable availing themselves of part-time and flex-time options because of specific policies that the firm has put in place. Of Jones Day's four part-time attorneys in Los Angeles, two are men and two are women.

Gibson Dunn's website does not mention official part-time policies on its website, however, a woman lawyer featured in the "Fair Play" video on its Diversity page mentions that one of Gibson Dunn's assets is its "real part-time policy." Although Gibson Dunn portrays part-time work arrangements as important to law firm diversity, its part-time policy appears to be targeted toward mothers: all of the three women featured in the video are mothers or expectant mothers. Because Gibson Dunn doesn't mention part-time work anywhere else on its website, the firm appears to primarily associate part-time work with mothers. Of Gibson Dunn's ten part-time lawyers in Los Angeles, eight are women.

Similar to the lack of part-time information on NALP, the fact that so few law firms mention part-time work on their websites is telling. Given that all of the firms allow part-time arrangements for at least some lawyers, neglecting to mention part-time schedules on their websites suggests that these firms are reluctant to advertise part-time work to law students, lateral attorneys, or others who look to their websites for information about the firms. Lack of information about part-time policies-- coupled and statements emphasizing that full-time work the normal expectation from which the firm may allow attorneys to deviate in some cases-- suggest that law firms view part-time work as a concession rather than a benefit.

Both the firm websites' and NALP's information about part-time work indicate that Southern California law firms do not differ significantly from the national trends: few lawyers work part-time, and the lawyers who do work part-time are women. Although NALP and the firm websites do not disclose how many Southern California part-time lawyers are parents, several of the firms that refer to part-time work portray it as an issue that pertains specifically to women-especially mothers. Therefore, it's likely that parental obligations and childcare concerns play as much of a role in lawyers' decisions to work part-time in Southern California law firms as in the rest of the country. 

Ashley Bowman is a member of Building a Better Legal Profession, (BBLP) an organization based at Stanford Law School.   BBLP is a national grassroots movement that seeks market-based workplace reforms in large private law firms. For more information, visit BBLP's Web site at www.betterlegalprofession.org.

For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.