Firms Find Ways to Reduce the "Motherhood Penalty"
For years, the legal profession was an unforgiving black hole for women, especially for those with children. As more women graduated from law schools and landed jobs at the nation's elite law firms, they found themselves trapped in a profession that demanded strenuously long work weeks that left little time for much else. The thought of billing thousands of hours a year as a full-time associate at a large law firm is daunting in itself, but the idea of having a child - to raise a family - poses an irreconcilable conflict between work and life outside the workplace.
While many women choose the latter, leaving big law firms to pursue other careers afforded by their law degree or drop out of the workforce entirely, the particularly tenacious woman returns to the biglaw lifestyle, convinced that her legacy of outstanding work prior to having a child will continue to carry her through the partnership track. Unfortunately, she faces a host of discriminatory behavior from co-workers and the firm's leadership: she is assigned lower-quality work - perhaps because she is viewed as less competent and committed - becomes estranged from key partners, and struggles to balance the firm's heavy workload with raising a healthy, well-adjusted child. Too often, this story ends with the woman joining the ranks of the stay-at-home moms or pursuing a career that is less prestigious but more accommodating and flexible for mothers.
But times are changing. More law firms - even large ones - are beginning to realize the folly of excluding a core competent group of the labor market and have taken steps to make their workplace environments more attractive to women and mothers. But as on-site daycare facilities, flexible work arrangements, and other work-life balance programs slowly gain traction among top-tier law firms, students graduating from elite law schools and big ticket clients must pressure law firms to continue moving their practices into this mother-friendly direction. Without these key market forces, recent trends towards a work-life balance may very well fizzle out in the face of greater pressures for higher profits and a constantly productive workforce.
On-site child care facilities, once viewed as impossible luxuries in the legal field, are appearing in an increasing number of law firms across the country. Arnold & Porter, based in Washington D.C., is credited for establishing the first full-time in-house child care center in 1995, and many firms eventually followed suit.[i] In the D.C. area, Covington & Burling also offers full-time child care while others, including Cromwell & Moring; Morgan, Lewis & Bockius; and Alston & Bird, offer back-up child care in case their employees' regular plans for child care fall through. The benefits for overworked parents are clear: parents can work late hours without worrying about their children at home, take a quick elevator ride to see their children and de-stress throughout the day, and turn previously unbearable commute times into opportunities to connect and talk about the day's events.
In addition, flexible work arrangements that allow employees to work on a part-time basis without the stigma attached to maternity leave programs are slowly making their way into various practices. Although firms typically eschew such programs due to the profitability difference between a full-time and part-time associate, some firms have accepted flexible work arrangement programs as an important tool to attract and retain talented attorneys. Without a doubt, the proper application of these flexible work arrangement programs can have an enormous impact on retaining talented female attorneys. WilmerHale, a large law firm based in Washington, D.C., has boasted a thriving part-time work policy since the 1990s. In 2010, these measures seemed to pay off: eight out of eleven newly promoted partners - an unprecedented 73% - were women.[ii] Today, 13 WilmerHale partners work part-time, ten of whom are women.
While these recent developments signal a clear step in the right direction, recent graduates and clients must continue to put pressure on straggling firms to join this movement towards a more equitable and accessible legal profession. Students should favor firms that have already instituted mother-friendly practices and question firms that have not. Once law firms realize that mother-friendly practices are just as important to incoming associates as springtime bonuses and firm prestige, firms will likely adjust their practices to attract the most talented law students.
It is important to note that this responsibility to advocate for a better legal practice falls squarely on the shoulders of students graduating from the most elite law schools. Given the unsettling economics of the current legal profession, where the supply of recent graduates greatly surpasses the demand for new associates, it is unlikely that a student from a lower-ranked school would nitpick over daycare when a high-paying job is so scarce a commodity in this job market. Therefore, law students from the top schools, where firms interview for candidates rather than the other way around, represent the power of labor to self-select into firms with desirable practices and ultimately bring about change from the supply-side of the legal profession.
Big ticket clients - major, highly visible corporations - can also play a role in pressuring firms to adopt other-friendly practices as well. A recent study of fifty D.C. area firms reveals that more clients are requesting diversity statistics when choosing among firms.[iii] As diversity becomes an increasingly desirable characteristic for clients who are constantly in the limelight for their labor practices, firms must adopt mother-friendly practices to remain competitive with firms who already have such programs in place.
A handful of firms have led the charge in implementing new programs to retain mothers and create a more diverse, talented workforce. However, many more remain entrenched in profit-centric practices that discriminate against women with children. Clearly, students and clients play an integral role in forcing positive change in the legal profession. Firms like Arnold & Porter and WilmerHale have proven that mother-friendly programs and successful practices go hand in hand. It's up to the incoming employees and potential clients to convince the rest.
[i] Debra Bruno, "Can on-site day care stem lawyer attrition?" Law.com, http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=900005557228
[ii] Vivia Chen, "Wilmer's New Partners - Color Them Pink," Law.com, http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202474994033
[iii] Ibid.
Building a Better Legal Profession (BBLP) is 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.