Reflections from a Headhunter & Hiring Partner: Stopping Sexual Harassment (Enough is Enough!)

It’s a familiar story. A woman associate is sexually harassed by a partner. The harassment may be subtle or grotesque, occasional or frequent, or hint at a quid pro quo.  It may be fueled by martinis at midnight or take place at lunch. It may happen in the office, at a restaurant, or at a firm meeting. Between 5 and 10 percent of the 5,500 women lawyers and law students I’ve met since 1977 report they have been harassed. I believe that number understates the scope of the problem. 

Firms must enforce a zero-tolerance, no-exception rule against sexual harassment. The legality of the conduct is for others to debate. Senior management must recognize that harassment is offensive, unprofessional and inappropriate.  It derails and damages careers. It’s time that law firms stop writing hall passes for misconduct.

After the jump, a typical harasser, a typical management response, and some harsh realities about the way to change the culture that allows for both ...

Is Losing Lockstep a Step Backwards for Women?

Many firms such as DLA Piper, Howrey, and Orrick are moving away from or re-examining  a lockstep program of training and compensation. The lockstep program is a training and compensation program based objectively on the number of years served.  While the lockstep program may not be perfect, it was an objective way to ensure that the base level for associates was fair.  And while these other compensation models will likely take into account measurable and objective factors, they will likely also rely on subjective factors, many of which are outside an associate's control, such as who you work for or what case or project you work on. 

Proponents of moving away from the lockstep system say that we should not be afraid of a merit based system and that if you work hard you will be rewarded; however, associates will now have no guarantee of a level playing field.  This may prove particularly problematic for young female associates. For one, this is a prime child-bearing age for women. Will losing lockstep affect women who choose to take advantage of flex time or maternity options at their firm? Or will women who are still learning to find their voice at their firm lose out because they are criticized for not being aggressive enough or not speaking up? Hopefully these new compensation systems will not affect women disparately, but just in case, women attorneys may want to ‘watch their step.’

Part IV in Series: A Junior Associate's Networking Plan

Today's post in the series I've named "A Junior Associate's Networking Plan" is Community Involvement.  See here for the start of this series.

Part III in Series: A Junior Associate's Networking Plan

Okay, so now to Part III: Law School Network and Alumni Groups.

I have found that the typical advice, both formal and informal, to a junior associate trying to start building her professional network is that she should start with keeping in touch with law school classmates.  Therefore, I have built that into my networking plan.

Part I in Series: A Junior Associate's Networking Plan

This is the first part of a multi-part series where I will lay out my creatively-titled "Junior Associate Networking Plan" for your information, criticism and suggestions. I am writing this series because I have found the task of figuring out what a junior associate can and should be doing to build her professional network to be a little daunting and that is perhaps because there is no way to know how much effort one should put into it or where one should dedicate that effort.  I do not claim to have the right answers or be implementing the perfect plan.  Instead, I hope to share my plan with Ms. JD readers with explanations and pros & cons and then hear from others on what they are doing and/or what I should be doing.

A little background to set the stage for this series.  As you may know from my earlier posts, I am a junior associate in the corporate department of a large national law firm, where I have my sights set on making partner some day.  I have little "free time" on my hands.  I am a little compulsive about making the most of the time that I do have.  Some may say that I am overly goal-oriented and/or too ambitious.

No formal vacation means, well, no formal vacation

Recently, as I was contemplating taking a couple of days off work when the school year ends for my kids in June and I got to remembering when I first started as a biglaw associate. In a session on one of the first days, we met with junior associates who were supposed to answer all of our questions that we didn't want to ask in more formal sessions. Quickly the question came up about how to ask for vacation days and I remember the others that I was starting with being almost giddy about the fact that there wasn't any formal approval process and that we didn't need permission to take time off and even that it didn't seem like anyone was keeping track of it. I also remember being a little relieved that it didn't seem like vacation had to be something that one planned far in advance and didn't need to be coordinated with the entire office. Afterall, it seemed nice that you could take vacation whenever your work scheduled allowed. Ha!-- what a misnomer that whole idea is. See, the schedule of a junior associate in a national law firm, will never allow vacation. Instead, one has to force vacation into a riduculously busy work load and take it regardless of whether you have time to take it or not -- or not take it at all, an option that many see to go for.

Also, I have come to learn that the fact that vacation is very informal for attorneys means, exactly that -- it is informal. The truth is that vacation in general is a very loose concept. I've tried to take a grand total of 4 vacation days since the beginning of this calendar year and have actually only been able to take 1 vacation day where I didn't work, although I was not in the office for the other three.

I was reminded of this today when reading a post on The Glass Hammer.

Southern Ms. Part V: The Good Life

So lately I've been thinking that this is a really good place to live. Good people, good work, good culture. Especially when you're a young professional and the cost of living is a fraction of what it is in New York or California.

Lawyers here make six figure salaries but live like millionaires would in the bigger legal markets because the cost of housing is so low that they have much more disposible income.

Best of all those six figures come with a considerably lower time commitment. Sure if you're in trial you'll be busy, but for the most part lawyers here seem to work fairly reasonable hours. Nothing like the all-nighters and long weekends my friends in BigLaw are pulling on the coasts. No kidding, 9-5 is realistic and 8-7 is considered cruel. And these are in the big law firms here - so you're still getting the benefits of good staff support and insitutional weigh that come with BigLaw posts in other cities. It's made me think that this whole work-life balance, billable-hour rebellion is (just like the "opt-out revolution") the problem of a very small fraction of women lawyers in this country.

BigLaw Perks: Superficial or Fundamental?

A New York Times article detailing new perks designed to keep associates happy in BigLaw firms is making the rounds. These perks range from surprise treats likes milkshakes and candied apples to personal valet services, mental health professionals, and full-tiime in-house childcare.

I’m a Corporate Lawyer – Get on with your happy-judging self!

Okay, so, in no particular order, I’m a (30-something caucasion) woman, I’m a (working) mother of two, I’m a (married-only-once-heterosexual) wife, I’m a (Fiscal) Conservative, and I’m a corporate (BigLaw) lawyer. Why am I subject to so much judging?

BigLaw Swag and Sway

As most of my other posts reveals, I enjoy skimming law.com and nylawyer.com and tend to use these affiliate sites as my main source of news... so you are probably unsurprised that this post is inspired by an article recently published on law.com - I am so predictable.

I think many large law firms are predictable as well. When I read an article entitled "Firms Predict More Work, Less Equity" I was saddened, but unsurprised.

The article predicts that law firms will see even less expansion of their equity partner ranks, while at the same time more expansion in the associate ranks and a higher demand of billable hours.