As a junior associate at a big law firm, Peg has noticed an odd detail of her discussions of work/life balance with senior partners. In a recent post she explained,
The partners kept bringing the discussion back to the fact that I, and others like me, now earn(ed) $160,000 as first year associates at big law firms. When I said to one person that I wasn't talking about money and that I didn't understand why the conversation had to keep returning to that issue she said to me, "it is what it is, associates make decisions about where to work based on money."
After relating this anecdote, Peg takes apart the assumption that big salaries should buy silence on work/life reform. Nonetheless, firms surely do compete for hires on the basis of salary--which is easily quantified--more than on, say, the strength of mentoring networks or the acceptability of using family leave (neither of which have standardized measures like dollars). All this is to say: I'm not sure we need another pressure point for firms in the salary race. (We already have Above the Law to break salary news, right?) But we've got one: Already Bored.
[More after the jump]