Speaking Salary

In her recent New York Times article, Girl Power at School, but Not at the Office, Hannah Seligson discusses the "new arsenal of skills" that women need to succeed in the workforce. She suggests that letting go of perfectionist tendancies and creating professional networks are two critical skills to success. Additionally, to keep up with the old-boy's club, women need to start "speaking salary."

Already Bored with your firm's salary? New site offers tools to search for a better offer

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]

Does earning a biglaw salary mean that there is no room for my voice in the discussion on work/life balance?

I had the chance today to engage some law firm partners and others in a discussion about worklife balance. The focus of the discussion was whether or not law firm management should listen to the concerns of law students and young associates when determining business practices and trying to attract and retain women attorneys.

A funny thing happened. 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."

Money = Power = Masculinity ??

Today on NBC's today show they did a segment that is very typical of their format. The segment was about married couples where the woman earns more than the man. In light of the fact that most women practicitioners that I know make more than their husbands/partners, I have a couple of lingering questions for the group. In the piece, the host and the guest agreed that the equation of money=power=masculinity doesn't make logical sense to the women that are the breadwinners in their relationship. Still, they argued, the equation was a common emotional feeling. Do you think that money=power=masculinity?

Is Money the Solution?

The Wall Street Journal’s newish blog “The Juggle” recently posted about an email sent by a Big Law associate, who commented that the recent salary raise she’s received made a big difference in her motivation to work and in her ability to provide for her young child

What sparked my interest is that it has a post about the salary bump topic as seen through the work-life lens. The point being that perhaps money does make things easier, and perhaps it is a factor worth ratcheting up on the list (as in: what would you do with $15k more per year? Is it more/less/equally as important as your time with family? Does it help the time with family? Etc.). But the most revealing part is the very tetchy comments that some readers have made (if you have five minutes, definitely check them out).