Once women reach the almost impossible goal of becoming parter at a law firm, they are still paid an average of $66,000 less than their male counterparts. Sure, when you are making upwards of $1 million, that is not going to have a noticeable impact on your quality of life, but it is an injustice nonetheless.
I disagree with most of what the author recommends as possible solutions. He says the following: "Women, and men of conscience, need to bitch and moan and agitate and force change upon a system that resists. Clients need to start punishing law firms who support gender inequality. New associates need to proactively avoid firms that are committed to maintaining the old boys network. And successful female partners need to branch out and start building their own firms so that in a generation Alpha & Ladies LLP can compete with the Cravaths and Skaddens of the world."
This is all lovely IN THEORY, but is not really realistic and will take way too long. First, anyone who has a job now is not going to bitch or moan about anything. They are going to be eternally grateful that they are employed at the moment, and put their heads down. Along the same lines, new associates are going to take jobs wherever they can get them, so there is zero hope of any boycott. Third, branching out on your own is tremendously difficult, and cannot be the solution. For an all female firm to compete with the Cravaths of the world, will take decades, if not more. What I do agree with the author about is that clients hold the power. If the General Counsel of a Fortune 500 company demands that the company’s matters are staffed by women, etc., then this will force the firms’ hand because they cannot endanger hundreds of thousands of dollars of revenue. Law firms and lawyers generally are nothing without clients: they do not want to lose their clients and will do things within reason (which this certainly is) to assure that their clients are happy.
I disagree with most of what the author of the post recommends as possible solutions. He says the following: "Women, and men of conscience, need to bitch and moan and agitate and force change upon a system that resists. Clients need to start punishing law firms who support gender inequality. New associates need to proactively avoid firms that are committed to maintaining the old boys network. And successful female partners need to branch out and start building their own firms so that in a generation Alpha & Ladies LLP can compete with the Cravaths and Skaddens of the world."
This is all lovely IN THEORY, but is not really realistic and will take decades to attain. First, anyone who has a job now is not going to bitch or moan about anything. They are going to be eternally grateful that they are employed at the moment. Along the same lines, new associates are going to take jobs wherever they can get them, so there is zero hope of any boycott. Third, branching out on your own is tremendously difficult, and cannot be the solution. For an all female firm to compete with Cravath, will take decades, if not more. What I do agree with the author about is that clients hold the power. If the General Counsel of a Fortune 500 company demands that the company’s matters are staffed by women, etc., then this will force the firms’ hand. Law firms and lawyers generally are nothing without clients: they do not want to lose their clients and will do things within reason (which this certainly is) to assure that their clients are happy.
It is truly unbelievable that this pay inequality still occurs. I never experienced it as an associate because our pay was set lockstep by class year, and quite obviously I didn’t make it to the partner level by the time i left big-firm life. I am sure however that this problem is not unique to partnership, and undoubtedly goes on where pay is not automatically set by your class year, such as at mid-size and smaller firms.
1 comment:
I think it is interesting to look at the pay gap issue and see that the clients have control. At the same time, it's disappointing to realize that the partners of these firms do not recognize and fix this - especially because, as Ilana stated, to close the gap by paying their female employees an extra $60K will have little effect on large companies' revenues . And obviously another solution would be to base pay on 'class,' as was done at Ilana's firm in order to eliminate the disparities.
I also wonder how all of this relates to politics. First off, is there still a pay gap in government jobs? If so, with whom does the responsibility lie for fixing it?
Post a Comment