Yale Law Women Expands 'Best' List of Law Firms (but Don't Get Excited)
The list has gotten more complicated, longer and arguably more tedious.
May 20, 2020 at 06:21 PM
4 minute read
Yale Law Women's much-anticipated annual list of top law firms for gender equality and family friendliness is out. This year, however, it's no longer a simple top 10 firm list.
Instead, the list has gotten more complicated, longer (almost 30 firms listed) and arguably more tedious. "Winning" firms are now slotted into various categories, ranging from firm structure (hiring practices), training, promotion and leadership, part-time availability and so on. You get the idea.
I won't list all the winning firms in all the categories but I'll give you a taste. (For the complete report, click here.)
Women in leadership:
- Latham & Watkins
- Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
- Ropes & Gray
- Sidley Austin
Diverse partnership:
- Morrison & Foerster
- Munger, Tolles & Olson
- Steptoe & Johnson
Flexible work options:
- Hogan Lovells
- Littler Mendelson
- Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
- Perkins Coie
Advancement of part-time lawyers:
- Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel
- Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
- Ropes & Gray
- Winston & Strawn
Few of the recognized firms on the coveted Yale list are shockers. (As in previous years, the survey covered Vault Law 100 firms and includes data from Yale Law School alumni of all genders.)
But what's new this year was information about the percentage of firms that still require mandatory arbitration clauses or nondisclosure agreements covering allegations of sexual assault or sexual misconduct as a condition of employment. Let me cut to the chase and tell you that, despite all the #MeToo outrage, a majority of firms require them.
Also new this year was that data was collected on women of color and others who identify as LGBTQ+. "It was important for us to get a fuller picture of equity along dimensions of race, gender identity and sexual orientation and incorporate these metrics into our honors," says Anna Kaul, a rising 3L, who worked on the report. (The winning firms in the LGBTQ+ category are Allen & Overy; Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft; Jenner & Block; and Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton.)
But back to my original issue: Why are Yale Women dispensing with that nice, simple top 10 list? Is this an admission that there is no such thing as the best firm or firms for women?
"Individual firms excel in different areas, which was part of our rationale for disaggregating the awards this year," explains Sarah Baldinger, a rising 2L who worked on the survey, adding that this new approach is more accurate and "shows the complexity of these issues."
"Attorneys have different needs and preferences, and some firms may be a better fit than others," adds Kaul.
In other words, firms that give you maximum flexibility and better work/life balance might not be the places where women have the best odds at equity partnership. Fair enough, as long as the terms are clear.
And what else is on the wish list for this select group?
Besides wishing the pace of progress speeds up, Kaul adds this: "We urge firms to be transparent in regard to compensation. It is impossible for attorneys to make informed career choices when they are battling opaque compensation policies and potential retribution for speaking about pay."
Well, I guess that means firms with those infamous black boxes won't be getting many of these Yale women.
Contact Vivia Chen at [email protected]. On Twitter: @lawcareerist.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSkadden's Big China Cuts and What They Mean for the Market
It's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250