In Battle for Talent, South Florida Law Firms Offer Improved Parental Paid Leave Policies
High salaries can only do so much, and firms find that younger lawyers want a better work-life balance.
December 03, 2018 at 03:15 PM
5 minute read
In the battle for legal talent, Florida firms are going beyond big bonuses and diversity pledges in their efforts to attract and retain lawyers: they are now also offering generous parental leave policies.
In June, for example, Akerman extended its paid time off for parents by four weeks, matching Holland & Knight's policy, which gives 16 weeks paid leave to primary caregivers and six weeks to secondary caregivers. Holland & Knight implemented that policy in 2013.
The six weeks (plus two paid vacation weeks) were vital for Lara Rios, senior counsel at Holland & Knight, and her wife, who gave birth to their second child in July.
“Being able to be home in those early weeks are just so critical to develop a bond with your child and support your spouse who has to recover physically,” Rios said.
The legal industry's salary arms race can only go so far, especially when it comes to attorney retention. Rios says work-life balance is a hot topic nowadays, and a new generation of attorneys expects a healthy balance. That means paid parental leave policies are going to be increasingly instrumental in attracting new talent, and it will be especially crucial to have policies that account for an attorney's annual billable hours so there's no penalty for taking time off, she says.
Only 15 percent of all U.S. businesses currently have paid parental leave policies, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. But in white-collar industries with tight labor pools, such policies are increasingly common, labor statistics show. The tech industry, for example, has been implementing robust paid family leave programs to attract talent for years.
“Law firms are often a trailing indicator of many things, including benefits like these,” said Kent Zimmerman, a consultant with the Zeughauser Group. “But I do think law firms are catching up in this area in enhancing benefits to attract and retain lawyers.”
Zimmerman said leave policies are fairly common at South Florida firms, especially those in the Am Law 200. Larger firms are more likely to have paid family leave, but Zimmerman says he is starting to see more higher-end boutique firms offering paid time off.
“I think it's appreciated by lawyers. And in a number of markets, firms have enhanced the benefits over the past couple of years as the market has tightened in South Florida and elsewhere,” Zimmerman said.
Joe Zumpano of Zumpano Patricios, a midsized general practice outfit, has made family leave a priority from the early days of the firm. Since 2003, attorneys and staff are given three months time off, fully paid.
And the plan is gender neutral: The father or noncaregiving spouse can also take the three months. This puts his firm in line with the paid parental leave industry first-movers, such as Susman Godfrey and Fenwick & West, which also offer full leave regardless of caregiver status.
To Zumpano, the policy signals to his attorneys that their families come first, and doubles as a way to finally do away with the “mommy track,” a long-running phenomenon where women lawyers are punished for taking time away from their careers to start a family.
“How could you end up loving a firm that would overlook that one possibly rare moment in their life?” Zumpano said. “Our firm comes second to our families. It's allowed us to succeed and I don't think we've lost a penny in that process. It's created great stability and great loyalty to our firm.”
Matt Wright, a partner at Zumpano Patricios, took three weeks off last year when his wife had their second child.
“It takes a lot of weight off of my shoulders to have [family leave],” Wright said. “To know that it's not going to hurt me to take care of my kids.”
Andie Viele, a consultant at Viele Consulting Group, says a stigma still exists for men looking to take time off after the birth of a child, as many attorneys “still feel the pressure of meeting their hours.”
To shift this stigma, not only do firms have to offer paternity or gender-neutral leave, but attorneys have to be comfortable taking it. Wright said he took the time off in part because Zumpano sat him down and encouraged him to take it to help his wife recover from the birth.
“It's a magical time when you're starting a family,” Wright said. “You don't want to miss that opportunity just to get more billable hours in.”
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 AllFlorida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
3 minute readMorgan & Morgan Looks to Grow Into Complex Litigation While Still Keeping its Billboards Up
6 minute readLost in the Legal Maze: How State Regulations Are Hindering Hemp Operators' Success
7 minute readTrending Stories
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