Worth another crack at the glass ceiling
Women and law, eh? Same old, same old! Loads enter the profession but most fall off the career track of large City law firms by the time it comes to handing out partnership. By most estimates, more than half of the lawyers entering the profession are women, but a commercial law firm that manages to have a 20% female partnership is reckoned to be doing pretty well - over 40% and your managing partner becomes an automatic pundit on female empowerment.
January 21, 2010 at 12:53 PM
4 minute read
Women and law, eh? Same old, same old! Loads enter the profession but most fall off the career track of large City law firms by the time it comes to handing out partnership. By most estimates, more than half of the lawyers entering the profession are women, but a commercial law firm that manages to have a 20% female partnership is reckoned to be doing pretty well – over 40% and your managing partner becomes an automatic pundit on female empowerment.
Many would privately say that it's a problem rendered unsolvable by the conflict of biology and the brutal realities of City life. Well, one firm at least is having a renewed crack at addressing the issue, as we report today. Specifically, Allen & Overy (A&O) has expanded its range of flexible working options with the aim of tackling the conflict between the tournament of partnership and the family aspirations of lawyers in their thirties.
Yes, I'm aware that many City firms have a few part-time partners. But these schemes have in the main been ad hoc and taken up by only a few, even if they are technically available to equity partners.
What A&O is at least trying to do is to address the core problem and make its solution part of the architecture of its partnership – and quite rightly so, because the core problem is blindingly obvious: the time you want to start a family is inconveniently almost exactly the same time that the career typically makes the most onerous demands on your time. This is the case for most jobs, but it is doubly so for City lawyers who also have to handle a long-hours culture and the rigours of positioning themselves to gain partnership or trying to establish themselves as new partners.
A&O's idea is to tailor its scheme around providing flexibility for partners when it's needed most – when a young partner may want to start a family. That is why there is a time limit of eight years. It's not an open-ended signal that earning six or seven figures annually is compatible in the long-term with working part-time. Partnership does obviously take a certain level of commitment.
The firm has also been transparent about how the system would work in practice, including specifying the impact on partners' equity points. And as any lawyer can tell you, the spirit is often more important than the letter with such schemes. That's why senior partner David Morley (pictured) nailing his colours to the mast in publicly supporting this initiative should increase its chances of success.
Obviously there will need to be a significant take-up for the venture for it to gain credibility. For a firm of A&O's size, a few years down the track you would expect there to be 10-20 partners on flexi-time if it is to become a serious option. Success is far from guaranteed, but I'd call it an honourable attempt.
While I'm on the subject, Legal Week is currently researching an extended piece on women in the profession – so by all means let us know if your firm has come up with effective ways of retaining talented female lawyers at a senior level (or junior level, for that matter). The more successful examples that come to the fore – which can hopefully crowd out the PC waffle that dogs this issue – the more women will be pursuing long-term careers in the law.
For more, see A&O moves to retain talent with new flexi-time scheme for partners
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
© 2025 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 AllLatham's magic circle strikes, pay rises and EY's legal takeover: the best of Legal Week over the last few weeks
3 minute readJob losses, soaring partner profits and Freshfields exits - the best of Legal Week over the past two weeks
3 minute readMagic circle PEP hikes, the associate pay conundrum and more #MeToo - the best of Legal Week last week
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1On The Move: Energy Infrastructure Pro Joins Moore & Van Allen, Adams & Reese Changes Atlanta Leadership
- 2Miami Attorneys Secure $4M Settlement Despite Insurance Limits
- 3NY Judge Admonished Over Contributions to Progressive Political Causes
- 4Legaltech Rundown: Alexi Launches an AI Litigation Tool, Hotshot Announces Private Equity Practice Courses, and More
- 56-48. It’s Comp Time Again: How To Crush Your Comp Memo
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