Gender pay gap...Partners... Forum

[duckfan00]

So CNN had a stat that women in the legal field have an average of 49 percent pay gap to men in terms of compensation...any thoughts on chances of women becoming partners??...

[formerbiglawpartner]

Of course, women can make partner but the particular firm can make a difference. It's pretty obvious, but you need to see how many women partners a particular firm has; how many women have made partner in the last few years in each class; and how many women at the firm are on the executive committee or otherwise in management positions, e.g., heads of offices, sections, etc. You definitely can't go by the "awards" various publications dole out to the highest bidder. For example, one top firm that recently won an award for "Best Place for Women to Work" made only one woman partner last year out of FOURTEEN new partners. Clearly, that firm has a woman problem. It may be a great place to work if you are a staff attorney or a paralegal, but not if you want to be promoted! Just do your homework as each firm has a different culture.

[Old Gregg]

You're pondering a problem you'll never have.

[cyrusP]

deleted

[BeenDidThat]

So CNN had a stat that women in the legal field have an average of 49 percent pay gap to men in terms of compensation...any thoughts on chances of women becoming partners??...

Happens all the time. Good for them.

What the fuck kind of thread is this.

[ScottRiqui]

So CNN had a stat that women in the legal field have an average of 49 percent pay gap to men in terms of compensation...any thoughts on chances of women becoming partners??...

Do you have a link to the CNN article? I couldn't find it on their site. I'm wondering if they're lumping paralegal/secretary jobs in with the JD-required jobs, because I'm having a hard time believing that licensed female lawyers are only getting half of what their male peers earn, across the board.

[Danger Zone]

So CNN had a stat that women in the legal field have an average of 49 percent pay gap to men in terms of compensation...any thoughts on chances of women becoming partners??...

Do you have a link to the CNN article? I couldn't find it on their site. I'm wondering if they're lumping paralegal/secretary jobs in with the JD-required jobs, because I'm having a hard time believing that licensed female lawyers are only getting half of what their male peers earn, across the board.

It's not surprising. When you look at the NALP directory info on some of these firms, it's shocking how many male partners there are compared to their female peers. It's not unusual for a firm's partners to be three quarters male.

[ScottRiqui]

So CNN had a stat that women in the legal field have an average of 49 percent pay gap to men in terms of compensation...any thoughts on chances of women becoming partners??...

Do you have a link to the CNN article? I couldn't find it on their site. I'm wondering if they're lumping paralegal/secretary jobs in with the JD-required jobs, because I'm having a hard time believing that licensed female lawyers are only getting half of what their male peers earn, across the board.

It's not surprising. When you look at the NALP directory info on some of these firms, it's shocking how many male partners there are compared to their female peers. It's not unusual for a firm's partners to be three quarters male.

Oh, I'm not arguing that. I imagine the population that makes it through 5-8 years of associate life is probably skewed pretty male as well. It's like we say in the military - "If you want more female generals, get us more female recruits."

But a "pay gap" is usually talking about men and women *in the same position* receiving different levels of compensation. Unless the female partners are only pulling down half as much as the male partners with similar seniority, or X-year female associates are only getting half of what their male counterparts are making, it really sounds like the CNN stat is just taking the average compensation for all women in the legal field and comparing it to the average for all men. And if that's the case, I would think that the paralegal/secretary pay is going to drag the women's average down substantially.

[A. Nony Mouse]

It's not surprising. When you look at the NALP directory info on some of these firms, it's shocking how many male partners there are compared to their female peers. It's not unusual for a firm's partners to be three quarters male.

Oh, I'm not arguing that. I imagine the population that makes it through 5-8 years of associate life is probably skewed pretty male as well. It's like we say in the military - "If you want more female generals, get us more female recruits."

But a "pay gap" is usually talking about men and women *in the same position* receiving different levels of compensation. Unless the female partners are only pulling down half as much as the male partners with similar seniority, or X-year female associates are only getting half of what their male counterparts are making, it really sounds like the CNN stat is just taking the average compensation for all women in the legal field and comparing it to the average for all men. And if that's the case, I would think that the paralegal/secretary pay is going to drag the women's average down substantially.

I agree that CNN's probably lumping all women in the legal field together (not comparing people in the same position), but given the lack of women partners, I don't know that they need to include paralegal/secretaries to get those results - they could still be looking only at JDs. I think women tend to be overrepresented in government/public interest, too (or at least, if that's the case, that would help explain the results. Most government lawyers top out around where 1st year biglaw associates start).

[ScottRiqui]

It's not surprising. When you look at the NALP directory info on some of these firms, it's shocking how many male partners there are compared to their female peers. It's not unusual for a firm's partners to be three quarters male.

Oh, I'm not arguing that. I imagine the population that makes it through 5-8 years of associate life is probably skewed pretty male as well. It's like we say in the military - "If you want more female generals, get us more female recruits."

But a "pay gap" is usually talking about men and women *in the same position* receiving different levels of compensation. Unless the female partners are only pulling down half as much as the male partners with similar seniority, or X-year female associates are only getting half of what their male counterparts are making, it really sounds like the CNN stat is just taking the average compensation for all women in the legal field and comparing it to the average for all men. And if that's the case, I would think that the paralegal/secretary pay is going to drag the women's average down substantially.

I agree that CNN's probably lumping all women in the legal field together (not comparing people in the same position), but given the lack of women partners, I don't know that they need to include paralegal/secretaries to get those results - they could still be looking only at JDs. I think women tend to be overrepresented in government/public interest, too (or at least, if that's the case, that would help explain the results. Most government lawyers top out around where 1st year biglaw associates start).

Good point about the government/PI jobs. I'd just really like to see CNN's numbers, because my level of shock/dismay/outrage will depend on whether there's actually a gap between men and women in the same positions, and whether the overall gap is the result of women self-selecting into the lower-paying jobs, or if they're being systematically shut out of the higher-paying ones.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Good point about the government/PI jobs. I'd just really like to see CNN's numbers, because my level of shock/dismay/outrage will depend on whether there's actually a gap between men and women in the same positions, and whether the overall gap is the result of women self-selecting into the lower-paying jobs, or if they're being systematically shut out of the higher-paying ones.

I'm pretty sure they're lumping all JDs together, but in practice, I don't think there's a vast difference between self-selecting into lower-paying jobs and being shut out of the higher-paying ones.

[TooOld4This]

In non-lockstep firms, gender disparity in pay is far from unheard of.

[blsingindisguise]

Most of the most successful female lawyers I have met either do not have families or are not very involved with their families, unfortunately. There are exceptions. But the reality is that most women who have babies want to spend time with their babies. And that takes significant chunks out of the years in which you're supposed to be burning the midnight oil to advance your career.

[Anonymous User]

Most of the most successful female lawyers I have met either do not have families or are not very involved with their families, unfortunately. There are exceptions. But the reality is that most women who have babies want to spend time with their babies. And that takes significant chunks out of the years in which you're supposed to be burning the midnight oil to advance your career.

That's pretty accurate. My parents both were both in biglaw and when my mom had me, she ended up leaving practice for a bit to take care of me and then my younger brother when he was born. They were both partner track (well, my dad was made partner a few years before I was born) but my mom ended up going into government instead of going back to her firm (a V10)/working part time simply because the hours were so much better. This seems to be the case with most 2 lawyer families I know, though I imagine in the future we might get more men becoming house husbands so the pay differential may level out.

[84651846190]

Most of the most successful female lawyers I have met either do not have families or are not very involved with their families, unfortunately. There are exceptions. But the reality is that most women who have babies want to spend time with their babies. And that takes significant chunks out of the years in which you're supposed to be burning the midnight oil to advance your career.

That's pretty accurate. My parents both were both in biglaw and when my mom had me, she ended up leaving practice for a bit to take care of me and then my younger brother when he was born. They were both partner track (well, my dad was made partner a few years before I was born) but my mom ended up going into government instead of going back to her firm (a V10)/working part time simply because the hours were so much better. This seems to be the case with most 2 lawyer families I know, though I imagine in the future we might get more men becoming house husbands so the pay differential may level out.

Dear God, I wish I could be a house husband.

[Anonymous User]

I think the odds of making partner as a female are higher if you put in the requisite effort. Many firms are actively trying to make more women Partners, it's just that there aren't that many female Senior Associates to consider for promotion (at least at the V10 I summered at).

[TooOld4This]

I think the odds of making partner as a female are higher if you put in the requisite effort. Many firms are actively trying to make more women Partners, it's just that there aren't that many female Senior Associates to consider for promotion (at least at the V10 I summered at).

Not really. Setting aside issues such as maternity leave, many law firms still have significant barriers for women. There are many things that have to take place long before someone is on deck for partner. Firms often blame having few female partnets on their poor numbers of female senior associates, but aren't always good at looking at why the pipeline is so thin. Mentorship, being funneled the right kinds of work, working for the right partner, being invited to client pitches, and serving on the right firm committees are all areas where there is often a significant gender disparity and it starts very early in an associate's career.

[BeenDidThat]

I think the odds of making partner as a female are higher if you put in the requisite effort. Many firms are actively trying to make more women Partners, it's just that there aren't that many female Senior Associates to consider for promotion (at least at the V10 I summered at).

Not really. Setting aside issues such as maternity leave, many law firms still have significant barriers for women. There are many things that have to take place long before someone is on deck for partner. Firms often blame having few female partnets on their poor numbers of female senior associates, but aren't always good at looking at why the pipeline is so thin. Mentorship, being funneled the right kinds of work, working for the right partner, being invited to client pitches, and serving on the right firm committees are all areas where there is often a significant gender disparity and it starts very early in an associate's career.

How do you know this?

[TooOld4This]

I think the odds of making partner as a female are higher if you put in the requisite effort. Many firms are actively trying to make more women Partners, it's just that there aren't that many female Senior Associates to consider for promotion (at least at the V10 I summered at).

Not really. Setting aside issues such as maternity leave, many law firms still have significant barriers for women. There are many things that have to take place long before someone is on deck for partner. Firms often blame having few female partnets on their poor numbers of female senior associates, but aren't always good at looking at why the pipeline is so thin. Mentorship, being funneled the right kinds of work, working for the right partner, being invited to client pitches, and serving on the right firm committees are all areas where there is often a significant gender disparity and it starts very early in an associate's career.

How do you know this?

After working in biglaw and when you get to be a certain vintage, a disproportionate number of friends and acquaintances are attorneys. Some make it to partner. Some bail. Some get shown the door. The stories from the front are remarkable similar. There is a lot more lip service paid to retaining female associates now, and firms are getting more pressure to be diverse (in no small part to the fact that women who have left the firm environment are increasingly hitting senior positions in house and are now having more say in legal hiring). Old habits die hard, though and you still see the business and management committees coming up short on females (while recruiting committees will have heavy/disproportionate female representation) and plenty of tales of rainmaking partners not giving work to female associates (or keeping them in roles that prevent them from checking the right boxes in skill development). Large firms are not monolithic, so opportunities can vary by practice group. Unfortunately, by the time female associates can figure out the politics, it can often be too late to adjust course.

[Anonymous User]

Of course, women can make partner but the particular firm can make a difference. It's pretty obvious, but you need to see how many women partners a particular firm has; how many women have made partner in the last few years in each class; and how many women at the firm are on the executive committee or otherwise in management positions, e.g., heads of offices, sections, etc. You definitely can't go by the "awards" various publications dole out to the highest bidder. For example, one top firm that recently won an award for "Best Place for Women to Work" made only one woman partner last year out of FOURTEEN new partners. Clearly, that firm has a woman problem. It may be a great place to work if you are a staff attorney or a paralegal, but not if you want to be promoted! Just do your homework as each firm has a different culture.

Yes, yes, and yes. I am an associate at a V100, and in my practice group (a large one and one that is traditionally male-dominated), we are over half female, with over 2/3 of the associates being female and the chair of the group is a female partner. I don't feel any fear of not making partner if I stick with it - I fail to see any preference for making men partners over women. This is something that cannot be said at other firms.