Chrissie Lightfoot: too much leg stroking
This is not an overwrought passage from a romance novel designed to get the heartbeats of middle-aged housewives racing. Or indeed a pastiche of America’s latest television craze, Mad Men. It is instead the kind of scene that is still regularly played out in the offices of business law firms -- along with a host of other ‘hushed up’ behaviour.
Cracks in the ceiling
Several years ago I conducted some research that resulted in a thesis entitled ‘Relative work, relative leisure; women entrepreneurs in the 1990s’. In it, I firmly concluded that there was no such thing as the glass ceiling. If women were prepared to work thrice as hard, make the right bold choices, bring about the necessary changes in behaviour and ultimately take control of their career journeys, then they could, quite simply, shatter the glass ceiling.
I was wrong.
My research was flawed. I’d failed to interview women in the legal profession. Also, at that time, I’d never worked in it myself, witnessed what actually goes on or met the hoards of highly talented ladies who suffer from sexual harassment, bullying, ‘professional prejudice’ and ‘baby prejudice’. Those who dare to complain endure the daily patronising, megalomaniac, egotistical old boys’ club mantra of ‘if you want to get on in this firm you’d better shut up and wise up’.
In a legal world where clients and prospective clients are being entertained in lap dancing bars and schmoozed by high class escorts to ‘seal the deal’, it’s not uncommon for women lawyers attempting to scale the corporate ladder in London, New York, Sydney and elsewhere to be stone-walled and ostracised in conversations and meetings with male colleagues while they guffaw in their deliberations over which strip (or sex) club their clients would prefer.
Problems and solutions
But should this be the attitude and behaviour we’re proud of as a profession and business? Do all male lawyers behave in this way? Unlikely. Do all female lawyers endure and/or tolerate this kind of behaviour by their male (or female) colleagues? Again, unlikely.
Yet, when I recently posed the question ‘does the glass ceiling exist in our beloved business of law?’ to many female lawyers, the overwhelming response was typified by one reaction. It came from a female city lawyer who has managed to claw her way to partnership in a global law firm, and who also witnesses the daily prejudice against her female assistants and associates. She admitted with a pained expression: ‘I didn’t think it existed...but it does.’
So is there a problem? Yes, definitely. Is there a solution? Yes, there’s always a solution if we -- men and women -- are prepared to put our egos, ignorance, arrogance and prejudice aside.
In an earlier article I shared the thoughts and predictions from leading futurologists that the world is moving towards a networked global society, typified by hyper-collaboration, return on involvement, an appreciation by clients of emotional intelligence, the importance of human brand, interaction before transaction and a desire for legal advice based on emotion. Arguably, these are just the type of skills in which women lawyers, women partners and women in boardrooms naturally excel; for example, communication, conversation, engagement, involvement, emotion, empathy and relationship marketing (networking).
Girl power
Female entrepreneurs -- buyers of legal services – currently account for approximately a third of all entrepreneurs worldwide, and the US Census Bureau predicts that by the year 2025, the share of women entrepreneurship in that country will increase to more than 55 per cent. And the UK-based futurist, Rohit Talwar, predicted in a recent report that by the year 2020, 20 per cent of the US working-age population will be self-employed entrepreneurs.
Where America leads in business, the rest of the world eventually catches up. Therefore, taking account of trends regarding the number of female entrepreneurs worldwide, we’d be wise to temper our attitudes, behaviour and prejudice towards women lawyers. We’d be foolish to ignore the fact that we need talented women in the business of law.
Why? In a networked society and collaborative world where trust, relationships, emotion and humanness are currency, where the number of present and future women clients is set to increase, where clients do business with those they know, like, trust, understand and share common interests; where clients buy legal advice on the basis of emotion, and justify that purchase with logic, it’s a no-brainer.
Fortunately, in adversity there is always opportunity.
Chrissie Lightfoot is the chief executive of legal consultancy EntrepreneurLawyer and author of the book ‘The Naked Lawyer: RIP to XXX – How to Market, Brand and Sell YOU!’
Latest stories
- South African lawyers urged to fight 'racial prejudice'
- US targets patent trolls
- Cotton court battle escalates
- US lawyer expelled from Moscow
- KWM Oz chief steps down
Comments
zarina 14/05/2012 05:53
In a nutshell I would say there are risks being a lady Solicitor: it is like crossing the street one has to be mindful of the traffic in case one gets run over!
Chrissie Lightfoot 20/04/2012 14:05
Hi Stephanie
Thanks for getting involved. Excellent points. And the 'movement' "Women In Law" is nothing short of inspirational, passionate and very positive! You're doing a wonderful and admirable thing!
It's fabulous news that four / five law firms (inc.PwC) managed to creep into The Times Top 50 Employers For Women;
http://www.bitcdiversity.org.uk/awards/on_awards_2012/the_times_top_50.html
However, as we women in the professions (and beyond) are perfectly aware, there's lies, damned lies and statistics. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that even amongst these golden four / five 'women friendly' law firms there will have been 'an element' of women lawyers who have experienced prejudice, bullying and/or harassment. I actually have it on good authority in relation to one of these firms, that at least one of these is the case.
Again, it's a case of we cannot always believe what we hear aka what is reported.
One of the lady respondents (legal advice buyers) in a group on LinkedIn asked "how would she know if a male lawyer was a 'leg stroker' so I can avoid him". Answer: you wouldn't.
I guess it's not unlike asking "would you know which firm in an allegedly 'Top 50 Employers for Women' would employ those who would bully, harass and hold a prejudice toward women lawyers?" It is, after all, on an individual basis, and not firm wide phenomenon...
Warmest regards as ever,
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Chrissie Lightfoot 18/04/2012 15:31
Oh dear...
What cost for leg stroking (and more)?
No surprise today that the Daily Telegraph reports 'Deidre Dare' is set to sue Allen & Overy for almost £22 million for alleged sexual harassment.
I take back what I said in my reply comment to Charles that it's usually cheaper to get rid of the troublemaker female lawyers either through constructive dismissal or pay-out in a sexual harassment claim.
Clearly, shoud Deidre be successful in her claim it will certainly set a precedent... and I will humbly (but gladly) eat my words :-)
What's your thoughts?
Best intentions as ever
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Stephanie Haladner 18/04/2012 14:40
Insightful article Chrissie. While it's correct that inappropriate behaviour exists in some law firms, the greater obstacle to women's advancement is the traditional law firm model and subtle biases in the culture.
Your point about the need for law firms to embrace more traditionally feminine norms such as empathy, emotional intelligence, collaboration (and I would add intuition to this list) is an excellent point. If these norms were integrated with the traditionally masculine norms, law firms would be better places to work for both men and women. There is also an opportunity for lawyers and clients to innovate around that relationship to ensure that the 'culture of client demands' is not cited by law firm management as a reason why alternative working structures cannot be successfully implemented in their firms.
We are tackling these issues at Women in Law www.womeninlaw.com
Chrissie Lightfoot 17/04/2012 13:06
Hi Maria, Stephen (S Waud) & Jonathan
Great contributions. Thank-you for sharing so passionately! :-)
Maria - I agree with you entirely, and in particular your view that "I'm all for people finding a loving relationship and that can be with someone they work with either directly or tangentially, but I think we can agree that leg-stroking and bum-grabbing are inappropriate behaviour." Thank-you for sharing your obversations here so candidly.
Stephen - duly noted. I hope to catch the BBC radio 4 programme later today. Tnx for the heads-up for us all.
Jonathan - You've actually raised an extremely important issue IMHO in relation to your points about "Cognitive distortion" and "promoting mediocrity", something which will strike a chord no doubt with both lawyers and those who purchase legal advice.
In a profession and industry that prides itself on its intellectual prowess and hangs its hat on beating the 'justice' liberty bell we ought to be ashamed of ourselves if we behave in a way that causes 'distortion' and settles for mediocrity.
Tnx again for getting involved, engaging and contributing to this sensitive issue.
Best intentions as ever,
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Jonathan Brown 17/04/2012 09:24
Hi Chrissie,
Loved your article. Undoubtedly, there is a moral aspect to this - as well as the legal one too. I used to focus on these when working to persuade executives to change. I don't anymore. I now take this a ruthless, performance focus. Preventing or impeding any individual from giving their best or stopping more qualified candidates from advancing through the firm for any reason other than performance is both irrational and damaging to a firm and to its clients.
So if I see a leader doing anything like this, I would wonder what other mistakes they were making because of their inability to control their impulses. Just how unaware does someone have to be to think that the leg stroking behaviour was OK? How will this cognitive distortion play out in other areas? What damage could partners who were unable see a situation clearly do to my business? They are weakening their firm and creating cultures that promote mediocrity. Even without the moral and legal aspect, I wouldn't want them anywhere near me or my business.
This lack of understanding of how partner actions shape what is happening around them including the culture of a firm is something that causes all kinds of trouble and you will see it in stark contrast as firms attempt to merge. Two groups of "leaders" coming together with hardly any awareness of how their actions impede or improve performance, leading people who feel unable to give their best without making serious moral compromises? That has train wreck, sorry firm wreck, written all over it.
s waud 17/04/2012 08:56
This isn't just a legal issue, although I suspect the legal profession has its own version. There is an intersting programme lined up on BBC Radio 4 at 8:00pm tonight called, 'My name isn't hey baby'. It will look at what constiutes sexual harrasment and what is acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. It will be worth listening to.
Chrissie Lightfoot 17/04/2012 06:27
"Prejudice never shows much reason"... Read on ...
Maria Ingold 16/04/2012 16:48
Hi Chrissie,
This doesn't just happen in law! I'm a female chief technology officer - and I've had my share of propositions in business (almost exclusively from married men or those in a relationship).
As you point out, it can happen with people doing business with you, not just within a company. Now I'm all for people finding a loving relationship and that can be with someone they work with either directly or tangentially, but I think we can agree that leg-stroking and bum-grabbing are inappropriate behaviour for the work environment and propositions from someone who is taken is unacceptable at any time.
The key though is not just that it happens, but how best to respond to it, as well as to the verbal language patterns that are also meant to "put someone in their place." What I've noticed is the difference between this behaviour and genuine flirting is the perception of a “power play”.
This behaviour is done by someone typically who wants attention and to demonstrate power and yet who almost always feels a lack of power in a situation. By that I mean someone who at their core suffers from low self-esteem, self-worth or self-confidence. Language that blames, subjugates or attacks as well as physical dominance or sexual manipulation all fits into this - it's all abusive. These are all meant to capture and hold someone's attention and provoke a highly emotional response.
How someone chooses to respond either gives the attacker someone to “play” with, or stops them in their tracks. Suzette Haden Elgin has done a superb amount of research on this in her Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defence series, including on sexual harassment.
In a similar vein to yours, my article is here: http://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/Women-in-Technology-Learning-the-rules-of-a-boys-game
This is only the beginning of how to deal with all of this and advance careers for women. There's a heck of a lot of us women - and we can figure this out, you know.
Regards,
Maria
Chrissie Lightfoot 16/04/2012 11:15
Hi Charles
Great to read you here and for providing such a thoughtful reply. I do believe you've raised questions and then answered them yourself?!:-) Fab. Saved me some time.
However, I believe further comment and analysis in reply to your views has now been covered off in my response to Nicky et.al.
My only additional thoughts in relation to your unique contribution to the discussion is your disbelief that "'pervy' behaviour actually goes on in reputable firms, even more so, that if it did, it would be hushed up." Trust me, I'm a lawyer. It does. And listen to the comments by the ladies and gentlemen responding and sharing herein.
Where 'inappropriate' behaviour is carried out by male partners it is not that easy to 'boot them out'; further prejudice within the firm comes to the fore when the powers that be realise that it's not truly in all their interests (and arguably the firms interest) to get rid of a partner who contributes to the bottom line, in spite of his 'pervy' behaviour, as you put it. Unravelling partnership agreement gubbins can be a VERY messy business.
Sometimes, it's just easier to 'hush things up' and get rid of the troublemaker female lawyers either through constructive dismissal or pay-out in a sexual harassment claim. it's usually cheaper!
My parting comment is simply "there's no smoke without fire".
Warmest and best intentions as ever,
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Chrissie Lightfoot 16/04/2012 11:02
Hi Nicky
Thanks for sharing your view and position.
Love your response. I believe you encapsulate the essence of the issues in the article when you say that it's "necessary to allow women to play their full part in the legal marketplace."
For the sake of everyone - clients, people / staff / lawyers, firm and global society - enough said...
Warmest
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Chrissie Lightfoot 16/04/2012 10:50
Hi Morgan
Simply put, it doesn't have to be awkward.
As to how to deal with it, the kind of response, behaviour and approach is not a "one size fits all" kind of thing. Every person, personality, experience, situation and circumstance will no doubt be different.
And in true lawyerly style "it depends" :-)
Warmest as ever
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Chrissie Lightfoot 16/04/2012 10:42
Hi Stephen
Thanks for getting involved.
Yes, 'tragic' is a good word to describe what's going on.
Unfortunately exposing the culprits is not (always) possible as the issues and activities are deep rooted, systematic and 'hushed'.
Plus, one has to be careful re. whisteblowing for fear of reprisal and as you say it "the sacrifice it may involve".
Thanks again for engaging and sharing.
Chrissie Lightfoot
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Stephen Kiptinness 15/04/2012 12:45
A well written & lucid article, tragic to hear that this form of discrimination is still widely practiced. The efforts to expose & call out culprits needs to be kept up, though having said that I understand the sacrifice it may involve.
Morgan Jarvis 15/04/2012 05:48
Hi Chrissie,
This is indeed still a major problem for young women in law firms. I know attractive young female lawyers who have the challenge of not just dealing with harassment, but also in trying to adapt traditional male business development techniques to suit young unmarried woman. They can't figure out how to request and accept invitiations for lunch, coffee, networking, and how to generally keep in touch with male potential clients without the awkward "my intention is business only" conversation. I'd be curious to get your advice on this point. Thanks!
Charles Gerada 14/04/2012 17:16
Interesting article Chrissie. I'm sceptical though as to the extent to which, in this day and age, that type of 'pervy' behaviour actually goes on in reputable firms, even more so, that if it did, it would be hushed up. Of course there are exceptions, but there are more prevalent issues that the profession could address painlessly - the abject under-representation of women around the partnership table and the barriers faced by those women who might otherwise choose to return to the profession after childbirth.
Of course the two are related - remove the barriers and there will be more women to take their seat around the table - and the presence of more female partners is probably the easiest way to put an end to the inherent sexism and discrimination associated with male dominated partnerships.
Most firms surely realise how much much better off they will be for having female insight but outmoded expectations as to working time persist. Perhaps these will fade as the more savvy opt to realise the savings on rent that flexible and home-working arrangements offer. The harder challenge is to overcome the perception, particularly prevalent amongst transactional lawyers, that one has to work crazy hours to succeed. Maybe that would become a taboo if the partnership table were gentrified by the presence of more women.
Chrissie Lightfoot 13/04/2012 19:01
Hi Michael
Thanks for adding to the discussion. I agree, your business model may be appealing to some of the ladies.
So too may Lawyers2You, HighStreetLawyer, Quality Solictiors, Legal 365, Keystone Law, Legal Zoom, Rocket Lawyer and of course Obelisk (mentioned earlier) business models, amongst other up and coming alternatives no doubt.
I guess that's my point i.e. there's a greater variety of choice available in relation to HOW to work as a female lawyer in order to accommodate lifestyle preference and to step away from environments and circumstances that are unfulfilling; and that's true for men as well as women.
The Data Age and digital world has helped bring about virtual lawyering meaning women no longer need to work in traditional corporate sturctures.
Maybe that will be the biggest solution to this issue in the medium to long term... do you think?
Warmest as ever
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Michael Porter 12/04/2012 19:29
To quote you Chrissie, ". I see the new savvy entrants into the legal space, the existing legal service providers with innovative business models and those such as virtual lawyering set-ups, franchises, boutiques etc as a huge opportunity for women lawyers to consider their options should they become exasperated with the kind of behaviour they've had to tolerate in the 'traditional' corprate law firm.
face2face solicitors as the new UK law firm franchise is a real opportunity for those successful female lawyers wanting to be in control of their of their own future. face2face solicitors is the new opportunity and is offering early adopters special terms.
Chrissie Lightfoot 11/04/2012 16:22
Hi Nicholas (@polishedlawyer)
"Frankenfirm is monster that devours all before it" Awesome way of putting it!
Furthermore your points that "actually it's part of a wider problem" and "none of this excuses discrimination or inappropriate behaviour" reminds me of the Japanese proverb: "When one has completed 95 Percent of the journey, one is only halfway there!!!”
In addition, your view that clients would prefer "a normally adjusted individual with a happy home life" advising them on their legal matter is irrefutable...
As Maya Angelou once wrote: “People won't remember what you say. They won't remember what you do. They will remember how you make them feel.”
Bottom line, whether the legal advice is provided by a male lawyer or female lawyer, humanness is currency.
Great input. Thanks!
Warmest as ever
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Nicholas Richardson 11/04/2012 13:42
Actually it's part of a wider problem. The larger law firms impose on themselves such financial pressure that anybody - male or female - who isn't seen to be sacrificing themselves (and their family life) to the greater good of the firm is finding it harder and harder to fit in. Doing a good job and looking after the clients is simply not enough. I would rather take advice from a normally adjusted individual with a happy home life who has had a good night's sleep and been able to bring some perspective to my legal problem than from an overworked, over pressurised wreck fighting an ever loosing battle with billing targets.
None of this excuses discrimination or inappropriate behaviour, of course, but Frankenfirm is monster that devours all before it.
Chrissie Lightfoot 11/04/2012 11:27
Hi Mark
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and for getting involved in the discussion.
You make the point that we should “treat everyone as equal”. BUT, as we suspect, “some are more equal than others”...
Hot off the press (released today) is a research report - funded by the Legal Services Board (UK) - which reveals there is “extensive evidence that while overtly discriminatory practices have largely been dismantled, the top echelons of the legal profession remain not only dominated by white, upper-middle class men, but as sites of subtle institutional discrimination.”
Accordingly, women have to employ special strategies to overcome this 'institutional discrimination', particularly when working in large law firms.
Highlights from the report include the following:
* Sexual advances from seniors;
* Biased opportunity structures;
* Women compromising their personal integrity by not complaining about sexism; and
* Strategies to manage the challenges they face ranging from assimilation through to withdrawal i.e. leaving the law altogether.
One woman barrister quoted in the report says that there was: “a lot of sexism, very casual sexism, at the Bar. I think there still is. The older barristers would hit on you, and that was perfectly acceptable. And I think they kind of assumed you would go along with that because you needed their patronage in order to get on'.”
So fresh and hot is this research report that the pdf hasn't been uploaded onto the Research/Publications page yet so you will have to check back later! - http://www.legalservicesboard.org.uk/what_we_do/Research/Publications/pdf/lsb_diversity_in_the_legal_profession_final_rev.pdf
Suffice to say that albeit we now have empirical evidence to support what we 'in the know' already knew and suspected I don't think I will be holding my breath to witness a mercurial and immediate change in behaviour. Will you?
Chrissie Lightfoot
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Nicky Richmond 11/04/2012 09:04
I know of firms where women lawyers are in the majority and the the partnerships are 50:50.
But I've seen prejudice against women at first hand and a reluctance to tackle the difficult issue of flexible working, which in my view is necessary to allow women to play their full part in the legal marketplace. Of course it's not easy; clients want lawyers to be there 24/7 but with new technology and a flexibility on both sides, lawyer and firm, it can be achieved. It's worth the effort. I'm simply not prepared to operate in an environment where women are not given equal opportunity for career advancement.
Mark Longbottom 10/04/2012 18:35
I am not from the legal profession but saw something Chrissie posted on Linked In and would like to add my comment here too.
It's very unfortunate and sad that some within the profession stated above feel they can't take part in the discussion. Which underlines perfectly the need for change.
The really saddening part as ever is that as people some see a need to presume higher levels in employment are available to some not others, and are then shocked when questioned. My parents only told us a few things but one was to treat everyone as equal and to make sure they got respect that was deserved not gained through their age or their sex. Seemed simple to me, odd when I was made welcome at the Greenham Common Women's camp in the snow of February 1983, I thought by 2012 we would not only be in space suits and white buildings but not confronted still by this type of discussion still.
Whether glass ceilings or the behavior of men towards female workers at any level of employment, there is a massive mountain to climb before the reality of being equal is to be found. It's not as if we are waiting for the dinosaurs to die out. Watching some young men continuing the age old traditions because it's what's always been done is disheartening. Hopefully the places where diversity performance is high wills tart to become the norm.
People either male or female should be able to rise to any level due to skill, experience and knowledge not a displaced rule of thumb that a stronger gang can implement. As you mention Chrissie collaboration is one of the most aspects of business now and for the future, this is a big change for many but one they need to make as the people they are excluding men and women are the ones who will take society forward simply because they care to share opportunities with each other.
I maybe seen as naive but I'd rather be inclusive than exclusive whether drinks evening or in the boardroom, we need to make progress as people rather than a steady decline thinking sexist banter is ok because it's what everyone is doing.
The deeper consequences are witnessed by many but not those in the privileged seats, unless they take off their blinkers.
Chrissie Lightfoot 10/04/2012 18:32
Hi Emma
Truth always finds a way; and the truth will out, your words speak so :-)
We are, I believe, entering the Age of Woman. Perhaps I will write about this in a future post :-)
Now, wouldn't that just turn the world completely upside down?...
Warmest
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Chrissie Lightfoot 10/04/2012 18:28
Hi Emma
Truth always finds a way; and the truth will out, your words speak so :-)
We are, I believe, entering the Age of Woman. Perhaps I will write about this in a future post :-)
Now, wouldn't that just turn the world completely upside down?...
Warmest
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Emma Price 10/04/2012 17:20
Often several market forces need to combine for change to be realised and pace to be added - as the buyers change so will the suppliers ... we've seen it in consolidation, commoditisation and globalisation now bring it on for diversification. Come on clients don't accept it - law firms just get better please! Those who don't watch out your clients might just decide poor performance on diversity is not good enough
Chrissie Lightfoot 10/04/2012 15:22
Hi Nicola and Charlotte
Appreciate your engagement and views on this sensitive issue.
Nicola - great point. We're on the same page alright. I'm a great believer in looking at what's RIGHT and doing lots more of it. However, in order to get to the "what is right" we really do have to address the "what is WRONG". I am an eternal optimist in heart and mind, but a grounded realist. And the reality is that the issues I raise are REAL and NOW, even in this day and age.
As long as the prejudice continues women lawyers will not get into the position of leadership and be able to BE the difference to serve the clients of the present and future in the manner in which they seek, in the numbers that I passionately believe are required at any rate. What do you think?
Charlotte - picking up on your comment "It becomes a commitment to a new way of thinking - recognising that there is an inherent glass ceiling in the profession and thinking laterally to address it." I reckon you're on the nose! A paradigm shift is required in relation to how to get around the issue embracing new ways and models of working. For sure, it's not going to go away overnight (if ever!), therefore one has to be creative in dealing with the isssue(s).
If (male) lawyers and law firms genuinely care about their clients and their Business of Law then a frontal lobotomy with regard to client focus nurtured by female lawyers shouldn't be too hard a stretch, n est ce pas?
Best intentions as ever,
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Charlotte Devlin 10/04/2012 14:32
Great article Chrissie. Agree with your point on maternity/paternity policies - and focusing too much on these can blur the issue.
What we have found is that for those lawyers who wish to return to work, after focusing on their families (this could be for a few years) based around the time they have available, there are few options. What tends to occur is that the majority simply drop out of the profession. Not only does this impact on diversity, but it has a very real economic impact as this highly skilled group of people no longer contribute to the profession they trained in.
There are alternative providers that are working to harness this talent. But the real change will occur once firms and companies are prepared to actively address the glass ceiling culture and enage with alternative solutions over the longer-term to support the gradual re-entry of these lawyers back into the profession.
Charlotte Devlin
Obelisk Legal Support
Charlotte Devlin 10/04/2012 12:59
Great article. Agree with you Chrissie on the maternity/paternity point, and in fact this can blur the issue somewhat. We know that many firms and companies already have in place strong maternity/paternity policies.
What we've found is that after taking time out to spend focusing on their families (which could be a few years), many lawyers face real difficulties when they do want to make a return to their profession based around the time that they have available. And, faced with these difficulties many just drop out.
Not only is this concerning from a diversity perspective, but there are real economic costs involved as these highly skilled, talented people are no longer able to contibute to the profession that they are trained in.
This becomes an issue about addressing a transition from focusing on family commitments to moving back into the profession as personal circumstances allow. This is where firms and companies can look towards innovative business models that harness this professional talent - and forge partnerships with these providers - therefore creating re-entry points to the profession. It becomes a commitment to a new way of thinking - recognising that there is an inherent glass ceiling in the profession and thinking laterally to address it. I agree with you Steve - change is here.
Charlotte Devlin
Obelisk Legal
Chrissie Lightfoot 10/04/2012 11:45
Hi Steve & Tim
Tnx for getting involved. I very much welcome your take on this issue (being male) as I received an email from a lady lawyer earlier who was afraid to post anything in case of being reproached. I also received another email from a lady in publishing who said (I quote) "Thanks for the article - glad it got to see the light of day!"
Totally agree Steve. I see the new savvy entrants into the legal space, the existing legal service providers with innovative business models and those such as virtual lawyering set-ups, franchises, boutiques etc as a huge opportunity for women lawyers to consider their options should they become exasperated with the kind of behaviour they've had to tolerate in the 'traditional' corprate law firm. At least now there are alternatives / options available for progression, recognition and fulfilment in the Business of Law (particularly in the UK since LSA 2007 swung into real action) without having to kow-tow to the old structure and system.
Obelisk is a fine example of a new company which is attracting hoards of frustrated top quality ex-city women lawyers (magic cirlce included in the UK) who have clearly been discriminated against due to taking time out to have a family (for example) and/or suffered the prejudice of male colleagues being catapulted into positions which they clearly should have secured had 'The Firm' operated in a meritocratic fashion.
Tim - again, totally agree re. your point about the money. But actually, it's not always about the money,ask the women solicitors, attorneys and barristers; it's generally about fairness and human decency. Re. your point though, I believe that we ought to be self-reliant and shouldn't play the maternity / paternity card at all. We should take time out to have children if we can afford them and shouldn't lay any burden on a compnay for what I see is actually a huge privilege. Personally, I reckon the law's gone too far in relation to the maternity/paternity realm. Existing global population is 7bn, projected to be 9bn by 2050. Global resources are stretched and will continue to be. We shouldn't be stretching company financial resources when clearly the buck should stop with us in relation to our lifestyle choices.Surely? What do you think?
Chrissie
The Entrepreneur Lawyer
(of the naked kind)
Nicola Proudlock 10/04/2012 11:38
Well said, Chrissie, it's true that we in the legal profession still have some way to go here. Having said that, for each incidence where I experience prejudice or unfavourable treatment nowadays, there is at least an equal incidence of recognition that feminine qualities in our sector have been consistently undervalued, and that this has not served us well to date. And that motivates me to help change. Also, we need to take care not to focus too much on the 'what's wrong'. Women need to step up to leadership in our profession, to exert a gentle but determined force for change.
Tim Kevan 09/04/2012 21:43
Nice article Chrissie. One of the inherent problems for barristers is that being self-employed there is no maternity pay (or paternity pay either).
Steve Kuncewicz 09/04/2012 17:02
I'm lucky enough to know some truly gifted female lawyers and pretty much without exception they've had to fight harder for their place at the table, work harder and communicate better. The dominance of older Male partners is just one of any number of law firm cliches which the profession needs to break-the old model is under threat from ABS providers and new entrants into the murky world c the law firm and change isn't coming-it's here. Si much the better.
Add Comments
Comments will be edited and authorized at the discretion of The Global Legal Post. The website also has the right not to publish selected comments.
