Best
Wo m e n 2019
Law Firms
for
Workingmother.com| August/September 2019 37
there is evidence they are being treated unfairly,
such as the increasing data on gender pay
disparity. Major, Lindsey & Africa’s 2018 Partner
Compensation Survey reported a 53 percent
diff erence between male and female partner com-
pensation. MLA said that only some of that can be
explained by diff erences in originations, credits to
the lawyers who bring in client work, and hourly
rates. The rest might point to underlying bias. If
women lawyers are uncertain about whether their
fi rms are treating them fairly, Wetmore encourages
them to test the market by talking to recruiters or
contacts at other fi rms. Doing so is not a commit-
ment to make a lateral move and is not evidence
of infi delity. By testing the market, women can
confi rm that their current fi rm is treating them
reasonably well and feel better about staying put.
They might also get data to negotiate a fairer deal
with their current fi rm. Information is power,
especially in a highly competitive marketplace.
- The economics of the market requires women to
pay attention to their billing rates. Higher rates
obviously result in more revenue with the same
hours. So women need to factor in billing rates
when choosing a practice and career path; a trusts-
and-estates practice might provide regular hours
but not the top billing rates of a mergers-and-
acquisitions or IP practice. When the management
committee recommends annual rate increases,
women must be willing to raise their rates. Billing
rates directly impact future job options. Wetmore
notes that higher rates give lateral candidates
access to more-profi table fi rms, who are often
looking for work that can be billed at premium
rates; conversely, lower rates are a barrier to
lawyers wanting to move to more-profi table fi rms. - Women must also be protective of themselves
in connection with origination credits. Wetmore
recommends that women consider not working for
clients if the client-relationship partners won’t
share credit and instead migrate to clients whose
partners are more collaborative.
What does the battle for talent
mean for law firms that want to
retain and attract women lawyers?
- Law firms that do not support strong career
paths for women lawyers will be at risk of losing
some of their highest potential lawyers to other
fi rms—or to clients. Sara Begley, a labor and
employment partner at Holland & Knight, notes
that law fi rms often see it as a positive when
associates leave to join clients. Sometimes it is—
those in-house lawyers can recommend their
previous employers as outside counsel. However,
if those same in-house lawyers are too junior, they
are not positioned to infl uence the selection of
outside counsel. Plus, if they leave big law because
they see no path forward or feel undervalued, it’s
unlikely they will select their former fi rm as
outside counsel. Either way, the law fi rm loses
promising talent, as well as the investment it has
made in its associates’ development.- Law firms that allow gender pay disparity are at
the highest risk of defections—and lawsuits.
Although there aren’t many lawsuits, they have
become more common. But fi rms that perpetuate
gender pay disparity face a bigger problem:
attrition of high-value women lawyers. Rick
Palmore—pioneering diversity champion, author
of A Call to Action: Diversity in the Legal
Profession and founding chair of the Leadership
Council on Legal Diversity—predicts that if more
women leave fi rms because they learn or feel they
are being paid unfairly, law fi rms will be forced to
change their policies. But Palmore, senior counsel
at Dentons, cautions against assuming that market
forces alone will level the playing fi eld for women
lawyers—especially for multicultural women, who
remain poorly represented in law fi rms.
Women lawyers, law fi rms, legal recruiters and,
ultimately, clients share one pressing common
need: data to evaluate which fi rms promote
diversity and inclusion. Firms need data for critical
self-assessments to develop policies that will
discourage defections and promote retention.
Women lawyers need information so if they are
leaving one fi rm because they have not been
treated fairly, they can select a fi rm where their
prospects are better. Recruiters need data so they
can recommend more-hospitable fi rms to women
candidates. Clients who require diverse lawyers to
staff their matters need data on the fi rms that are
most likely to fulfi ll their demands.
Congratulations to the 60 fi rms recognized
on the 2019 Working Mother Best Law Firms
for Women list for gathering the data to analyze
their diversity practices and results, for submitting
the data to Working Mother for review and
benchmarking against the industry, and for their
commitment to using their own data to promote
greater diversity and inclusion in their fi rms.
Law fi rms that are hungry for growth will
make recruiting—and retaining—women lawyers
a priority.
Karen Kaplowitz, president of the New Ellis Group,
a business-development strategy and coaching fi rm
that she founded in 1997, has worked with hundreds
of partners in the U.S. to build their practices. Since
2016, she has been a senior advisor to the Working
Mother Best Law Firms for Women Initiative.
Kaplowitz was named one of Lawdragon’s Global
100 Leading Consultants and Strategists to the
Legal Profession in 2018 and 2019.Firms are
competing
to recruit
the best
talent away
from other
firms;
employers
have
stronger
incentives
to retain
their most
valued
lawyers.