Yale Law Women List Top 10 Family-Friendly Law Firms

Women in the Law

Yale Law Women List Top 10 Family-Friendly Law Firms

Posted Sep 8, 2008, 05:21 pm CST
By Martha Neil

Updated: Last year, Quarles & Brady was No. 1. But this year, the Milwaukee, Wisc.-based law firm didn't even make it on a list of the nation's 10 most family-friendly law firms compiled by Yale Law Women.

It wasn't alone in being left out, however: Only three law firms—Arnold & Porter (based in Washington, D.C.); Covington & Burling (also in D.C.); and Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris Glovsky and Popeo (Boston)—were on the list both last year and this year. And this year the group listed the law firms alphabetically on its website.

The other seven firms ranked in the top 10 this year are: Dorsey & Whitney (Minneapolis); Debevoise & Plimpton (New York City); Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (Los Angeles); Kirkland & Ellis (Chicago); Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel (New York City); Perkins Coie (Seattle); and WilmerHale (Boston).

Quarles partner Nancy Peterson, who chairs the firm's diversity committee, says the firm wasn't included in the Yale Law Women survey this year because its scope narrowed. Last year, its survey looked at the top 200 law firms based on data provided by NALP, but this year it considered only firms from the 2007 Vault Top 100 Law Firms list, and Quarles isn't on it, she points out.

"Family-friendly policies remain very important to our firm," she tells ABAJournal.com. "Many attorneys who aspire to be great lawyers also aspire to be great parents. Our firm is committed to providing the support to be both."

In addition to recognizing the achievement of law firms that provide a superior working environment for women, Yale Law Women also hopes the top 10 list will be a catalyst for change, the group says in a press release.

The list helps to highlight a continuing problem, the group writes: "While the average percentage of female associates was more than 40 percent, the average percentage of female partners was less than 20 percent. Across the profession, the percentage of female associates becoming partners has not increased in more than 20 years."

Last year's Yale Law Women list is discussed in a prior ABAJournal.com post.

Related coverage:

ABAJournal.com: "Is Your Firm on Working Mother’s Best of 2008 List?"

Updated at 10:50 a.m. on Sept. 12, 2008 to include comments by Nancy Peterson. Corrected at 1:10 p.m. on Sept. 15, 2008, to include law firm's correct headquarters city.

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by WHAT?!?!?! - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 18 hours, 41 minutes ago

KIRKLAND & ELLIS in CHICAGO?!?!?! Talk about a false-positive result?!?!? They can’t possibly be serious…
Posted by Wamba - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 18 hours, 28 minutes ago

“Family-friendly”? Why not call it what it really is - special treatment for women attorneys who want to be “fulfilled” with mommyhood but don’t want to have their career advancement affected. The trouble with this attitude is that it expects everyone else to accomodate mommy. for the attorney who isn’t with family (both male and female) that means having to pick up the slack left behind by mommy lawyer when she takes reduced hours, has to run off for school meetings or other excuses or simply takes a leave of absence. Real equality here - NOT! It’s just another example of feminists parroting the equality line but expecting special treatment and changing rules and practices in their favor.
Posted by TMT - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 18 hours, 22 minutes ago

To “Wamba” - As my husband would say . . . “don’t be a hater”!!
Posted by Ellen Barshevsky - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 9 minutes ago

It is a SHAME that there are only TEN TOP law firms for women. Being Women friendly should be a requirement for ALL law firms. After all, we are getting only 53% as much as men, which is another TRAVESTEY that MUST be fixed immediately. That is why we are taken advantage of. We don’t speak up and unite for what is RIGHT!

Women Lawyers, Let’s stand up and say we want equal pay for equal work. Anything else is unfair and discriminatory.

If we bind together we will get 100% of the pay we deserve for the work that we do. What is so wrong about that?
Posted by mom&lawyer - 2 months, 3 weeks, 23 hours, 45 minutes ago

I believe the list says family friendly for all of us who have children WAMBA! I hope you are never a father or mother as we can all see where your priorities lie! It is nice to know that you can be a lawyer and have a real life like the rest of the real world outside the legal profession; that’s why most of us are in small firms or solo practices, because the majority of big firm attorney just don’t get it.
Posted by WWSD2008 - 2 months, 3 weeks, 23 hours, 11 minutes ago

Ellen B. says, “It is a SHAME that there are only TEN TOP law firms for women.“

Logic is not your strong suit. We can have 10,000 “family-friendly” law firms, but if we are going to select the top 10, 9,990 are not going to make the cut, no matter how family-friendly they are. That doesn’t mean the 9,990 are not family-friendly.

Oh, the survey measured “family-friendly,“ not “women-friendly.“ Men count.

Sheesh.
Posted by Allison - 2 months, 3 weeks, 22 hours, 39 minutes ago

As long as flexible policies to accommodate family demands continue to be viewed as only (and merely) a women’s issue, this discussion will go nowhere. As a matter of sheer survival, women have led the charge. But it’s well past time now for the senior, largely male, firm management cadres to realize that all employees benefit when they have the means at their disposal to fulfill ALL of their various obligations. And you younger guys, keep getting with the program - your presence is welcome and necessary.

Being a lawyer, parent, spouse and active community member is always a tug of war, but flexible policies help keep you from being strangled by the rope.
Posted by Jon Edwards - 2 months, 3 weeks, 21 hours, 56 minutes ago

I have no interest in treating a female employee differently than a male employee of the same level of responsibility. That means, of course, that she has to be there at all regular hours, just as he does. If she wants to bring her child to work, and take nursing breaks, etc, she is going to accept the consequences, which means some unpaid break time. If he doesn’t get it, she doesn’t get it. You can’t have equal pay for a full day, if you are taking breaks to care for kids at work, or working fewer hours to spend more time with your kids. For me to do what I want with my company, my employees will work the hours I need them to work, both within the daily and weekly constraints. If they don’t like it, they can seek employment elsewhere. I will be there when the office is open, she will be there for her scheduled hours. I don’t currently offer paid sick time or paid vacation, I don’t get paid when I am absent, either.
Posted by Tim - 2 months, 3 weeks, 21 hours, 43 minutes ago

Jon,

Do you own a 1-man company?
Posted by WWSD - 2 months, 3 weeks, 21 hours, 27 minutes ago

__________

The comments here have convinced me.

A woman should be able to work whatever hours she wants, whenever she wants, without any responsibility to the firm. She should get paid exactly the same as a man (if not more), regardless of when, or if, she shows up.

How does management deal with that? That’s management’s problem.
Posted by Jon - 2 months, 3 weeks, 21 hours, 27 minutes ago

one man, me. One secretary, female, two law student researchers, both female. It’s what works for me.
Posted by Jon - 2 months, 3 weeks, 21 hours, 23 minutes ago

My current company size is not really the issue, though. My policies are not going to change when I expand, though, and I will. I hope to hire one of my female law student researchers as my associate when she graduates. Don’t know which one, I’d probably take the first that applies, they are both good (and both 2L’s)
Posted by MCF - 2 months, 3 weeks, 21 hours, 15 minutes ago

For all of the men complaining that women are somehow receiving “special treatment” by virtue of the various women-friendly policies at big law firms, when you start assuming equal responsibility at home and in your family life, then you, too, will be deserving of this “special treatment.“ Seriously, are you completely closing your eyes to the entirely unequal role women play in the home? Do you not realize that we essentially juggle two jobs—homemaker and attorney? Your dry cleaning doesn’t make it back to your closet on its own initiative, nor do your other clothes clean themselves. Groceries don’t magically appear in the pantry, and dinner doesn’t make itself. Kids don’t hitch rides home from daycare, nor do they bathe themselves. And surely, you obnoxious alpha males with absolutely no sensitivity to these issues are NOT helping out. Who takes care of these chores, then? You have the most myopic perspective and it makes me sick to my stomach. You have no idea how much harder it is for women. Maybe if I had me a nice trophy wife to take care of me, I could spend every waking moment at work ... oh wait, that’s right, I already do spend almost every waking moment at work. Except for when I leave early to take care of my family, only to revisit the billable hour between 10 p.m. and midnight—oh how I enjoy that “SPECIAL” treatment!
Posted by d - 2 months, 3 weeks, 21 hours, 14 minutes ago

Why is this in the “Women and the Law” section?
Posted by SKP - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 56 minutes ago

Well said, MCF.

Jon, is there a reason that you insist on having only women as your subordinates? Just asking because you made such a point of specifiying that everyone who works for you is a woman.
Posted by Hadley V. Baxendale - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 39 minutes ago

MCF—yours is one of the more bigoted, prejudiced and sexist posts I have read in a long time. I go to the dry cleaners, cook, grocery shop, maintain the house and (used to) bathe the children—and my wife either didn’t work or worked 3-4 hours a day, mornings. Marriage is a system of cooperation so don’t judge couples who divide the work and responsibility—do you cut half the grass and make your husband cut the other half? Wash half the dishes, clean half the gutters, build half a deck? The fact that many, perhaps most, couples divide the assignments along “traditional” lines doesn’t mean they don’t want to.
Posted by Former Nursing Mom - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 38 minutes ago

Jon- You should read up on the laws affording women the right to use break time for breastfeeding without any deduction in pay. Moreover, every pediatrician in the world says that at least 1 full year of breastfeeding is the best for an infant, and unless you can figure out how to bless men with the ability to lactate, this burden will continue to be on the mothers of the world. As a practical matter, you should know that today’s pumping technologies and accessories allow nursing professionals to work productively while they are pumping (so long as they have a private space and a technology link). Finally, I hope and pray that your female clerks read your posts and think long and hard about NOT staying to work for you as attorneys.
Posted by JT - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 33 minutes ago

What does “family friendly” mean, exactly? Each of these firms may have flexibility with maternity/paternity leave and maybe even allow for flexible work arrangements. But frankly, I don’t understand how any firm, regardless of how nice and progressive its policies are, can be called family friendly when it requires the attorney work 60+ hours/week. Next to trust and love, time is the most valuable asset to a family.
Posted by HVB - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 31 minutes ago

Allison #7 you are right—members of each gender should have the opportunity for fulfilling lives outside work. Here’s why it won’t work—the law firm business model (which I think may collapse soon) is driven by over-working the bottom layer, with no real consequences b/c each one who burns out, leaves or protests can be replaced instantly—they are fungible billing units. One large firm I know actually had an hourly goal for outside activities for associates, whcih had to relate somehow to the firm’s (or its clients’) business interests. How offensive is that? I agree that the young males need to join the females on opening up the sweatshop, but I am not optimistic (FTR I am an old dude). Young men who complain are seen as whiners, slackers or “not team players” and the women as “same old song and dance” at the places not interested in addressing the issue.
Posted by AM - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 24 minutes ago

Today, having children is a lifestyle choice, not a biological requirement. If women and men wish to have kids, they must recognize that that decision will inevitably affect everything else in their lives, including their work situation. Those who do not want or can’t have kids, should have the same opportunities for paid or unpaid time off to nurture their lifestyle choices (education, travelling, long-term volunteering, etc.), which are no less valid. Further, after observing the coddled Millennials that have emerged, it may be worthwhile to return to a less child-centered existence for both moms and dads.
Posted by Valerie Dunbar Jones - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 22 minutes ago

I’m tremendously tired of quality of life being charaterized as a “women’s issue.“ Have we really developed a subculture of people who can feel successful as lawyers while failing at being human beings? Some perverse part of us is taking pride in sacrificing family for work, and sacrificing self for family. And where is “community” in this battle?

We’re smart and competitive—don’t we understand nobody “wins” these contests? Except the firms, that is. Are any of these dank edifices worthy beneficiaries of your lives, your fortunes and your sacred honor?
Posted by Surprised - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 14 minutes ago

Taking bets on how much K & E paid to make that list…. What a joke…
Posted by Former Nursing Mom - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 10 minutes ago

AM- oh, you’d be surprised how much biology influences people’s decisions to have children- for many it is a matter of the heart and not the head (unlike choosing to engage in travel or leisure activities).
Posted by NotTooSerious - 2 months, 3 weeks, 20 hours, 8 minutes ago

I’m still pushing my firm for a more “cat friendly” environment so that I can bring them with me. It’s discrimination!
Posted by Anthony - 2 months, 3 weeks, 19 hours, 53 minutes ago

Micro-managing your employees is the best way to lose good employees. Every minute of every day is not going to be productive. And you following your employees around to make sure they aren’t dealing with family issues during “business” hours just shows that you aren’t taking enough responsibility on yourself. Employers need to lighten up. You hired a person, not a robot.
Posted by Rexkanobi - 2 months, 3 weeks, 19 hours, 37 minutes ago

HVB (19) and AM (20) are spot on here. The Biglaw business model is the culprit here and it equally affects BOTH genders. The firms’ bottom line is predicated on their associates (and more junior partners) working ALL THE TIME. So until someone comes up with an alternative business model that demands less of lawyers’ time but provides similar profitability, you will never be able to use large law firm and “family-friendly” or “work-life balance” in the same sentence.
Posted by Sue - 2 months, 3 weeks, 19 hours, 27 minutes ago

#8 - “I don’t currently offer paid sick time or paid vacation”

I definitely want to work for you; where do I send my resume?
Posted by Jon Edwards - 2 months, 3 weeks, 18 hours, 43 minutes ago

The fact that there are only women in my firm or as law school research assistants is strictly accidental. No, it wasn’t planned (the secretary was, I wanted this particular girl to work for me (go ahead and call me sexist for calling her a girl - she is a homeschooled 17-year-old girl) As for the two women (both 2L right now), I happened to meet them both at a law school program, they both attend my church, and one is also the math tutor for my homeschooled son. I like them both, and if one will come work as my associate after she graduates, why in the world would I even bother looking at any male students or attorneys?
Posted by Bjorn - 2 months, 3 weeks, 17 hours, 30 minutes ago

The thing that has always bothered me is that almost universally the term “family-friendly” really means “mommy-friendly”. I was a stay at home dad for a number of years and it was the most rewarding (and challenging) thing I have did. However, many times I would go to a “family” event and end up being the only dad there. When the conversations turned to lactation or such, the comfort level really decreased. Anyway, if they want this list to be taken seriously, it needs to be picked not by Yale Law Women, but by Yale Law. Family does not mean mommy.
Posted by Karen - 2 months, 3 weeks, 17 hours, 21 minutes ago

I work for one of the top ten firms, and “family friendly” means that I was given paid FMLA leave to take care fir nt elderly mother and for my partner who had heart surgery. “Family” just doesn’t mean Mom/Dad and small children, you know.
Posted by Mary Ann - 2 months, 3 weeks, 17 hours, 11 minutes ago

If we could be completely honest, we would admit that there is no such thing as either a “family friendly” or even a “diverse” law firm. These are PC concepts or ideals that are touted to woo clients and new associates. Once the woman or other minority associate is in, then the concept fades and the reality dawns—work your billable hours or else. The fact is law firms are businesses and they exist for only one purpose—to earn lots of money. They will embrace “family” or “diversity” or “green cheese from the Moon” if it will increase revenue. I do not believe it is possible to be either family friendly or diverse in their truest expression. I am not so sure that we should expect businesses, where we go to earn our income, to be either “family friendly” or “diverse.“ Family friendly and diversity are ideals best expressed in churches or social clubs and not law firms or businesses.
Posted by HVB - 2 months, 3 weeks, 17 hours ago

right on Mary Ann.
Posted by DR - 2 months, 3 weeks, 16 hours, 56 minutes ago

I have to agree with Mary Ann above. I’m on a flex-time schedule this year, but oddly still billing above the average associate in my firm. Why? We have tons of work and it is not hard to be working from the moment I get here to the moment I leave…as well as the time I spend working on briefs on the weekends. I’m going back on the regular associate track at the beginning of 2009. I have found that it is not that difficult to meet billing requirements and I took a big cut in pay this year to do the same amount of work. I love my firm, but the flex-time option didn’t really work for me. I can’t speak for others.
Posted by Rachel - 2 months, 3 weeks, 12 hours, 17 minutes ago

Law firms really can be family friendly, but not those that operate as sweat shops. My firm really is “family friendly” as well as external-pursuit friendly. We are a smaller firm (45 attorneys) in Salt Lake City and as long as attorneys meet their obligations (both billable hours and keeping clients happy) then no one really cares when one comes and goes or how one meets those obligations. We don’t do “flex time.“ Instead, people chosing to go part-time are just paid for the hours they bill. One woman here bills about 1000 hours per year. Its not a perfect system and there are sacrifices with respect to quality of work, but its still workable and allows a more balanced life.
Posted by Nick - 2 months, 3 weeks, 10 hours, 56 minutes ago

My biggest problem with the whole article is identifying Quarles & Brady as a Chicago law firm. Of their 400 lawyers, just about half are in Milwaukee, and the rest sprinkled around the other offices. And they were founded there as well.

That said, I’ve been a big law partner for over 15 years, and I don’t have any idea why all of you think that it’s the associates and young partners that are worked to death by the firms. It’s just a matter of how much money you want to make. If you don’t care that much about money, get a different job. I work longer than any of my associates and younger partners. I didn’t used to, when I had kids at home. Back then, I would take off at 3:30 to watch a football game or go to a track meet or meet with a teacher if I wanted, but I still got my work done (at all hours sometimes), and in getting my work done, my hour requirements were always satisfied. But it really is all about choice. All choices come with consequences.
Posted by Rectifier'D - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 20 hours, 54 minutes ago

Frankly, EACH AND EVERYONE OF YOU ARE NOT REALLY SEEING THE POINT OF THIS ARTICLE!
It is not just about ‘Mommy Dearest”, ‘Feminist’, or whatever. It is primarily emphasizing the criteria upon which these TEN law firms were selected. Secondly, it makes a point of how this ‘CATEGORY’ of law firms sizes up against the view of the disparity in salaries amongst the two sexes.
THAT’S IT!
All this B.S. crap about: “sharing household duties”, “equality”, working a specified number of billable hours, etc., etc. is pure ignorance!

If you cannot read and comprehend no better than that then you all need to go back to GRAMMER school!

To be grown adults in this world and working in such an honorable profession that is so crucial to the citizens ALL OVER this great nation of AMERICA and to speak with such incomprehensible ignorance is despicable. It surely indicates that while your body has matured, your brains have not!

As for the author of this piece, you should stick to one relevant point at a time! Any professional writer/reporter would know that. The context of this article DOES NOT clearly articulate, nor even communicate, the details of this subject. Therefore, it is slightly understandable as to why these “child-like” comments are posted here. Because you did not stick to the subject at hand. That being the identification of, the basis of, the process of and the analysis of the results!!!!!!!!!!!!

The only other relevant point would be: How this relates to THE WORKING ENVIRONMENT(s) within these firms. Not that mess about male vs. female salaries!!!!!!!!

As for you BOMBASTIC, PINHEAD males:
Nick, Rachel and Mary Ann all make good points that you should read over again.
And Jon: Every employee is a good and productive employee if they have a supportive and GREAT employer!

But as the legal profession is full of ‘characters’ such as those posted here then I can only say: This profession will never ‘settle’ this argument on salary disparity or even racial equality ‘within reason’ nor within this era. And that is the true SHAME that you ALL are burdened with.

And likewise, so are us ‘CITIZENS’ that truly depend on your services!!!!!!!!!!
STOP ACTING LIKE CHILDREN AND SETTLE THIS ISSUE!
Posted by khazeh - 2 months, 2 weeks, 4 days, 13 hours, 54 minutes ago

HVB - as I am the person in the family who does the outdoor work, like mowing the lawn, I have to gently tell you that the jig is up on that one. Mowing the lawn once a week, trimming the hedges, and all that is far easier than handling laundry, childcare, meal prep, dishes, etc. all day long. If my spouse offered to switch laundry for yardwork, I’d reply that you’d have to pry my cold dead fingers off my edger/trimmer. So please, spare the boo-hooing about how those lazy women just don’t understand the burden of manly chores.
Posted by HVB - 2 months, 2 weeks, 4 days, 12 hours, 23 minutes ago

Khazeh, I think you missed my point. First, I don’t consider women as lazy regardless of where they “work.“ There’s a big list of work to be done to run a household, which includes the inside and outside housework as well as earning the income. Each type of work can be enjoyable, intolerable, easy or hard, erwarding or exhausting, and no one can say that physical labor is harder than mental, or vice versa. The couple has to strike the balance as to who gets which tasks, based on abillity, interest and timing (I couldn’t be a lawyer in a firm if I could only do my yardwork on Thurdays from 9-2.) Neither side can, or should, claim that his or her assigned tasks are “harder” than the other’s; if there is an imbalance the couple has to adjust it. Also, tasks get easier or harder with age: Childcare is harder when they are little; office work can get harder as you age. My point was that I know just how hard, or not, each task is b/c I have done them all (I don’t say I do them all).
Posted by GGB - 2 months, 2 weeks, 1 day, 12 hours, 41 minutes ago

HVB:

All you seem to be advocating is requiring one parent—which we all know, in all of our lives, has traditionally been the woman—to stay home and care for a child while the other works. I’m glad that works for you. I’m sure many are envious of your situation. Not everyone has the luxury of having one parent stay in the home (sometimes, not even for a year, depending on their financial situation). This is why the law has evolved - slowly, in our country, much more rapidly, in others - to provide incentives for the parent who both needs to work and is the “primary provider” with respect to household and childrearing duties. The reason why this has been called a “women’s issue” rather than a “family issue” is becuase, in the vast majority of instances right now, it is the woman who splits her time and attention betewen the primary duties of the household and her duties at her place of work. I hope that label changes over time as parents begin sharing responsibilities in a more equal manner. For various reasons, I’m not sure that it will change. And for the women that it affects every day—the women in these posts who bill just as many hours and change the diapers, make the meals, and get back on the blackberry at 10—it IS a woman’s issue and it needs to be addressed by the legal workplace.

Do you know women are more than 50% of the students graduating from ABA law schools? This issue will impact most of these women. If law firms do not attempt to deal with it, women will be forced to look to other professions, which in many cases have handled this issue better than we are right now.
Posted by Ellen Barshevsky - 2 months, 2 weeks, 23 hours, 25 minutes ago

WOMEN: PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS IMPORTANT:
The University of Baltimore School of Law is hosting their Second Annual Feminist Legal Theory Conference in 2009. The conference, which will bring together law students, legal academics, practitioners and activists, “will look at discrete areas of the law and ask how feminist legal theory operates or could operate to expand existing law, create new law, or combat contractions in the law.“

This conference will address these issues from the perspectives of activists, practitioners and academics. The conference will provide an opportunity for participants and audience members to exchange ideas about the current state of feminist legal theory by looking at how those theories are being actualized in practice and in specific areas of the law. From the conference, we hope to further the discourse about the future of feminist legal theory and its practical applications to the law.

Additionally, the University is seeking submissions from those interested in presenting. Academics, law students and practitioners are encouraged to apply. A one page abstract is due by October 17, 2008, with a working draft due in February 2009.
Posted by Lawstudent - 2 months, 1 week, 5 days, 17 hours, 49 minutes ago

To all who have commented on duty sharing, traditional roles, equality issues, I pose this question: What do you say to the single parent (either female or male) who has no family, no other parent, no one else to share the duties with? I do it all. I do mean the yard, the car, the kid, the dishes, the dry cleaning, and the legal work when the kid goes to bed. Sure, I could be in a different career, but I wasn’t able to afford for my child to have a life that way. To what do you say to me? Where in the law do I fit? No one else can pick up my child at 5:30 p.m. when the daycare closes each day. Its all me. But I don’t mind picking the laptop back up at 10 p.m. Suggestions? Advice? Comments to that?

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Women in the Law