Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Mean Girls



Earlier this week, a teenager in a town not too far from here hanged herself after six months of bullying and cyber-tormenting by the high school cool girls. Even after her death, the gloating continued on Facebook. Her tragedy and the arrogant, narcissistic cruelty of the tormentors has captured local attention and fills the radio talk shows.

Yesterday, I heard a talk show caller (male) comment that "it wasn't surprising," because "women are always that way." He went on to relate a story of a friend who was a lawyer at a large downtown law firm: "My friend says the women senior partners terrorize the junior women partners. It's brutal."

I will be the first to agree that society of women operates on different rules than the society of men, and that women (like men) can be thoughtless and even cruel. I claim no special "kindness" for my sex. The queen bee phenomenon exists (though it is usually a single hard-bitten survivor), but truly, I am shocked by that caller's account of a group of senior women ganging up against the younger ones. Perhaps his tale is accurate, I cannot say because I do not know the name of the firm, but I doubt it.

I have spent twenty years in large law firm settings, and by and large, the women have looked out for each other. Within firms, the more senior women - especially we few senior partners - generally do our best to mentor the young ones: we de-brief them after sexist encounters, give them a "heads up" about particularly difficult clients or opposing counsel, and share strategies for navigating firm hierarchies.

The women's network in the larger legal community is also strong. We may not be chummy (after all, we are often opposing each other in court), but within our jurisdiction or practice area, we few, senior women keep tabs on each other. We compare experiences and women's "war stories," even about our own firms, and in a pinch, when the issue is a woman's issue, and not a case, we back each other up. I have seen it and experienced it again and again.

In the large dollar, complex lawsuits that are my specialty, there are rarely more than two or three senior women among the many lawyers and law firms involved. When the deposition breaks, or the judge dismisses the jury, we all head to the same place, and we are alone there for days and hours and weeks over the course of a complex matter. Being generally adverse, we can't talk about the case, and most of us don't talk football. So what do we do? Well, we're girls, so we start with the easy stuff, "Wow, I love your shoes!" And then, we dish: "Did you hear that Smith & Smith finally made a woman senior partner? I didn't think they'd ever do that . . ." Before long, it's personal: "How good is your firm about part time?"

So, mean girls be damned, but don't damn us all: the sisterhood of the Ladies Room is strong.

Sunday, January 17, 2010

Unequal Pay


I began this blog, in part, to talk about my life as the chief diversity officer of a mid-sized (70-100 lawyer, multi-city) law firm. As of December 31, 2009, I resigned from this post. I will keep writing all the same. With or without the "badge," my passion for the problem will not wane. After all, this is my life.

Why did I resign? Interestingly, though it was an unwelcome shock to my firm's governing body, and though I have since discussed transitional issues with each of its members, not a single leader of my law firm asked me that question.

Perhaps they know, and knowing me, they know that if they ask, I will tell them, and the one thing they do not want to know, is the answer to the question, why did I suddenly quit.

But the answer is not a secret: I resigned because I suddenly realized that the job had become my own personal glass ceiling. My firm had asked me to take on the role because it knew I had the passion, commitment and talent to imagine and direct a cutting edge diversity initiative. Somewhat reluctantly (because I suspected this day might come) I did what I was asked (women so often do - ironically, we are the archetypical "good soldiers"), and I succeeded beyond my own expectations. I even succeeded, I think, beyond the firm's.

But in the end, the firm was unwilling to value my work. Sure, they patted me on the back, and praised me, and said, "wow, this is incredible." But in a law firm, that's not "value," that's spin. Law firms know only one way to value their partners' contributions: money. If it matters, you'll see it in your pay check at the end of the year. It's crass, but it's unambiguous.

As I've learned, a CDO has two options: wear the badge, schedule monthly committee meetings, and continue to bill the same hours as in the past; or leap into the role, like a case assignment -- or like the critically important business development project it is -- and give it the time it needs and deserves. I'm not much into "badges," so I took the second course.

It's the classic problem. Unequal pay for equal work. Women and minorities are typically the people tasked to lead the diversity program. Everyone agrees that program is a core "business development" program, but at the end of the year, when it comes time to divide the profits, golf counts, diversity doesn't.

Question:  When will the position be properly paid?

Answer:  When it's filled by a straight, white male.

P.S. My replacement is female, and she too, will be expected somehow to run one of the firm's most significant and far-reaching programs, innovating all the while, without missing more than a handful of billable hours. She's a marvelous woman and an incredibly hard worker. If anyone can do it, she can.

God speed!

Monday, January 11, 2010

The Laws of Men and Women in the Workplace: Part III


And last, but not least, the rules of social engagement:
10.   Make sure to include women lawyers in social invitations (especially when on the road: drinks, dinner, etc.) to the same extent that you would/do their male counterparts. And generally, think of them as lawyers and colleagues, not as women. (Naturally, this rule does not extend to inappropriate jokes, venues, etc.. There, the rule is, if you wouldn't do it with a woman present, don't do it in business at all. Corollary: Don't apologize if you swear in front of a woman, unless you would apologize to a man in the same circumstances. This is an outdated concept that assumes women are not fit for the rugged business world.)
The work/social boundary is a particularly tricky issue because business and social rules are in conflict and there is no consensus on how to interleave them. For example, it is a business norm for the junior person to hold the door/carry the bags for the senior person, and it is a social norm for the man to do these same things for the woman. Because there is no consensus on how to handle these matters, no matter what you do, someone will consider you rude or be offended. You may find it easiest to navigate these rules differently with different women. When in doubt, however (or if the navigating gets too hard), err on the side of business rules in a business setting. If you give offense, at least it will be for rudeness, not for sexism or perceived discrimination.
          As for greetings, stick with shaking hands unless you know the woman quite well and know she is comfortable with a kiss-on-the-cheek/hug approach. Better to be too cold than too familiar when it's work.
I have spent years struggling with these issues and norms. I used to bristle every time a man I worked for/with did something like open a car door for me or offer to carry my suitcase. Now that I'm more self-confident and know my partners and friends better, I find I have different rules for different people. With some, I will allow it because I know it is intended as a courtesy and is not meant to diminish me, but with people I do not know so well, I still insist on business, not social rules when I am working.