Anyone who has viewed the viral video, “So You Want to Go to Law School” on YouTube may recall an older male attorney describing one of the more mundane aspects of the practice of law (e.g., responding to Requests for Admissions created solely to confuse you) to an earnest young woman considering going to law school. Despite the male attorney's ominous warnings, the female protagonist in the video, Carrie-Ann Fox, nonetheless decides to go to a fictitious law school and even spawns a sequel YouTube video. Unfortunately, many women are making a different decision—to not go to law school. As a result, this could be a critical time for law firms to make the practice of law more "friendly" to women.

The data provided in a recent Catalyst study illustrates this fact. (Catalyst’s “Women in Law in the U.S.” (2011).) Catalyst is not alone in reporting this trend—according to the ABA, in the 2009 to 2010 class, women made up 47.2 percent of J.D. Students. (American Bar Association, “Enrollment and Degrees Awarded 1963-2010.") This is a noticeable change from 1993, when women comprised 50.4 percent of J.D. students. (American Bar Association, “First Year and Total J.D. Enrollment by Gender 1947 – 2010.”)

Several factors are likely to blame for the erosion of female law school applicants—the economy, related concerns about student loan debt, and perhaps most importantly, the lack of women in the upper echelons of law firms and corporate law departments. This stalled advancement coupled with the perception that law school may not be a good investment in these trying economic times could contribute to a long-term setback for women in the profession. These troubling statistics have certainly been noted by the media—the New York Times, for example, published a piece last year documenting the progress of women in the law in light of the 30th anniversary of former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor hearing her first case on the United States Supreme Court. (Editorial. "The Glass Ceiling." New York Times on the Web, 8 Oct. 2011. 5 April 2012.) The editorial noted that women with children are having the hardest time staying in the profession, and are half as likely to be hired as women without children.

In 2010, women made up 31.5 percent of all lawyers. (Current Population Survey, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Table 11: Employed Persons by Detailed Occupation, S*x, Race, and Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity,” Annual Averages 2010 (2011).) However, 11 percent of the largest law firms in the United States have no women on their governing committees. (National Association of Women Lawyers and The NAWL Foundation, Report of the Sixth Annual National Survey on Retention and Promotion of Women in Law Firms (October 2011). At many firms, female partners do not play a major role in business development. Indeed, women partners account for only 16 percent of those partners receiving credit for having $500,000 or more business at law firms. (Id.)

After assessing the amount of time, effort, and money required to complete law school and make partner at a law firm, some women may determine that it is not worth the sacrifice, if being partner does not give them actual power relative to firm business decisions. In a survey of the 50 best law firms for women, only a fraction of the decision makers were women: 10 percent of firm chairpersons were women; 2 percent of the firms had women managing partners; 19 percent of the equity partners were women; and 28 percent of the non-equity partners were women. (NAFE and Flex-Time Lawyers, “Executive Summary,” Best Law Firms for Women 2011 (2011).)

This lack of power translates into cold hard dollars, as women lawyers made approximately 77 percent of male lawyers' salaries in 2010. (Current Population Survey, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Table 39: Median Weekly Earnings of Full-time Wage and Salary Workers by Detailed Occupation and S*x,” Annual Averages 2010 (2011).) This lesser income, combined with the demands facing women at home, may not make the practice of law as appealing to females who may feel that they are choosing between a family life and a successful law practice. One study found that nearly half as many male lawyers as women lawyers (44 percent vs. 84 percent) have a spouse that is employed full-time. (Catalyst, Women in Law: Making the Case (2001).) So while top male lawyers may have spouses who do not work full-time, if at all, many female lawyers' spouses work full-time, and the demands of both spouses working is particularly hard on these families.

What do these declining enrollment figures mean for the future practice of law? A decreasing number of females entering law school will undoubtedly result in fewer female attorneys in the coming years. And, that could result in even fewer women in leadership positions within firms, which may further perpetuate the enrollment trend.

What can law firms do to encourage women to enroll in and complete law school? Law firms should consider instituting female-friendly work practices, such as generous maternity leave, flex-time, and telecommuting ability. These business decisions may lead to increased productivity and lower turnover rates. What goes without saying is the impact of technology on the modern lawyer's life. Gone are the days of being “off-the-clock.” The BlackBerry, iPhone, and other PDAs have contributed to a whole new level of accessibility for most attorneys, particularly those who communicate with clients. Although there are some drawbacks to the norm of around-the-clock communication, it has ushered in a new age of flexibility for attorneys who do not have to be in their office to review e-mails, work documents, and participate in telephone conferences. These advancements have benefited female practitioners to the extent that they allow for some of the same work to be done from home, which is particularly helpful for those with family obligations.

Notwithstanding the percentage reduction in law school enrollment, there are still a number of organizations focused on advancing women in the profession. Groups like DRI's Women in the Law Committee (WITL), the National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL), and the National Association of Women and Minority Owned Law Firms (NAMWOLF) have undertaken noteworthy work aimed at ensuring the success of women both in law school and in private practice. The WITL, for instance, holds an annual Sharing Success Seminar, n/k/a Women in the Law Seminar, which provides an opportunity for female attorneys to discuss tried and true methods aimed at achieving success in and outside of the courtroom. NAWL has similar initiatives like the continuing series, “Taking Charge of Your Career,” designed to provide the skills and information that women lawyers need to reach leadership levels in their practice settings. These efforts will hopefully cause law firms to pay closer attention to these important issues moving forward in order to counteract the enrollment decline and ensure diversity in future generations of attorneys to come.

Michele Hale DeShazo is senior counsel with the New Orleans office of Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson LLC, in which four of the firm's five founding partners are women. Her practice is entirely devoted to litigation, including environmental, toxic tort, product liability and general civil defense litigation.

Jury selection, mock client pitches, and personal negotiation tactics, oh my!  The Women in the Law Seminar is not just for or about women.

So many helpful tips and tricks today.  Loved the synergy of humor and energy In the jury selection segment.  Lori Cohen and Samantha Holmes offered fantastic advice on how to navigate jury selection in the Facebook generation.

The client pitch presentation was especially innovative.  A role playing segment that allowed us to examine and evaluate two different client pitching approaches with a real in-house counsel representative.  Amazing props to Ashley Cummings of Hunton & Williams LLP and Jennifer Haltom Doan of Haltom & Doan LLP for providing such great examples of how client pitching works.  Can't wait to see how this presentation concludes tomorrow when April Miller Boise of Veyance Technologies Inc and Marianne Trost of The Women Lawyers Coach LLC evaluate the techniques of each.

Victoria Pynchon's negotiation presentation and breakout session were particularly helpful.  Making the case for why women need to negotiate their way up in the firm, she offered real solutions and strategies on how to negotiate for our bottom line.  Truly motivational and inspirational. 

Media strategy and the tips and tactics of developing female organizational power were the big topics of the morning at this year's DRI Sharing Success seminar in sunny Scottsdale at the Westin Kierland Resort.  The morning started off with TV and radio personality, Mary Katherine Ham.  She regularly defends her political opinions on her morning radio program, The Morning Majority, and against Bill O'Reilly on The O'Reilly Factor.  Her presentation focused on finding our voice and crafting our message and defense in the media - be it in the press, on tv, or on the Internet at large through social media.  Enlightening and refreshing and a great start to the morning. 

Linda Bray Chanow from the Center for Women in the Law spoke next and offered a very interactive discussion on the perceptions of female power in business and law. Simply by starting with a classic scenario we've all seen in our professional careers,  attendees peppered Ms. Chanow with questions and comments. Overall an incredibly collaborative and insightful presentation that will surely lead to continued discussions amongst all the attendees during the rest of the seminar.  Definitely excited to see what the rest of day has to offer.  

I got an e-mail the other day telling me that I should read an article published by the ABA.  Normally I ignore such messages, but this one caught my eye.  The title of the article was “Not One Legal Secretary Preferred Working with Women Lawyers.”  Hummm.  I thought.  So I read it.

On Friday, October 28, 2011 the ABA Journal posted this article in their online content. 

This article is based on a study called “If you become his second wife, you are a fool: Shifting paradigms of the roles, perceptions, and working conditions of legal secretaries in large law firms.”  The full study is available at this link. The problem is that the ABA’s article, in my opinion, is a complete mischaracterization of the study.

On October 31, 2011, a group of women attorneys including the President of California Women Lawyers, Georgia Black Women Lawyers, and others had a phone conference with ABA Editor, Allen Pusey.  Those on the call ultimately demanded an apology and a retraction.  At the time of this writing, neither has happened.

On Wednesday, November 2, 2011, Forbes published a piece about women demanding an apology from the ABA.  

Two days later, on Friday, November 4, 2011, the ABA ran another article, basically saying the original article did women lawyers a favor by pointing to the fact we are discriminated against, and we don’t like to talk about it, so we got angry.  That is my summary. Read it and decide for yourself.

I am not a member of the ABA.  I dropped my membership and I am glad I did.  I think both articles should be retracted immediately.  The title of the initial article is inaccurate.  The study actually states that 47 percent of those surveyed had no opinion as to whether they preferred to work for male or female partners or associates.  With almost half of survey respondents expressing no opinion, it is a distortion of the results to say that “not one” legal secretary preferred working with women partners.

Additionally, the article gives the impression that the survey heavily emphasized the issue of legal secretaries working with women partners.  Such a survey on its face is insulting and feeds into gender stereotypes.  We do not (and should not) read about surveys regarding working with partners of particular religious affiliations, ethnicities, or sexual orientations.  While the study surveyed legal secretaries on a wide range of issues, two thirds of the ABA article focused on only one issue, secretaries working with women partners.  By strongly focusing on the survey results dealing with legal secretaries working with women lawyers, the article misrepresents the substance of the underlying study.  It gives disproportionate attention to but one of many issues addressed and in so doing continues to perpetuate negative stereotypes of women lawyers.  

Legal secretaries play an important role in law firms, and surveying how that role has evolved during the past 50 years is a worthwhile endeavor.  The ABA Journal’s emphasis on one aspect of that study does a disservice to legal secretaries as well as the women lawyers with whom they work.  I hope you will join me in writing to that organization asking for a retraction and apology. If you are interested in more background information or the steps certain women lawyers groups are taking, please let me know.  I am proud to be a DRI woman and I am proud to be on its Women in the Law Committee.

An article from AM Law Daily suggests that the continual bad press about the lack of discernible growth in female leadership positions in large law firms and legal departments may be causing a decline in female students applying to law school.  Although it is constantly stated that women make up around 50% percent of the students in our nation’s law schools, the statistics seem to be suggesting a decline.  The numbers at the top ten law schools show that female students make up around 40% of the population, with only the University of Berkeley ahead of the crowd with a female law student population of 52.9%.  Such numbers may not be an immediate cause for concern, but the article does point to statistics that show that there has been a steady decline, albeit a small one, in female enrollment since 2002. 

Is this just the product of regular ups and downs in enrollment levels or a cause for concern that the legal profession should be evaluating?  And if fewer women actually enter the legal profession over time will it further exacerbate the compensation disparity issues between female and male lawyers?  More than anything it may simply be the combination of many factors – the state of the economy and the profession, the cost of law school compared to its benefits and pressures, and the articles and blog reports about the alleged lack of growth potential in Big Law.

Data reported by the Minority Corporate Counsel Association (MCCA) and Vault.com in the fall of 2010, substantiated fears that the effects of the recession would undo diversity gains achieved in the legal profession over the past decades.  Similarly, a recent report issued by the New York City Bar documents a slippage of hard-won diversity gains last year at local law firms.  The city bar surveyed firms that are signatories to a 2004 statement of diversity principles that articulated both short-term and long-term goals related to the hiring, retention and promotion of diverse attorneys.  The survey found that for the first time since March 2004, the percentage of minorities and women had declined at almost all levels.  Further, the report noted that if the pace of change is not accelerated, the share of minorities holding partnerships would not equal their representation among associates for 40 years and, for women attorneys, it would take 50 years to catch up.  While the report suggests that recent declines are likely related to the recession, it also noted that the voluntary turnover rate has been consistently higher for minority and women attorneys thus highlighting that retention remains a key problem.
 
The recession has challenged law firms to be innovative and to leverage simple changes in billing into new business and higher revenue.  What innovations has your law firm implemented to stretch diversity dollars to avoid suppressing the effort and momentum that has been built over the past decades? 
 
Good business sense dictates that, in a weak economy, diversity efforts must be part of a firm's long-range plans.  The global economy is diverse and those firms that realize this fact can maximize the talents and skills that their diverse attorneys bring to the table to add to their bottom lines.  What best practices has your firm implemented (either formal or informal) to retain diverse attorneys?

I have seen a few versions of this interview/article recently. This time it galvanized me to put fingers to keyboard, perhaps because I recall painfully my own self-consciousness in a law school classroom, frightened into silence by feelings of intellectual and verbal inadequacy.  With almost 2 decades of law practice under my belt, I have learned to live, and practice, the adage: Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.  But the author’s points resonate nonetheless, and chafe a bit.  It seems that there are a few perspectives missing from this genre of article: 1) Is it, in fact, the case that women lawyers are self-selecting out of the high-profile trial and appellate level careers? 2) What about all of the women trial and appellate lawyers in DRI who defy the notions that are represented in these articles?  3) Does active participation in an organization such as DRI provide a place where women trial and appellate lawyers can acquire skills that will instill the confidence necessary to compete for the high profile cases? My fear of speaking out in law school, fortunately, did not extend beyond the classroom walls, and certainly isn’t the case in a courtroom, boardroom, or auditorium. I fear now, though, that perception becomes reality for women lawyers (aspiring and practicing) when articles such as this proliferate without a discussion and examples of where women ARE achieving prominence in high profile cases.

Though New Hampshire is one of the smallest Legal Bars in the nation, its recent Ten Year Gender Survey contains important data for the country.    In the Granite State and nationally strides have been made, inequality remains.  Women are graduating from law schools at unprecedented levels.  Social norms regarding traditional roles of women in society are evaporating.  However, fewer female attorneys are making partner, fewer are litigators, fewer are in management positions, and, unfortunately, sexist attitudes continue to be observed frequently.  This is not a female v. male issue, but an issue that influences the credibility of our profession within society.

DRI is poised to lead the way in promoting “Women in the Law.”  That exciting new committee can make a difference if we all get behind it by taking the message to our firms, our SLDO’s and our state bar associations.  Further, it is essential to both recognize that our clients want gender and ethnic diversity and to respond accordingly.  Traditionally, lawyers lead the way for social change; that change begins at home.  Anyone interested in this issue should review the New Hampshire Gender Equality Committee report and is welcome to contact me, Chair, NH Bar Gender Equality Committee, to share ideas and generally collaborate on this issue.  By working together, we can continue to make progress toward gender equality for our profession.

Manhattan U.S. District Court Judge Harold Baer, Jr. ordered two firms serving as co-lead counsel in a securities class action to "make every effort" to assign at least one minority and one woman to the case.  

Judge Baer ruled, “WHEREAS this proposed class includes thousands of participants, both male and female, arguably from diverse backgrounds, and it is therefore important to all concerned that there is evidence of diversity, in terms of race and gender, in the class counsel I appoint, see In re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation, 242 F.R.D. 265, 277 (S.D.N.Y. 2007); it is hereby ORDERED that Co-Lead counsel, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP and Labaton Sucharow LLP, shall make every effort to assign to this matter at least one minority lawyer and one woman lawyer with requisite experience…”

In the 21st century, the legal profession faces no greater challenge than the imperative to advance diversity throughout our ranks.  Is this the start of a trend by the judiciary to meet this challenge?  Are such orders constitutional?  What impact will Judge Baer’s order have on trial team staffing by defense counsel?  Will corporations demand that defense counsel have a diverse trial team as a preemptive measure?

A recent article from Law.com that was featured on DRI Today discusses research done by law and business professors from Temple University and the University of Texas Pan American about the gender pay gap in the legal profession.  The research highlights something that may or may not be surprising – female partners earn less on average than male partners.  According to the research – the pay gap has nothing to do with lower billable hours or performance, but rather has more to do with the way most partnership and promotion opportunities are designed at law firms. 
         
What do you see in happening in your own firms?  What is your firm doing to tackle this issue?  What efforts have you seen that are successful in addressing this issue? 

Read Gender Pay Gap at Law Firms on Law.com here.