Heller Ehrman: 12 weeks paid

I'd like to know if the universal policy is that you have to have been at the firm a certain amount of time to get the benefit.

How about a listing of paternity leave???

How about paternity leave? How much time can associates take off when their spouses have kids? How much time do they really take off (as some firms say you can take a certain amount of time off but no one takes that much)?

Fried Frank???

That is a funny looking kid in the picture. It looks like Jim Cramer's kid or something.

MILF LLP: 69 weeks!

There was a female associate at my firm was impregnated by a partner ... i believe she got maternity leave indefinitely ... or at least, that's what she tells people, some of you might call it "child support" or "hush money"

Po-TAY-to ... Po-TAH-to ...

Knocked up mistress associates to permanent paid leave!!!

It's a baby reading a newspaper.

This list of shame (or whatever) lacks any real angst bc only a small demographic really care. Whereas pay scales are much more broadly relevant. Plus, the women who would care only care when they start looking to push a kid or two out not during recruitment when this list would matter.

Please add Nixon Peabody, 4 weeks, to the table.

Please add Nixon Peabody, 4 weeks, to the table.

Cahill Gordon 12 weeks

3:12,

You've got it twisted. Only a small demographic really care? How about just about every female law student or associate. And, the women who do care would actually like to know this info during recruitment. It's not like they're going to want to switch jobs right before they have a kid. My wife is a law student and maternity leave is one of the main factors we're considering in looking at potential employers.

I actually think the longer the leave the worse down on the list of shame. I mean, if a female associate asks during on campus interviews about the maternal leave policy this is what I hear ... "can I take 16 weeks off in two years when i get knocked up, and use that time to decide whether or not i'm going to actually come back to work afterward, and if I do, be an overall less productive member of the firm until i decide to tell you i'm pregnant again, and take more time off, because i'm done at the firm after i milk you for all i can get anyway" ... and i make the decision right there to wipe my ass with her resume, unless she's really hot, and then i'm going to recommend her for an offer. I mean, let's be honest, law firms could use some hotter women ...

Thanks for posting this chart. As a female law student, this information is very useful to me and isn't the kind of thing one wants to ask about during an interview.

3:37 ... thank you for proving my point.

Winston & Strawn is only 12 weeks paid maternity, not 16 weeks.

And she's looking at Biglaw in that case why? $100,000+ in law school debt, then immediately pop out a kid (at least close enough to hiring that maternity leave is a "main factor" to consider)? Not the 2,100+ hours a year she won't be home?

In 16 years your kid isn't going to care that you didn't spend that extra time with them when they were first born ... they're going to be too busy hating you form missing their entire life from when they were 12 weeks until then because of your BigLaw career.

Either you're able to leave your kid, and focus on work, or you're not. That extra for, or hell, 12 weeks isn't going to make a difference. And if you can't come back and be productive, you shouldn't. Sorry, I'm a woman (without kids), but this is a business, and we still have to do our job.

3:45, a main factor does not mean the main factor. In addition to maternity leave, we are also looking at billable hours, salary, do they have part-time (and if so do associates actually participate), and specialized practice groups.

3:56, it's not about the kid, it's about the woman. The fact that you don't have kids explains why you don't understand how important it is to a woman to be able to spend the first few months with her child. FYI, she won't be doing biglaw more than 5 years, so the kid won't be hating her for missing his/her life, but thank you for your concern.

I love it. You posters are probably the same people who would judge a woman for not breastfeeding and then bitch about the breastfeeding room at your firm.

Fortune 500 top 100 place to work with only 4 weeks leave...

I'm curious why their maternity leave policy didn't make it into the theme song!

K&E provides 16 paid weeks to associates:

http://www.kirkland.com/sitecontent.cfm?contentID=275

Partners get more; usually 6 months paid.

Only 12 weeks from WOMBle?

Hey 3:31-

I think you're underestimating how important Cubs opening day is for me every year. And spring training. Would you kindly write a letter to firm management so we can get "End of World Series dreams" paid leave every year once the Cubs are mathematically eliminated?

I think the point is that we all understand that it has nothing to do with the baby, it's just that the woman wants to be there. And if she really does, she's probably going to want to do other things like take the kid to school, or see a piano recital, or other things there just aren't time for in BigLaw.

The fact is, if she really wants to be at home, she'll take the time off whether she's getting paid or not, so why subsidize it? And why take a population of associates that are only going to be working two-thirds of a year.

I don't have a problem with taking time off to have a be with the child, but why isn't this just another personal leave of absence? My problem exists solely in the fact that you get paid a full salary to do no work whatsoever. If i choose to take 12 (or 16) weeks off to surf in australia, I can't get paid for it (unless i've spent 5 years at Cadwalader and reached my sabbatical). Why is your choice to have a child superior to my choice for my mental and physical longetivity and well-being?

I'm sitting here rolling my eyes at all of you who think (1) maternity leave is a vacation, or (2) is some schmoopy bonding time. Obviously, you have never had to deal with a newborn. Putting aside that the mother just had her insides rearranged by the passage of a bowling ball, a newborn demands attention practically 24/7.

Traditionally, maternity leave was set at 6 weeks because that's about the earliest time you could hope to get your baby onto any kind of regular schedule. Before then, you'd be lucky to get a shower or dinner cooked, much less get yourself ready to go to work!

After 6 weeks, I think the main benefit of the extra time is that it allows breast-feeding mothers the extra time to do that. If a law firm chooses to encourage that, then great.

But the first 6 weeks are hardly a "perk."

Oh, and yeah -- unless you actually have kids who hate you, I'd appreciate it if you'd not assume that my children hate/will hate me.

at my firm you have to be there for a year.

Add Kramer Levin, 14 weeks (but the Women's Committee is working on changing the policy to 18, in light of the trend).

...to get the full maternity leave.

Another response to moron-post at 5:49pm. Without maternity leave we can't have children you freak. It's a way to allow women to join the work-force without being penalized for reproducing with their MALE mates, to allow both males and females to work and still create progeny.

I second the request for paternity leave data as well. A lot of firms only give 2 weeks of paid leave ... that is barely enough time to get your wife and kid home from the hospital.

6:51 and 7:04-

The reason maternity leave is provided is because pregnancy is a legal disability. Therefore, employers (most of them) must provide you with the same rights as if you were disabled in any other way (if you've been there for a year), even though pregnancy is a voluntary disability. So if your firm has a 12-week disability, then it's 12 weeks etc. (See Pregnancy Discrimination Act if I'm wrong on any of this, I've only seen it tangentially)

And any time you're getting full pay to not be at work, it's a perk. Just because it's not enjoyable, doesn't mean the firm pay isn't a perk, you (presumably) made the choice to put yourself through it, so don't complain to your co-workers about how hard it is on you. You can complain to the father, sure, but it's not your employer's or colleagues responsibility to subsidize or rearrange their lives and practices for your choices. To THE LAW FIRM ... maternity leave is no different than vacation. You're not there, no work is getting done, and they're paying you a full salary (for what isn't covered by insurance) and paying full overhead, etc. with the associate generating no billables. Sorry, but it is a business.

Thelen gives 6 weeks paid for primary caregiver... whether male or female.

Goodwin Procter: 12 weeks maternity, must be at firm for 1 year to be eligible. Policy is different for parents who do not actually give birth (e.g. if adoptive, use surrogate, etc. only get one month I hear). Pretty weak, especially since GP’s managing partner is a woman.

"Why is your choice to have a child superior to my choice for my mental and physical longetivity and well-being?"

Because I want to have a normal, well-adjusted child to offset the existence of obtuse jackasses like you.

I second the request for paternity leave data as well. A lot of firms only give 2 weeks of paid leave ... that is barely enough time to get your wife and kid home from the hospital.

Very funny 7:24 p.m.

I think WilmerHale's policy is gender neutral - it's 12 weeks for the primary caregiver (male or female).

Why doesn't everyone just adopt? Aren't there plenty of kids out there that need parents?

Call me crazy, and I realize i'm pretty socially liberal, but I just don't like the idea that my employer is making a bold financial statement about how they think I should live my life, and what decisions it supports, and does not. My firm doesn't provide sabbaticals, adoption assistance costs, (p)maternal leave for adoption, etc, and I would just prefer they either provide leave and cover expenses for the addition or loss of a family member across the board, or not do it at all.

The maternal leave policy is a direct result of their attempts to not look like pigs. Now, I know there are a lot of considerations, but I think that it's just as important to keep me (who adopted, if you couldn't tell from my above post) as it is to keep a female that wants to have a child naturally. Personally, I feel like it sends the firms judgment about what living a "proper" life is, and I would prefer for them to not tell me i'm living otherwise, as long as i'm billing hours and bringing in clients. I can't imagine what it must be like getting this stuff covered someplaces if you're not a part of a "traditional couple." With the number of alternatives to husband/wife, 1 marriage, 2.3 kids, suburbs and dog families there are today, I would love to see a firm provide benefits that cover everyone.

I heard that Freshfields has 3 months full pay and then an additional 3 months half pay.

I would imagine these stats to be far less important to working moms then how permissive a firm is with flexible schedules. The maternity leave is a one time deal at the very beginning of the baby's life, but the child will need the mom to be there for far longer.

Also, family friendly policies such as long maternity leave and flex schedules provide significant benefits to society in general. Firms too benefit in many ways.

I totally agree. There really isn't that much of a difference if you stop seeing your kid awake (except waking up throughout the night with them) when they're 12 weeks old or if you stop seeing them when they're 16. And let's keep in mind that maternity leave includes pre-birth time, so realistically, it's 8 or 12 weeks if you work through 8 months. What's more important, if you really want to be a good parent, is that you have the time to be there with them as they're growing and learning, and that isn't going to be solved by maternity leave, it will only be solved by less demanding hours.

any info on loeb & loeb's policy in ny?

Does anyone know what PWSP offers?

9:11, no one gives a shit about your children.

I think it would be useful to start a thread on whether an associate's required yearly hours (to be eligible for a bonus) would be pro rated based on the number of weeks taken off for such paternity/maternity leave. Say, if you take off 1 month, you only need to hit 11/12th's of 2000 hours to be eligible for a bonus. Of course, your bonus would only be 11/12th's of the regular size bonus. Such is very reasonable.

I was under the impression most firms do that, but I am learning from a few people at my firm that such is not the case here. I think they "consider" the factor of your paternity leave when deciding if they should give you a bonus if your hours were a wee-bit short otherwise, but there is no policy. If this is true at many firms, I think its ridiculous - it basically penalizes you for taking the leave they allow you too. This hurts associates morale.

And I'm talking about taking 1-2 weeks after your kid is born for paternity, not a full 6 or something. Although I wish I could do that. I understand this is big law.

All you have to do is shout the words maternity leave and just watch the douche quotient rise on here... apparently the crop of male law students (I suspect those are the enlightened voices in our midst) don't plan on marrying women who are accomplished enough to have landed a job at the very same firms as them. (Otherwise why complain that your baby and wife are in good care and your dual-income household remains the same for a few months? I, for one, welcome it.)

Most firms offer similar (albeit shorter) leave policies for paternity and for adoptions. 4 weeks seems pretty standard, though not all guys take it.

You want a firm that will give you 12 weeks paid to go surfing? Um, yeah, me too (!), but that's (a) ridiculous, and (b) a terrible analogy. Take your 4-week "Surf Leave" (it's called vacation) and suck it up.

1. How long do you have to be with your employer before taking maternity/paternity leave? For maternity leave, is this determined by federal law, whereas for paternity leave it's firm policy?

2. Applicability to gay couples (whether adopting or one partner is giving birth)?

Thank you!

1. How long do you have to be with your employer before taking maternity/paternity leave? For maternity leave, is this determined by federal law, whereas for paternity leave it's firm policy?

2. Applicability to gay couples (whether adopting or one partner is giving birth)?

Thank you!

I don't think (s)he was comparing child birth to surfing from the viewpoint of the associate (or young partner), but, from the viewpoint of the law firm, which is a business, and has no stake in anything but billable hours and productivity, over both the long and short term

shearman ?

I second (third, fourth?) the request for a survey regarding paternity leave. The times, they are a-changing!

Me too.

What about paternity leave policies?

SHEARMAN?

MOFO?

Perhaps you should include the information on Cleary you already published: http://www.abovethelaw.com/2008/02/biglaw_perk_watch_cleary_gottl.php

Any indication as to how many of these are some variant of gender-neutral "primary caregiver" leave instead of "maternity" leave (i.e., for attorneys in long-term same-sex relationships)?

how about ropes?

Ropes gives 13 weeks paid maternity leave, you can take additional time unpaid, and there is no requirement that you be at the firm a certain amount of time before going on leave.

Does anyone know what the benefits are for an associate who has a baby before being at the firm for one year? Does it depend on state? I am interested in DC.

MoFo is at 18 weeks.

Anon 3/13 8:25 pm -- it depends on the firm but it's probably in the neighborhood of 2-4 weeks paid leave.

Careful with the numbers: as a single mom adopting my kid, I notice a lot of these "18 weeks" don't apply to me if the firm's policy is described as disability leave + x. Better policies just call it parental leave, requiring you to use disability if you can (i.e., give birth), rightly noticing that it's about taking care of your kid.

Really amazes me why they don't make these equal--we're talking about a small number of cases here.

To guest @ 3:12 who said that only a minority of people care about this anyway, and that female law students going through recruitment aren't thinking about this now- First, the length of this comment thread suggests you're wrong. Second, many responsible female law students are thinking about it when going through recruitment. Statistics say most of us will eventually get knocked up, and it's good to consider the potential ramifications. Also, a firm's maternity leave policy is just another data point when you're trying to distinguish firms from each other and figure out what they value. I'd like to know about paternity leave too...

To the guy who want to take 5 weeks off to "surf" - when surfing involves puching something the size of a watermelon out of a hole the size of a pea, then, maybe someone will pay you to take 12 weeks off to do it.

Anyone know what WSGR's maternity leave is like?

TIA!!

Anyone know what WSGR's maternity leave is like?

TIA!!

3:15 - Again, it has nothing to do with how unpleasant the experience is. The firm is paying you despite the fact that you are not there. Whether you are surfing or giving birth does not matter.