Women in Law: Crunching the Numbers
American Lawyer has released another report that shows that while women make up a significant percentage of Biglaw associates, they are under-represented in law firm partnership ranks:
And while the ranks of female partners have grown steadily, women still account, on average, for fewer than one in five big-firm partners. The greatest numbers of female lawyers remain concentrated at the associate level.At the same time, it’s worth pointing out the wide variation among firms when it comes to female head count. Despite the laggards, some firms—such as Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton; Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; and Ropes & Gray—are nearing the 50 percent mark in their overall percentage of women lawyers. Even better, at a few other large firms—including Littler Mendelson, Ice Miller, Arent Fox, and Epstein Becker & Green—women make up at least a quarter of the partnership.
The disparity is most clearly seen when we talk about leverage:
Crunching the numbers further tells a more interesting story. Of the female lawyers we counted, what percentage are partners? In other words, are women reaching the senior levels of a firm in proportion to their overall numbers? To find out, we calculated the number of female partners as a percentage of all women lawyers. We found that at the firms surveyed, about 23 percent of female lawyers were in the partnership ranks. For every women who’s made partner, there are three women in the nonpartner ranks.That 3:1 leverage among female lawyers is double the leverage among all lawyers—male and female—in the firms surveyed. Nationally, we found that 41 percent of all lawyers are partners: For each partner, there are about 1.5 nonpartners. If one looks just at male lawyers, the leverage essentially vanishes: There is about one male nonpartner for each male partner.
The report also exposes a somewhat obvious fact: firms that tend to be good for female attorneys don’t necessarily score highly on other diversity factors.
More details from the report after the jump.
While it should be self-evident, the report points out that not all “diversity” scores are created equal:
One of the first questions we wanted to answer was how women’s numbers at law firms compare to those of minority lawyers. These days, “diversity” often refers to both racial and gender makeup, and it’s tempting to think that one accompanies the other. However, the statistics show that minorities and women are not necessarily progressing in tandem. When we compared the 20 top firms in the Women in Law Firms study [see chart, page 76] and in MLJ ‘s Diversity Scorecard [see minoritylawjournal.com], which measures racial diversity, we found little overlap. Only four firms made both lists’ top tier: Cleary; Paul, Weiss; Epstein Becker; and Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith. Just 11 firms ranked in the top 50 in both racial and gender diversity.Why the disparity? For some firms, geography may help explain why they have been less successful in recruiting and retaining lawyers of color than female lawyers. Consider one extreme example: Faegre & Benson, eighth in the Women in Law Firms ranking, 172nd on the Diversity Scorecard. The firm’s four U.S. offices are in Minnesota, Colorado, and Iowa—mostly states with relatively small minority populations, although Colorado is almost 20 percent Hispanic. In other cases, the key to understanding the gap may lie in a given firm’s practice specialty. Some intellectual property firms that rate well in racial diversity don’t do as well when it comes to women—perhaps reflecting the lower numbers of women with advanced degrees in engineering and the hard sciences. Townsend and Townsend and Crew is second on the Diversity Scorecard, 202nd in Women in Law Firms. Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, fifth on the Diversity Scorecard, ranks 204th in Women in Law Firms (for the full Women in Law Firms study, click here).
While the American Lawyer report focuses on issues for female attorneys, it’s worth pointing out that male attorneys can also suffer from limiting gender stereotypes. A note from the Yale Law Journal points out a possible Title VII challenge for men:
In a fiercely competitive labor market, large American law firms universally offer some paid leave to attorneys after the birth of the child. This Note offers an empirical investigation of those policies, finding that all firms offer paid leave to new mothers, and many firms offer at least some leave to fathers as well. In most cases, however, men receive much less leave than women. The most grossly gender-disproportionate policies harm attorneys of both genders—perpetuating stereotypes about women, stigmatizing fathers who spend time with their children, and entrenching the “ideal worker” norm that scholars have protested.
Gender discrimination, work-life balance, these are the issues that are truly affecting associates during the market … what? G.M.? Excuse me, I need more bottled water and canned goods for my fallout shelter.
Stuck in the Middle [American Lawyer]
Childbearing, Childrearing, and Title VII: Parental Leave Policies at Large American Law Firms [Yale Law Journal]
Earlier: Gender Gap Disappears If You Just Keep Working
Is the Recession Good for Female Lawyers?
(81) 
Comments
First!
more asian girls
-mpp
Ellie: I love the way your tits bounce when you type.
Support Sonia from the block - The right judge at the right time for people who think America needs more race-based decisions and redistribution from white people to latinos and blacks.
First to say -- as soon as men start lactating they can have parity on the baby-leave.
#3 Nailed it.
Also, now I want to titty hump Mystal while feeding him doughnuts.
Michele Obama's Penis
Parity on maternal/paternal leave is completly retarded and reflective of the bizzare world-view of anyone who would take on a career of monitoring diversity.
I wish women would stop shaving their bush.
#8 - Hush yourself boy.
The American Lawyer and Above the Law miss the real issue: the study does not appear to distinguish between equity and non equity partners. That is a far sadder and far more interesting story. Also they can't and don't tell the tale about discrimination in income at the partnership level - no matter whether the partners have equity or not. The ugly truth is that there is still widespread, systemic, and substantial discrimination against women in law firms - and all of the symposia, initiatives, committees, benefit dinners, awards and all the rest are illusory chaff which deflect any attempt to analyze the real issues. Many firms dress up their numbers by loading various non operational committees with women members. This is terrific for publicity but is of little consequence. Until women control client relationships, get billing credit, and sti in substantial number on the groups which control compensation all of the rest is basically meaningless. White male V20 partner here.
I wish women would stop shaving their bush.
I wish women would stop shaving their bush.
AmLaw misses another key issue - the age of the partners in question. Just because women are 50% of associates now does not mean they were 20 years ago. Without analyzing those statistics, every man in the profession will say that while there used to be a problem, it's been fixed, and it takes a while for the numbers to catch up. As a woman, I can say that at least at my Vault top 20 firm, there is still a problem.
Thanks 11. Are you accepting resumes?
kicked-out female K partner who will work for food
Asslobsters are a hell of a drug.
Does Michele Obama shave her pussy?
Anyone know?
shaved bush was cool until it became the norm. now its nothing special and no longer hot. landing strip is the new shaved.
Elie crunches numbers by sitting on them.
i will be here all week
Latham has an atrocious record for making women partners. I think about 10% of new partners were women.
Latham has an atrocious record for making women partners. I think about 10% of new partners were women.
I prefer a nice fuzzy rectum .
anyone know what the deal is w/ anal bleaching? i know people do it, i just can't understand why.
In other news the sky is blue and Santa Claus does not, in fact, exist.
At least women can marry someone rich when they don't make partner.
17 is right.
are we still doing the minority report movie poster thing? get it because it was a report on minorities. no but really, tom cruise bleaches his anus.
This would never happen in Texas because all of our women are 3500 sq ft and unshorn.
I don't understand why a lack of female partners is a bad thing. Partnership is a fate worse than death, so the fact that women escape it more often than men is a positive, not a negative, for the female gender.
I strongly endorse the strong female lawyer featured in the new Comcast advert. Much better than the greedy girl in the Dealbreaker ad.
Landing strip is nasty. Women should be bathed in nair from the neck down.
this study , like all similar studies did not take into the account the effects of taking years of time off to have a baby. if i took years of time off to cultivate a love of windsurfing, it would have an equally detrimental effect on my chance of making partner. tom cruise has a landing strip.
Bill or GTFO.
5 is completely right.
#17 is right. and ditto that for the thong. it used to be hot to catch a girl rockin one. it was risque. now its the norm. is no panties the new thong?
"So what do you do for a living"
"Oh, I monitor diversity."
"Wow, must be exhausting. So if the diversity levels get too high or too low, is there a bell or something that you can ring and warn everyone?"
"No, we just send out reports, and when it is a slow day, news sources and blogs will post the reports and pretend they are breaking news and manufacture a story from them."
I am sick of this sexism non-sense. I am a woman, so stop jumping into conclusions before I begin.
Why should everything be 50/50? If 10 men make partner, so should 10 women; If 10 men are recruited into college, so should 10 women; if 10 white firefighters are promoted, so should 10 colored firefighters;
What happened to merit? I am a woman. I am hispanic. I don't want a friggin free pass. I want to be recognized for my work just like everybody else. I don't want to make partner because my firm wants to be PC by promoting 40 more women into partnership ranks; I want to make partner cuz I am a very good lawyer who brings crap loads of money into my firm.
For the record, I don't think white males are somehow less intelligent than me. I think Sonia was on crack when she made that comment. I don't want to dicuss race when I work and I don't want to use race to diss someone else at work. I don't want someone to use race to judge me and I won't use race to judge you. If you are stupid, you are stupid, no matter what race or gender you belong to.. sorry, no free passes for you just because you belong to the right group.. If you are smart, you are smart no matter what race you belong to.. so promote me by looking at my credentials.. not be feeling sorry for my gender. 2 women earn their masters degrees for every man and the ratio is 1.5 women to 1 man when it comes to bachelors degrees. Women have taken advantage of the benefits of reverse sexism for 3 decades. I now know that we are in the same boat as men. So, stop sympthizing with me. No more statistics about man v. woman crap. We have a black prez and a female sec. of state for pete's sake. Get out of the apologetic and AA mentality and start living in the friggin 21st century. GROW THE FUDGE UP!!
To the extent that making partner requires the ability to deal with clients and generate business, it is entirely possible that the blame goes to the clients for discriminating against the female lawyers and the firms are actually making decisions based on merit. It is also entirely possible, similar to what Obama's chief economic advisor once pointed out, that women simply don't have the same aptitude for being good lawyers that men do.
The white man maketh...the rest of the world taketh away....and we white men let it happen. enough is enough.
36, I like your attitude. Provided you shave your snatch, I'd bang you.
36 = white male
The survey does not take into consideration that many women decide to leave law because it completely sucks. Instead, many women pursue more important things, like family.
40. This is 36. Obviously you ignored my first para. Like I said, a stupid is a stupid is a stupid - no matter what skin color you wear. Learn to read what people write before you jump on your imaginary bandwagon. Like Lebron's mom says, if you don't have anything nice to say, shut the f--- up!! Good day!
You guys are way too picky. Basic bikini, Brazilian, rising sun, landing strip, tear drop, star, arrow, heart, butterfly - anything works for me except the full bush. Bonus points for bleach or color.
Women are peripheral characters who are only around for one episode of Hardcastle and McCormick (unless it is a two-part “to be continued” episode).
36 = not a woman.
If you've managed to make it far enough in life to become a practicing lawyer without understanding that subjective assessments of "merit" are rife with nepotism, discrimination, arbitrary whim, etc., then you are retarded.
If women are x percent of a firm's attorneys, then one would expect them to be x percent of the partners. One expects deviations from these percentages when numbers are small (if you don't understand this, please do your own research/education on statistical significance, I'll not be explaining the concept to ignorant trolls).
However, when a sample size is large enough, and the deviation is statistically significant, then we need to look for an explanation for that deviation.
Studies need to account for women who choose to quit working at firms to raise children. There are many young, capable women attorneys who quit 3-5 years into their career because they'd rather raise a family and have their husband/wife be the wage-earner.
If the stats show that women disproportionately lose out on partnership when they are tenth year associates--that is a different story. Say, for example, 10 women and 10 men are up for partnership as 10th year associates. 7 men and 3 women being named partner starts to look suspicious....
22,
It makes it look much, much cleaner. More presentable, if you will.
46,
It looks suspicious if lawfirms are designed in such a way that those decisions disproportionately affect females.
By contrast, women doctors don't face nearly as much hardship compared to male doctors as is the case with lawyers.
The problem isn't with the female gender.
Why would any female pursue a career in law.
30 - Nair? It's not 1997. We wax now.
45. This is 36. I made it far enough to say with authority that I can tell when a retard calls someone else a retard. So, retard, here is why I think this article doesn't make sense ---------- See #46. That's exactly why. So, if you are not a woman, shut up. If you are a woman, let me know if I am missing something.
And coming to the 'expect' point: You don't 'expect' anything in this country. If men do well, they make partners. If women do well, they make partners too. At my firm, if 10 men and 10 women are up for partnership, equal percentages get accepted/rejected. And for your kind info, this discrimination etc. in merit decisions exists for men too. In case you are too busy whining about women's rights and not paying attention, men get screwed due to discrimination and favoritism too. Just wake up and smell the coffee honey!! Good Day !!
Michele Obama does not wax, she shaves her balls with a trimmer.
I agree with 32. Bill baby Bill.
51 = lame ass, east coast traditionalist, sucks farts out of dead chickens.
48,
The career demands are different. Many doctors can set their own schedules and run their own practices. Lawyers often cannot set their own schedules--we must bill hours. The type of work is fundamentally different, doctors can work a 9-5 in a family practice. Some doctors can even work a 9-3 and be home when their kids get home from school. That just isn't true for lawyers.
If a female quits as a fifth year because she gets married or has a child, then she has removed herself from partnership candidacy by her own choice. So saying that partnership excludes females requires only factoring in females who seriously want partnership---the 8th through 10th year associates. If they are unfairly excluded, then yes there is discrimination. I'm not taking a position on whether discrimination exists at that stage, I don't know.
51 (or 36 or whatever). You are right on the game. I got screwed because I was not kissing the right a-- at my firm. Another 3rd year female associate got all the billing projects because she kissed (literally) the right a--. I am a man and I got nothing. Can I cry too?
Oh. stop the man hating already. men dont have secret society meetings where we agree to pull each other up. we are screwed by our brothers every day. chill woman. chill.
57 = uncomfortable being a women
I've come to the conclusion that the reason that there is such a disparity at the partner level is that most women are smart enough to leave these shitholes.
This is why the only thing that women are good for are being pounded in the ass as secretaries.
There's no crying in baseball.
I hate the landing strip or Nazi strip as it is sometimes referred...I like a full bush but will accept a trimmed bush...
36- white guy - with shaved snatch
BITCH SPREAD DEM BUTTCHEEKS SO I CAN SEE THAT BLEACHED SPHINCTER!
51 and 57 are right. And I am a woman with a trimmed bush....
62,
You apparently are not a connoisseur, then. A full bush is equivalent to a guy never shaving his face. It's just not accepted in most civilized settings.
Hey 11 and 14
White male out of work here. Are you accepting resumes from white males? Just checking....
51 said "honey" (just like real women frequently do), so we know it's definitely not some fat, white male blowhard...
The real outrage is the lack of men whose wives let them stay at home with the children.
68 = black woman
69 is right. The oppression has gone on for too long!
68 FTW
These numbers are meaningless without adjusting for experience and other factors like productivity. Not surprised this wasn't mentioned.
45,
At my firm, I rarely hear women talking about becoming partner. I mostly hear them say they hate their job and want a sugar daddy. Men don't have that option.
74. I agree with you.
Now that I think about it, I think 45 is a troll.
Go home peach
I'd like to see a poll of BigLaw associates (say, 1st, 3d, 5th and 7th years) and ask how many want to become partners. Will there be a disparity between men and women? I dunno, but if 75% of men say they do, and 25% of women...
41 and 64 are the only credited responses...
74 - are you sure you work in a law firm and not a strip club? A quick glance around will verify whether or not your female co-workers are wearing any clothing.
78, strippers are more in demand, have more career options, and face better prospects than most biglaw lawyers.
Anyone with real options gets the #$! out of Biglaw as fast as they can. That life suuuuuxxxx.
This is a non-story. The reason there are a disproportionate number of women associates vs. partners is because dramatically more women are going into the law today than when most current partners graduated from law school. Women today account for about half of all new lawyers, whereas they accounted for a tiny fraction only a generation ago. Since most partners are from that last generation OF COURSE there are fewer women partners. Give it a rest! The passage of time will inevitably lead to female parity if not dominance in the legal profession.
heres an idea.. stop popping out kids... start getting promoted
if i had to choose between investing $160k a year into someone will havea child.. take months off.. and then might not come back after that leave
vs. someone whose not.. guess whom im investing in?
its not "sexism" its reality.