Biglaw

MoFo Hit With $100 Million Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit

The complaint alleges a 'good old boys' club' at MoFo.

By  
on

Biglaw giant Morrison & Foerster has been hit with an employment lawsuit filed in the Northern District of California. It’s styled as a putative $100 million class action, and alleges the firm discriminates against women who avail themselves of the firm’s “family friendly” policies by delaying their pay and advancement opportunities. This probably sounds very familiar to other women in Biglaw.

Three plaintiffs, all under Jane Doe designations, allege they took maternity leave but their careers stalled when they returned. The women say they were denied the same promotions and increases in compensation as their peers, and even though they didn’t get the benefits of a promotion, clients paid for their time as if they had been promoted. Yes, that’s right — the complaint alleges that despite being held back in their annual review cycles, their billing rates increased anyway. If you’re a MoFo client reading this, it can’t feel good.

The plaintiffs are represented by Sanford Heisler Sharp, the firm that seems to be making a name for themselves suing Biglaw firms over gender discrimination. A representative had this to say about the culture at MoFo:

“MoFo’s employment practices perpetuate the ‘good old boys’ club’ culture that has dominated law firms for decades,” said Deborah K. Marcuse, Managing Partner of Sanford Heisler Sharp’s Baltimore office.  “MoFo’s standard operating procedure of delaying the advancement of women who have taken pregnancy leave holds women back and promotes damaging stereotypes of women in the legal profession.”

As reported by Law360, the complaint also alleges the firm is aware of the impact their practices have on women at the firm:

“When a female attorney at MoFo is pregnant, has children, or takes maternity leave, the firm’s standard operating procedure is to hold her back from advancement with her peers, denying her opportunities for greater pay and limiting her progression,” the complaint said. “MoFo has long been aware of these problems but has failed to take remedial measures to prevent or correct them.”

The complaint alleges one of the plaintiffs was warned against taking leave when a partner told her “parents tend not to do well in this group.” According to the complaint when she got back from maternity leave she was told she needed to “ramp up” and actually bill in excess of the 1,950 billable hour requirement. But don’t worry, she also alleges she wasn’t given the assignments necessary to bill those hours.

Sponsored

Another plaintiff alleges a partner presumed she was no longer committed to her job, just because she was a new mother. The unnamed partner allegedly told her she had to “work really hard to prove [she was] committed and to get the best, most interesting work.”

Needless to say, we’ll be following the suit with interest.

headshotKathryn Rubino is an editor at Above the Law. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

Sponsored

Topics

, , , , ,