Biglaw

More Partners Join $300 Million Biglaw Gender Discrimination Lawsuit

Three more former partners at Ogletree allege unequal pay at the firm.

By  
on

Earlier this year, the Am Law 100 firm — with a thriving Labor and Employment practice — of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart was hit with a $300 million purported class-action by nonequity shareholder Dawn Knepper, alleging gender discrimination and unequal pay. Now, three other other former nonequity partners are joining the lawsuit.

Jocelyn Campanaro, Angelica Ochoa, and Alicia Voltmer have added their stories about working at Ogletree in an amended complaint filed May 11th. The amended complaint alleges that the work that women partners tend to do at the firm is not the work that is rewarded by origination credit or otherwise tied to their compensation:

As female shareholders draft briefs, supervise younger lawyers and non-lawyer staff, and handle a broad range of client demands, the firm selects male shareholders for pitch meetings, conferences, and other business development opportunities that enable those male shareholders to reap origination credit, management credit, and other compensation that is disproportionate to their contributions.

The amended complaint alleges this has a direct — and negative — impact on the pay and promotion of women attorneys at the firm.

Representing the plaintiffs is the firm of Sanford Heisler Sharp, which is carving out a niche for themselves suing Biglaw firms over gender discrimination. As Law.com reports, David Sanford has indicated they’ve gotten a lot of feedback from current and former Ogletree partners:

“Many current and former shareholders have reached out to our firm to discuss their experiences while at Ogletree.”

According to the amended complaint, the firm is aware of the pay disparity between genders and the unequal opportunities, but has not done anything to rectify the situation:

Sponsored

“Ogletree leadership fosters or condones a firm culture that marginalizes, demeans, and undervalues women,” the amended complaint said. “Ogletree’s leadership is aware of the firm’s inequitable pay, promotion, job assignment, and other practices, but have taken no steps to remedy the root causes of the disparity.”

This is a claim Ogletree disputes in a recent statement about the lawsuit:

“Equal opportunity has been a core principle of Ogletree Deakins since the firm’s founding, and we do not tolerate discrimination of any kind—gender or otherwise. We take the allegations filed by former shareholders very seriously,” the statement said. “However, the decision-making process that governs our compensation system is both fair and equitable. In fact, we are proud of our ‘open compensation’ system under which all shareholders in the firm know what every other shareholder earns—and the factors that support those determinations.”

Additionally, the firm pointed out that over the past four years, the majority of attorneys promoted to shareholder have been women, and there’s been increased representation of women in firm leadership positions.

Sponsored

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).

Topics

, , , , , ,