• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

University of Baltimore Law ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law All Faculty Scholarship Faculty Scholarship 2000 The Glass Ceiling in Law Firms: A Form of Sex- Based Discrimination Rebecca Korzec University of Baltimore School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/all_fac Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Legal Profession Commons, and the Sexuality and the Law Commons Recommended Citation The Glass Ceiling in Law Firms: A Form of Sex-Based Discrimination, 2 J. of Employment Discrimination L. 251 (2000) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Glass Ceiling •In Law Firms: A Form of Sex-Based Discrimination Presented at the Stetson University College of Law /4Ih Annual National Conference on Labor and Employment Law: Criticia//ssues for 2000, March 23-24, 2000, Clearwater Beach, Florida I. Introduction Although women have made substantial strides in the work world, overcoming significant obstacles and earning the right to earn a liv­ ing in the professions, they have made anything but impressive progress in the legal profession. Today, women comprise almost 50 percent of entering law school classes-an impressive increase from eight percent in 1970.1 In addition, women comprise almost 39 per­ cent of all law firm associates,2 a drastic improvement from 2.9 per­ cent in 1969.3 However, these increases have not resulted in a By Rebecca Korzec significant increase in the percentage of women partners in law firms, Rebe cca Korzec is a Pro­ where women comprise a mere 13 percent of all partners.4 Clearly, fe ssor of Law at the U rii­ these statistics demonstrate that the number of women partners is versity of Baltimore disproportional to the number of entering law students and the num­ Sc hool of Law. She has ber of female associates. taught courses in ad­ vanced commercial trans­ At a certain level, women lawyers collide with a "glass ceiling," actions, comparative civil an invisible, artificial barrier which prevents women from being liberities, consumer pro­ promoted to management and leadership positions within a busi­ tection law, contracts, le­ ness or firm. 5 "The glass ceiling 'represents a subtle form of sex gal analysis, research and writing, products li ab ility, discrimination-unwritten, generally unspoken, but very perva­ property, sales, and sex­ sive.' Its presence is reflected in trends and statistics which con­ based discrimination. sistently reveal women's underrepresentation in executive and Pri or to teaching, Pro­ management positions."6 fe ssor Korzec was an As­ sociate at the law firm Scholars have advanced numerous theories to explain the glass ceil­ of Venabl e, Baetjer and ing in law firms. Some scholars argue that the glass ceiling is at­ H oward in Baltimore, tributable to women's shortcomings, rather than to discrimination, Maryland. She was a despite the fact that women enter law school with better qualifica­ Visiting Professor at tions than men. 7 Others have suggested that "the glass ceiling ex­ the University of Aber­ ists as a result of either organizational bias or negative attitudes deen in Scotland. Cur­ rently, she is a Facu Ity · held by decision makers regarding female candidates' abilities and Associ ate at the qualifications for promotion to senior-level positions, rather than Hoffberger Center and · the candidate's qualifications and career choices."8 Some argue that a Fell ow at the Center · it is "blatant discrimination against women in the promotion-to- o f International and · partner process [that] may explain the scarcity 9f female partners."9 Comparat ive Law. © 2000 CCH INCORPORATED 251 V) This article focuses on whether the glass ceil­ Both men and women perceive women as less E ing formed as a result of sex discrimination, business-oriented than men.15 Women do not .-~ blatant or subtle, or whether it formed as a re­ have the same level of client contact as men u.. sult of women lawyers' differing qualifications through involvement in activities which tradi­ or career choices. It explores many aspects of tionally have provided men with a business net­ ~ law firm culture, including business develop­ work. Women do not have "access to social .J ment, mentoring, and the demands and pres­ networks that men use to develop business rela­ C sures associated with becoming a partner. tionships" and women need to devote more ef­ Moreover, it addresses family issues and the forts than men in developing contacts. l6 Men bO C effects of family life on succeeding in a law firm develop business contacts through college and environment. Finally, it discusses the effects of law school friendships; often these male friends CJ sex discrimination, sexual harassmen t, sex ste­ attain senior management pOSitions having the U reotyping, and the devaluation of women in law power to hire attorneys.J7Because it takes less time V) firm partnership. to become a senior associate or partner in a law V) ro firm than it does to become senior management II. Factors Contri buting to the in a corporation, women who reach the senior l? Glass Ceiling level in law firms generally are much younger C) than their female eqUivalents in the business ..c: A. Business Development world, leaving women lawyers without signifi­ J- In today's cost conscious society, clients have a cant contacts. IS Moreover, most decision makers "bottom-line mentality" and are no longer loyal in corporate America are men,l9 and most people to their law firms.lO Law firms cannot "depend prefer working with in~ividuals who are most on client commitment; the days when firms like themselves 20 Significantly, networking and could wait for business and bill fees that went client development often occur at sporting events unquestioned are gone. Today, clients shop or on the golf course. Men perceive women as around for law firms, parceling out their busi­ unwilling to attend these events even if invitedY ness to different firms and demanding more ac­ countability."ll Therefore, law firms place Women who wish to attend social and athletic increased pressure on both partners and asso­ events experience difficulties. Often they have ciates to develop and retain business. less time than men to devote to client develop­ ment because men frequently have time to take Lawyers who obtain many clients or generate clients out to breakfast, lunch, and dinner. 22 large sums of money for the firm are labeled "rain­ Women, frequently, have obligations outside the makers."12 Rainmaking is the act of securing and firm , as primary caregivers in their familiesY retaining clients. Generally, lawyers use three Therefore, women tend to have lunch with cli­ methods to secure business: (1) senior partners ents, rather than dinner. "But even for women may refer business internally to a lawyer; (2) with time available, dinner invitations are prob­ current and former clients may refer new work lematic because of questions concerning the pro­ to a lawyer; or (3) a lawyer may obtain new busi­ priety of a woman inviting a male client to ness by soliciting new contacts. 13 dinner. "24 Clients may feel uncomfortable accept­ ing a social invitation from a female attorney. 25 Generally; women are not considered as skilled at rainmaking as men, with very few women having '~ Because women are not invited to partiCipate the reputation of being "independent rainmakers. "14 in social gatherings that produce networking ties The impediments women face in becoming rain­ often leading to client relationships, women find makers at their law firms are attributable to many it more difficult to forge links with present cli­ factors, especially the misperceptions of both men ents and find it difficult to establish the sort of and women of women's place in business and the profeSSional networks available to men which lack of business connections that prevent women foster new client development."26 Most women from networking. executives are generally not senior enough to 252 be able opportunities to some women are attorneys, opportunities for and their women. 28 work to exposed or showcased to influential partners in the firms ... and situations. "38 watched over and of a junior ,-"">LC'""U'L practicable and for attorneys in charge women in encounter with development, they may over men. \Vomen are to deal and women in which women part­ leaders to meetings.31 women are reluctant but different Women participate in association to committees, write and newsletters, and lecture at seminars. may as improper.4211 In a climate of heightened sensitivity ambi- B. Mentoring guity about sexual mores in the the The structure of law fosters mentoring. relationship "Mentoring is a system or ol.der, more exnenenc:ea Women partners are hesitant to develop mentoring relationships with are usually power- and P1"p·t",rp will be training of as partners view women as only women because they are women, of qualifica- tions46 In addition, women choose not to men- heavy workload."47 most reason why women do not mentor younger women, stems from the view older u,,,,a'-...i<C;:' to overcome with "no [them] or op- available [to them]. "48 Despite the prevailing view that women are less nalize women, who tend to act as primary powerful than men, many junior women associ­ caregivers of families. Women lawyers often de­ ates prefer to be mentored by women because "it vote less office hours but not less skill.

Load more

  14

Copy Link