The legal profession is a service industry built on a model inherently at odds with the concept of motherhood. As long as clients are willing to pay for round the clock service, that’s what will be expected. I interview women lawyers who have found tremendous success and happiness (www.alawyerslife.com), but do they ‘have it all’? That depends upon how you define it. Two things are clear, however, (1) law firms need to figure out how to promote women to positions of financial power within the law firm structure; and (2) women (especially moms) need to stop being so hard on themselves. As a lawyer who left a Park Avenue law firm to design jewelry, I’m still working on the latter.
I worked for a small real estate company from 1968 to 1972. When the owner's secretary said she'd have to stop working so she could deliver and raise her baby, the owner, to keep her, built a small nursery just yards from her desk. She loved it and continued to work. Forty-five years ago.
Why was she going to quit? To raise her baby? No. She was going to quit because she had a husband who supported her.
Therein lies the cause of the gender wage gap, the cause that women's advocates stubbornly refuse even to consider: the influence on married women -- AND on the many single women who aspire to marry -- of a husband's or future husband's income.
Verify it: Suppose a law prohibited men, in marriage or out, from supporting women, spending money on them, and giving them assets of any form that are convertible to cash.
What kind of work decisions would women make? What kind would men make?
For the answer, see:
"Why the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Hasn't Helped Women" http://malemattersusa.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/will-the-ledbetter-fair-p...
Why was she going to quit? To raise her baby? No. She was going to quit because she had a husband who supported her.
Therein lies the cause of the gender wage gap, the cause that women's advocates stubbornly refuse even to consider: the influence on married women -- AND on the many single women who aspire to marry -- of a husband's or future husband's income.
Verify it: Suppose a law prohibited men, in marriage or out, from supporting women, spending money on them, and giving them assets of any form that are convertible to cash.
What kind of work decisions would women make? What kind would men make?
For the answer, see:
"Why the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Hasn't Helped Women" http://malemattersusa.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/will-the-ledbetter-fair-p...
As a professional coach to women lawyers across the country, what is exciting to see is that while there are plenty of challenges and sacrifices women (and men) must make to pursue a fulfilling professional journey AND family life, the options of what this looks like is changing, albeit slowly. Flex time in practice and not in name only and virtual law firms are two such options.
As law firm leadership becomes more diverse (and boy, this is a tough one) and younger, those in decision-making roles are recognizing and, in fact, embracing that the traditional model of 8-10 hours in an office setting is not required to produce the desired results of delivering extraordinary service to clients, being the face of your law firm, AND being home for dinner and children baths.
Yes, there is a long road to gender parity and work/life balance, but the path IS moving forward. Props to the Geller Law Group and those like it.
As law firm leadership becomes more diverse (and boy, this is a tough one) and younger, those in decision-making roles are recognizing and, in fact, embracing that the traditional model of 8-10 hours in an office setting is not required to produce the desired results of delivering extraordinary service to clients, being the face of your law firm, AND being home for dinner and children baths.
Yes, there is a long road to gender parity and work/life balance, but the path IS moving forward. Props to the Geller Law Group and those like it.
My focus is on how the business was described. Heaven forbid one of their clients actually need anything because they're way down the list and who knows what they really get for $280 an hour. This is baloney. C'mon. What's next, a law firm in a van down by the river. What kind of service do you think is really generated by a fly by night operation like this?
1
Twenty years ago, I started my own law firm because I was laid off - but I remained on my own because it enabled me to spend more time with my daughters. As many have pointed out, it wasn't easy - back then, technology was rather rudimentary and tasks that my assistant can carry out in a half-hour might have taken a half day, (see - http://myshingle.com/2013/09/articles/work-life-balance/women-lawyers-ne... and for years, I worked a midnight shift, 9 pm until 2 am, our house was a wreck (http://myshingle.com/2009/05/articles/work-life-balance/the-twenty-first... and though we were comfortable on our two incomes and saved for college and retirement, we live in a tiny house, take vacations subsidized by my work travel (so my daughters have enjoyed the treat of room service and luxury hotels in NY, Phoenix and Las Vegas and toured Paris with my husband while I spoke at a conference) Somehow, I managed to make it work. So I could not be more thrilled to see this new generation of lady lawyers not just surviving as I did but positively thriving! Their choice may not be for everyone - some women may still want to stay home full time and others may wish to work at big law. But at least there are options for women - and men and that is worth celebrating
2
This is so encouraging! We need many, many more examples of flexible workplaces like this. There are so many professional careers that can be done sans office. I don't know why these cases have to be the exception, rather than the rule.
1
Brava ladies, it's the way we all should work.
1
My wife and I have 35+ years at a variety of large and medium size law firms. All we can say is "what color is the sky in their world" because it doesn't sound like any world we've been in.
1
I agree. How do these women deal with a client calling on a Friday afternoon before a long weekend who needs something prepared for Monday morning (for the pre-meeting) and then redone for Tuesday morning (for the big meeting) and the work to prepare it will require 4 or 5 people working 18 hours on Saturday and Sunday to achieve that? And then repeat that request every Friday (and every Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday). Do you tell the client you won't do the work? You'll never hear from that client again. That is the real life of a partner in a law firm - it isn't the lawyers who decide what sort of culture exists - it is the clients. This story is either a fairy tale or these women are not concerned about their client base.
3
Congratulations to these lawyers. My kids, (who grew up with a mom working full time as a partner with significant responsibilities in terms of case content,) are now just beginning to understand the hell their mother went through. My daughter has zero interest in being a lawyer for that very reason, whereas my son is out to conquer the world as a "better" lawyer than his mom was...whatever that means.
This is a great story. But it can't hide the fundamental flaw, which is the idea that a lawyer "should" work 60-70 hours/week. Who decided that? What's wrong with giving lawyers the chance to work 40-hour weeks and earn $100,000/year?
Indeed, the same could be said of finance professionals, doctors and others - the high earners in our society who invariably sacrifice the quality of their personal and family lives.
It's plenty to live on, and it enables a more quality life. But most lawyers do not have that option. It's all or nothing. Sure, maybe they could open a small-town law-clinic, but anyone with ambition for career-growth must agree to this 60-70 hour work-week to even be considered.
Meanwhile, while they work their 70 hours, there are others who cannot find work at all. I don't know the easy solution, but I do know that the current system isn't helping anyone, because I do not honestly believe that most lawyers actually want to work so many hours ...
Indeed, the same could be said of finance professionals, doctors and others - the high earners in our society who invariably sacrifice the quality of their personal and family lives.
It's plenty to live on, and it enables a more quality life. But most lawyers do not have that option. It's all or nothing. Sure, maybe they could open a small-town law-clinic, but anyone with ambition for career-growth must agree to this 60-70 hour work-week to even be considered.
Meanwhile, while they work their 70 hours, there are others who cannot find work at all. I don't know the easy solution, but I do know that the current system isn't helping anyone, because I do not honestly believe that most lawyers actually want to work so many hours ...
5
Did I miss something? I'm curious as to whether Ms. Geller and Ms. Simon have spouses.
2
I applaud these women, but the whole tone of the article reinforces the stereotype that mothers should be making these adjustments more than fathers, foregoing opportunities (such as litigation) and hobbies/relaxation. Seriously, what century are we living in? Children need parental involvement, period.
1
This should be mandatory reading for everyone! THIS IS NOT BALANCE. She is racing back and forth every minute. I work in medicine and it's the same thing for me. My kids are happy but I dream at night about endless rooms of patients waiting on me every day. Society needs to change.
6
These women can afford to work part time because they have husbands who provide the resources that allow it.
No men can plan for this because the contract to be a husband and father is asymmetric. He must pay for that, and it requires he work and have a career sufficient to allow the woman to stay at home or work as she please.
When there is a substantial market of women demanding stay at home dads, maybe then something will change.
The goal of working is to stay home, not to be a wage slave. If you're a woman you can acquire a man who will give up his life for your convenience. It never works the other way around for the reason of biological consequences.
No men can plan for this because the contract to be a husband and father is asymmetric. He must pay for that, and it requires he work and have a career sufficient to allow the woman to stay at home or work as she please.
When there is a substantial market of women demanding stay at home dads, maybe then something will change.
The goal of working is to stay home, not to be a wage slave. If you're a woman you can acquire a man who will give up his life for your convenience. It never works the other way around for the reason of biological consequences.
1
The hardest job in the world is to be a mother and the country that seems to least value mothers is the US, in my humble opinion. Many of us have had to struggle with being held in low regard for having children and having stayed at home with them. There is a great deal of tension and judgment over this in US society. It never meant that I, for one, did not wish to accomplish my dreams and ambitions, which I worked hard towards in obtaining an education, but once I saw my little ones, I just could not hand them over to a stranger to raise them. The "pay" is low, the hours long, the job description is waitress to teacher to psychologist, etc. If you have the wrong partner the road will be that much harder. Still, the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, on some level, in a hopefully positive way. That the choices are so fraught makes little sense. After all, children are our future….
2
My first thought was "FANTASTIC". This business model would be desired by anyone who wants some control over their work/life balance, which I think includes more and more of both genders. (And as an introvert I find it very appealing.) I have never understood why working from home is not encouraged, and bricks/mortar facetime minimized. Think how much time is wasted driving or commuting, never mind gas burnt and cars worn.
This is MRS. I have worked for large law firms in Cleveland, New York and Chicago for well over 30 years. I am considered "staff." At no time was my family circumstance ever considered important. Show up at that desk between the hours of X and Y and that was that. There is no flexibility to deal with a handicapped child, who is now an adult; there is no flexibility to deal with aging parents with declining health; there was never flexibility to deal with a spouse who needed surgery. If a medical appointment was not for myself, it was deemed not necessary, even though I was the responsible driver. Take too much family medical time and the job may not be there. This will weigh on a person's own health. This is what I will have to endure for the next 2 years before I retire, and that retirement can't come soon enough. Then, Johnny Paycheck's song from the 1970s will have greater significance, because I can afford to sing it out loud. I wish those who succeed me well, because things don't change in BigLaw unless it suits the suits. This firm is one of a kind. Its model is a great example of what can be done, but BigLaw can't see its way through to doing anything more than beating the life out of its staff with the threat of losing one's job. They have no concept of what true change is.
2
I worked at a lawyer head hunter agency once. That was worse than the oil company I had worked in before that. That short stint provided me with a window into Big Law. I had aspirations of working in a law firm once. That place cured me of any desire to be anywhere near a law firm.
1
This reads like some chapter of the great American novel, "The Entitled Ones". So much drama.
“When they were younger, I needed to be there physically, to attend events,” she said. Later, “it was important for me to not just be there physically but emotionally.” Gag.
The writer adds more melodrama with statements like:
'It’s a contemporary daydream to wonder what the workplace might look like if it were run entirely by women, or at least by fully engaged parents. The answer, it seems, is this: There would be no revolution. Working parents would still be exhausted and distracted and anxious about falling short in every aspect of their lives.' Barf.
All that's missing from this piece on self-indulgence and hyper self-importance are the flurry of descriptions of the "brave" "courageous" "heroes". Cowgirl up.
Many/most mothers from past generations did a whole lot more with a whole lot less and didn't expect anything except a hug from their kids, better lives for those kids (that they didn't monitor constantly like the women featured in this piece) and an occasional thank you...
And, many of those women also worked outside the home on top of the monumental work they did inside the home--a whole lot harder for a pittance of what the women featured in this nauseating portrayal of all that's going wrong with our shallow-grave culture are complaining about...
“When they were younger, I needed to be there physically, to attend events,” she said. Later, “it was important for me to not just be there physically but emotionally.” Gag.
The writer adds more melodrama with statements like:
'It’s a contemporary daydream to wonder what the workplace might look like if it were run entirely by women, or at least by fully engaged parents. The answer, it seems, is this: There would be no revolution. Working parents would still be exhausted and distracted and anxious about falling short in every aspect of their lives.' Barf.
All that's missing from this piece on self-indulgence and hyper self-importance are the flurry of descriptions of the "brave" "courageous" "heroes". Cowgirl up.
Many/most mothers from past generations did a whole lot more with a whole lot less and didn't expect anything except a hug from their kids, better lives for those kids (that they didn't monitor constantly like the women featured in this piece) and an occasional thank you...
And, many of those women also worked outside the home on top of the monumental work they did inside the home--a whole lot harder for a pittance of what the women featured in this nauseating portrayal of all that's going wrong with our shallow-grave culture are complaining about...
1
Good for them! I'll be honest...it still sounds stressful and like they never stop, but I appreciate what they have done to allow more time with their young children. I'm aggressively trying to pay off my mortgage in order to be able to work part time. There are no easy answers!
2
Good for them if it makes them happy. But enough with faulting the law firms for their difficult and demanding lifestyles. As Don Draper growled "that's what the money is for." For 250k - 300k per year, which is far far above the median salary in this country, it's fair to say you forfeit regular hours. So good for them to realize they wanted more intangibles for less money, but it's not like the law practices they left behind are the enemy.
Also what's their ambition for their firm? One day, they'll want offices, and marquee clients, and eventually a big case may arrive on their desk, one that demands no childcare breaks. Are they really going to say no? Is Ms. Simon really going to go home at 4:30 instead of meeting with a client prepared to pay them 100s of dollars an hour? And if they say no, we won't take those cases. Well, outsourcing and the internet is gutting low-margin low-hanging fruit legal work. They'll need to do higher value work to even survive.
So again, good for them, but they won't resemble this situation three, five or even seven years down the line, even if it's worked so far.
Also what's their ambition for their firm? One day, they'll want offices, and marquee clients, and eventually a big case may arrive on their desk, one that demands no childcare breaks. Are they really going to say no? Is Ms. Simon really going to go home at 4:30 instead of meeting with a client prepared to pay them 100s of dollars an hour? And if they say no, we won't take those cases. Well, outsourcing and the internet is gutting low-margin low-hanging fruit legal work. They'll need to do higher value work to even survive.
So again, good for them, but they won't resemble this situation three, five or even seven years down the line, even if it's worked so far.
6
Life is a balance between home and work. And yes, home should come first. Too many careers today want you available 24/7 via text or email. My son was on a short trip with us to the high rock deserts of our state and had to climb the red rock to pick up a signal for his I-phone for work emails......ugh. Remember, at your eulogy they will never bring up the fact you were a great lawyer. In the long run any career is a job plain and simple.
3
How do you define "fully present"? Isn't that just another way to say "having it all"? If we would stop establishing these benchmarks, then working parents would not feel as if they are failing to meet any expectations as a worker or a parent and establish a balance that is their personal best.
1
As a 58-year-old female attorney, I find it a sad irony that the last several decades in which women made great inroads into male-dominated professional fields are the same decades during which America slowly but steadily transitioned to our present cut-throat 24/7 work culture. Prior to the 1980's, law was considered a "gentlemanly" field allowing for family time, and doctors had a weekly "golf day". Working mothers aren't asking for the moon. They are simply seeking a more humane work life that once was the norm, not the exception.
21
With advances in technology, working remotely makes sense for a lot of people in a variety of professions. There is nothing magical about the law, and it's simply tradition that keeps face time so important to advancement in many fields including law. And, just a note to the parents who are trying to make every event at their kids' schools and take them to lessons during the day, don't overdo it. My kids are grown and believe me, they don't remember half of what I did during the years I stayed home (after being laid off) and religiously attended every major and minor event.
3
"Women accounted for a mere 16.5 percent of law partners in 2013, according to the National Association for Law Placement, despite graduating from law school in roughly equal numbers as men over the previous decade." I wonder if the writer understands that the graduation statistic cited has virtually no relevance to the partner statistic because most attorneys aren't even eligible for partnership until year 8? If the writer wanted to provide an accurate assessment he/she would have provided the M-F ratio for all partner-eligible attorneys (generally those with more than 10+ years of experience). In that demographic, according to ABA stats, women make up approximately 27% of the workforce. So, they're still disproportionately represented as partners, but about 66% less so than what is being suggested by the writer. Really this is a 27%-16.5% issue (an 11% disparity); not a 50%-16.5% issue (as the writer's asserted 33.5% disparity suggests). However, it appears that the irrelevant statistic is used to bolster the writer's conclusion driven bias that female attorneys are being discriminated against in law firms. While I completely agree that female attorneys age 40+ have dealt with their fair share of discrimination, I would steadfastly argue that this just isn't the case for women under 40, and the persistent suggestion that women can't get a fair shake causes morale issues and spitefulness in those vast majority of firms where women get their fair shake, and then some.
1
My husband was forced out of a law firm because he was viewed as spending to much time on family matters - his dying father, our 3 kids with special needs - so he started his own firm and recruited women and men who left their firms for the same reason. They are doing quite well and I hope this idea continues to spread to other professions, such as my own.
7
My father could have made millions as an exceptionally good engineer, but he chose a life that would allow him to put family first. My whole life, he came home at 5:30 sharp. The ritual lasted some 18 years: at 5:15 pm., my part-time working mother would put on lipstick and brush her hair; my dog would go sit at the front door; and my sister and I would set the dinner table.
Only when I was an adult did I realize my father had made a conscious choice. We lived a more modest life because of it. My mother had an MA and could also have pursued a career, but chose a different life. I am eternally grateful not only for the close-knit family that this daily family ritual fostered, but for the example that was set about what's really important.
Career was not the focus of life. I chose to not have children, but it wasn't because I wanted to prioritize career. It was because I didn't want the demands and expectations and exhaustion of parenting. In my own way, I set up the same life my parents did: I love my work (teaching at a university and writing novels, and achieving success at both) but I manage my own life and set limits on how much I do work-wise. I write a novel and take a break. I teach and take a break. For me, the reward is not spending time with children, but spending time with the world: I read, hike, enjoy a large circle of friends, spend time with my like-minded husband, and enjoy the peace of my life.
It's not just "kids or career." There are other options.
Only when I was an adult did I realize my father had made a conscious choice. We lived a more modest life because of it. My mother had an MA and could also have pursued a career, but chose a different life. I am eternally grateful not only for the close-knit family that this daily family ritual fostered, but for the example that was set about what's really important.
Career was not the focus of life. I chose to not have children, but it wasn't because I wanted to prioritize career. It was because I didn't want the demands and expectations and exhaustion of parenting. In my own way, I set up the same life my parents did: I love my work (teaching at a university and writing novels, and achieving success at both) but I manage my own life and set limits on how much I do work-wise. I write a novel and take a break. I teach and take a break. For me, the reward is not spending time with children, but spending time with the world: I read, hike, enjoy a large circle of friends, spend time with my like-minded husband, and enjoy the peace of my life.
It's not just "kids or career." There are other options.
24
And like government agencies that do "diversity" female quota hiring, this 'firm' must make their employees without children do a large share of the parents' work.
2
And you know this how? For 40 years I've worked in a government law office that has hired many excellent attorneys and support staffers, of both genders, ON MERIT, and in which both fathers and mothers, and non-fathers and non-mothers, have received help, and given help, cooperatively and compassionately, so that the office can produce terrific work while everyone in the office has a good personal life. Success is not a zero-sum game. By suggesting otherwise you demean working mothers (and fathers) and you narrow your own possibilities.
4
There can't be five women attorneys in practice for thirty years or more who read this article without laughing. Back in the 80's these arrangements were called *kitchen stove practices*. The use of rented by the day space does take it out of the kitchen.
Usually, operations like this get referrals from previous firms and some women's bar assocation colleagues. But lets see where they are in 10 years.
Law is a jealous mistress and unless you rapidly carve out a reputation in a specialty like wills or appellate work, operations like this don't have much life.
Usually, operations like this get referrals from previous firms and some women's bar assocation colleagues. But lets see where they are in 10 years.
Law is a jealous mistress and unless you rapidly carve out a reputation in a specialty like wills or appellate work, operations like this don't have much life.
6
A law firm that is human and humane? That truly is SHOCKING!
2
Certain fields demand sacrifice - if you aren't willing to be there for your clients don't bother being in the field.
6
It is telling that there is no mention here and very little in these comments about men having some real share in all these problems.
2
But they ARE there for their clients. That's the point: that they can "be there" for their clients AND their families.
3
Uh? Certain fields including parenting?
I applaud these women. I have taken a similar tact with my professional degree (veterinary medicine). Instead of doing clinic medicine, I am a consultant on food safety (trust me, there's a tie in!). I have sacrificed a fatter salary and 401K for contract work and uncertainty. But, despite the travel, when I am home, I am home. We don't have a mad rush in the morning to get the kids out. We eat dinner together almost every night of the week. It may not last forever, but it is good enough right now. I'd also like to point out that when people say that these women can do this because they have money, they have a commensurate level of debt. A legal degree costs as much as a small house (so does a vet degree). Servicing a <$100K debt on $125K is barely manageable.
7
After working (and making partner) at two small law firms where I was the only female attorney, I left and started a solo practice in 2006. My husband and I bought a small office building and it has become somewhat of an incubator for female attorneys who want to leave their firms and go solo. I currently rent office space to two other solo practitioners, both of whom, like me, are mothers of young and adolescent children. In my small, rural area, there are at least 4 other attorney mothers who have left firms to go solo, and 2 attorney mothers whose "firms" consist only of them and their attorney husbands. I think it's pretty clear that for the most part, law firms, even in rural areas like mine, haven't offered the solutions that working mother attorneys need. Kudos to Ms. Geller and Ms. Simon for having taken this unconventional approach.
7
I run my CPA firm (we have offices on the east and west coast) that is family friendly. I tell the staff that your children are first and the young mothers really appreciate that. They are responsible professional and work from home when their children (or spouses) are ill. As long as the work gets done is what counts. You treat people as you would want to be treated you get results. I have literally zero turnover. The clients,staff and I are happy.
8
I think it's crazy to have children and then work 70 hours a week. How can money be that important? And btw you can just go to any big company and earn that $150k, but only work 40 hours/week...
2
Please let us know where those jobs are because most jobs expect more than 40 hours.
1
Ms. Simon was already on top of her game when she decided to cut her pay in have for the flexibility. If a junior associate were to opt for this route, as a practical matter she would have to struggle to be on any partnership track and her career will be compromised. This has nothing to do with whether a man or women is running the firm because there will always be other people, other women who will not make the same decision and those people will get ahead in the game. In the legal field there are hundreds of associates competing for senior positions and this is a gender free reality.
9
Not all lawyers are great litigators, many carry out mundane tasks on a daily basis. No rushing off the court to save the day. In this scenario, yes - you could have a semblance of a normal life. Not all lawyers, are struggling to make partner at a big name firm, that's the movie version. So this mom friendly firm might well be able to accommodate the partners.
Does this generosity extend to all employees of the firm? Would it ever? High end folks, high end problems, high end fixes, for as long as one generates income. But when times get tough, these policies will be the first on the chopping block.
Easy to be a monk in a monastery. Probably won't transfer well into "real" life.
Does this generosity extend to all employees of the firm? Would it ever? High end folks, high end problems, high end fixes, for as long as one generates income. But when times get tough, these policies will be the first on the chopping block.
Easy to be a monk in a monastery. Probably won't transfer well into "real" life.
3
As a part time male oncologist and father of four, I find articles about work life balance that only focus on female parents very '90's. Move on
15
Here's a newsflash: men can't "have it all" either. It's just that women could care less that men don't have the chance to be involved in their kids' lives.
3
With an attitude like that, it's no wonder that your experience doesn't include women who care about your life.
3
I would be curious as to what happens with administrative personnel.
7
Nice story but an exception to the general rule. For most, a legal career remains family unfriendly.
5
I've been lucky enough to find a niche appellate practice, working "of counsel" to a firm from my home. It has allowed me great flexibility in terms of my work hours and I have been so grateful for this opportunity, especially while my children were little. However, I am not a partner in the small, all male firm, and knew early on that I would not be. They are wonderful guys to work for, but have very demanding work schedules, and that is the standard in the firm. During my 35 years of practicing law I've seen few examples of a women-run firm like this one, partly because many of my cohort chose not to have children.
2
Here's a problem: when you have a legal issue, either personal or corporate, you need, in most cases, for it to be treated with the utmost urgency. No fooling around, get it done now, get this out of the way. When someone is trying to balance their personal life against your needs, it is easy to see that their personal concerns will often win out. Failure to have legal counsel when you need it can be one of the most costly aspects of running a business. If you don't have it, you have to make decisions without the benefit of counsel.
I have tried to work with lawyers who show no personal commitment to getting things done on time or quickly. Doesn't work out very well. I had been accustomed to dealing with firms in DC where ten at night is not considered extremely late to be working. Then, I called a firm in the suburbs and was told they close at five, period. No you ever stay late? No, five is when we stop.
The idea of working hard with dedication is not merely to impress potential clients. It is to give some of the same urgency to the client's problems as the client does himself. At the same time, kids can't wait, When you say you are picking your child up at 4:30, you have to be there. This would work best in a small geographical area rather than one scattered over many miles like DC, Maryland and Virginia, a place that resembles LA for urban spread.
Doug Terry
I have tried to work with lawyers who show no personal commitment to getting things done on time or quickly. Doesn't work out very well. I had been accustomed to dealing with firms in DC where ten at night is not considered extremely late to be working. Then, I called a firm in the suburbs and was told they close at five, period. No you ever stay late? No, five is when we stop.
The idea of working hard with dedication is not merely to impress potential clients. It is to give some of the same urgency to the client's problems as the client does himself. At the same time, kids can't wait, When you say you are picking your child up at 4:30, you have to be there. This would work best in a small geographical area rather than one scattered over many miles like DC, Maryland and Virginia, a place that resembles LA for urban spread.
Doug Terry
11
Let me see if I have this right. Ms. Simon, the worker bee, works over 60 hours per week on Ms. Geller's clients while taking home $125,000 to $150,000 a year. This sounds like a great deal for Ms. Geller and a not very good one for Ms. Simon, even if the latter can duck out a couple of times each month for child/school-related events (which Ms. Simon could also do at a large law firm with some planning, and then make two or three times as much working those same 60 hours).
2
Um, no. You don't have it right. Nobody like Ms. Simon (a non-partner, with no book of business) is gonna make "two or three times" what she makes at this firm. Nowhere.
3
When did it become a priority for parents to attend all the myriad minor school functions and athletic events held during the workday? This is a crazy-making expectation, and an option open only to the top tier income earners. (Try telling your supervisor at WalMart that your kid has a party scheduled mid-shift!)
School conferences, yes. Medical appointments, yes.Year-end 'graduations'? Yes. As an employer, I have no hesitation in encouraging employees to use their leave time to attend these events.
But thinking you can and/or should attend every soccer game or little league practice leaves your child with the idea that his or her extracurricular activities are (and should be) the center of your world.
School conferences, yes. Medical appointments, yes.Year-end 'graduations'? Yes. As an employer, I have no hesitation in encouraging employees to use their leave time to attend these events.
But thinking you can and/or should attend every soccer game or little league practice leaves your child with the idea that his or her extracurricular activities are (and should be) the center of your world.
31
Human resources management is so under rated.
What this article says is that in order to match talent to task and allow for the whole person to be who they are, these female attorneys took on the task of their own human resource management, created their own organization, because most organizations, and especially law firms, just don't.
Disappointing in at 21st Century workplace.
What this article says is that in order to match talent to task and allow for the whole person to be who they are, these female attorneys took on the task of their own human resource management, created their own organization, because most organizations, and especially law firms, just don't.
Disappointing in at 21st Century workplace.
4
Few companies exist to take care of a 'whole person' and those that do will not exist for long.
It is a business, not a family.
It is a business, not a family.
1
I can't help but ask: Why does day care schedule in the middle of the morning events which parents are expected to attend? Wouldn't the late afternoon or earlier in the morning work as well? Why is so much sugar fed to the kids? When are schools, whether day care, elementary or secondary, going to start taking into account the demands on parents' time and recognize that parents don't get holidays for the closing of schools for teacher preparation days and other reasons like that?
17
I worked as a secretary in big-time law firms for 20 years, and all but one or two of the young women associates left, because you cannot work 70 hours a week and be on constant call and raise children at the same time. Nor are those grueling hours necessary for anybody. One day I saw a young associate with his head in his hands at around 9:00 at night (yeah, I was there too), and I asked what was the matter. He said, "I was class valedictorian, went to Princeton, on the Law Review at Yale Law for THIS?" My boss would just shrug his shoulders. They were so proud of recruiting 50/50 women and men, but lost all of their women, and a good number of their men too. A European lawyer whom I became friends with over the years always went running in Central Park in the morning before his meetings, and my NY attorney remarried, "He couldn't work for this firm if he did that." Nope, we want them all fat, out of shape, miserable, and neurotic.
19
I always remember my Business Corporations law school professor telling us about his NYC big firm career. "One morning, as I watched the sun rise over Manhattan from my office window, I asked myself 'What am I doing to my family - and to me?'" And you wonder why our profession has such a level of stress and depression. I love being a lawyer, but I'm also very thankful after 30 years in the profession that I opted to work for a nonprofit.
3
If a male or female attorney with a family works late each night, misses dinner and connection with his or her children, and is "fat, out of shape, miserable, and neurotic",
it is about one thing - money, money, money !
it is about one thing - money, money, money !
1
While the job prospects for law school graduates are dismal right now, even five years ago corporate law students in the NY area made $160K right out of school for working 60-70 hours a week, with annual bonuses that can add another $30-60K to their income, plus generous annual pay increases.
No one forces anyone to go into corporate law. People do so because they want to make a lot of money which comes with sacrificing your personal life for a good ten years in hopes of reaching the top of the pyramid, a partnership with a guaranteed seven figure salary and lifetime tenure.
Every corporate law student knows the grueling work demands include being responsive 24/7, so if people drop out of their careers because they choose to have children and no longer want to work that hard and that long, how is this the company's problem again?
No one forces anyone to go into corporate law. People do so because they want to make a lot of money which comes with sacrificing your personal life for a good ten years in hopes of reaching the top of the pyramid, a partnership with a guaranteed seven figure salary and lifetime tenure.
Every corporate law student knows the grueling work demands include being responsive 24/7, so if people drop out of their careers because they choose to have children and no longer want to work that hard and that long, how is this the company's problem again?
3
I hate to interject a note of supply-and-demand economic reality, but considering the difficulty that law graduates from even good schools are having finding jobs these days...
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/business/dealbook/burdened-with-debt-l...
...the future for firms like this seems bleak. Students will be clambering over each other to show that they can work harder and longer. It's pure supply and demand.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/business/dealbook/burdened-with-debt-l...
...the future for firms like this seems bleak. Students will be clambering over each other to show that they can work harder and longer. It's pure supply and demand.
3
That very much depends on who's doing the hiring. (And if other lawyers are willing and able to create their own firms along similar lines).
"...to show that parents can nurture their professional ambitions while being fully present in their children’s lives."
Well, female parents at least. It shows us nothing about two-parent families or the spouses in same and doesn't seem to care to.
Well, female parents at least. It shows us nothing about two-parent families or the spouses in same and doesn't seem to care to.
2
Most 40-hour plus work weeks in the law are because lawyers' time is billed on an hourly basis, and the partners who share in the firms' profits want more money. When people started going to law school with the primary goal of becoming millionaires, they shaped law firm culture accordingly. Non-partner lawyers are revenue-generating cogs in the profit machines that are most larger law firms. Most larger law firms are controlled by people who are choosing money above all else, including time with their own families. Why would they accommodate other people's desire for time off, given their own value system that revolves around avarice? Kudos to the women of the Geller Law Group, who are trying to use their professional skills, support their families financially, and have some semblance of a life.
8
I am so proud of these women. It is not easy, it is not perfect, it is balance and they do have it all. Let this be an example for all moms and dads with children. Good luck!
4
I think one of the keys -- and obviously only one -- is learning to live a middle-income life instead of aspiring to be a "wealthy attorney" with all the trappings: large house, fancy car, expensive clothes, vacations to educational sites around the world instead of within your own state or country, etc. Many people in high-powered jobs took that direction for their life because they are internally driven to be at the top of their class, at all costs, so they don't even see that there's an alternative to going with the "top" law/finance firm where they're required to work 60-70 hours a week. They even have children to prove they're the best and can do it all! Something's gotta give!
7
I still think that women cannot have it all and neither can men for that matter. This is particularly the case for low and middle-skilled people who often have to count the hours and work far too many to make ends meet. Bravo to them for making this work. The firm is making plenty of good decisions such as renting space that make this possible. They also manage to keep their definition of monetary success in check and are happier because of it.
6
Of course the people who work the most hours should get paid the most - despite several comments to the contrary, I don't see where any of the attorneys profiled here suggests otherwise. What the article itself - and these commenters - seems to gloss over are the reasons for the discrepancy between "98 percent of law firms officially allow their lawyers to work reduced schedules" and "only 6 percent of lawyers actually work part time."
It's not just because of court appearances and client deadlines; there are plenty of attorneys in large firms doing the same type of work as Ms. Geller and Ms. Simon, who could (and sometimes do) control their own schedules. It's mainly because of firm culture and an outdated requirement for "face time," as well as lawyers' (both men and women) recognition that, even when you're supposedly approved to work a reduced schedule (at the correspondingly reduced compensation), you STILL end up working 60-70 hours/week because of those archaic expectations. And you get bumped off partner track because it's the quantity, not quality, of work that's valued - even though that quantity would return to 100% after a few years.
So why would you take the pay cut if you're still working the hours? Until law firms find a way to allow true flexibility - for an expected, and understood, pay cut - they will continue to lose incredible talent, both female and male. (Of course, they also rely on this attrition, as they simply can't make everyone a partner.)
It's not just because of court appearances and client deadlines; there are plenty of attorneys in large firms doing the same type of work as Ms. Geller and Ms. Simon, who could (and sometimes do) control their own schedules. It's mainly because of firm culture and an outdated requirement for "face time," as well as lawyers' (both men and women) recognition that, even when you're supposedly approved to work a reduced schedule (at the correspondingly reduced compensation), you STILL end up working 60-70 hours/week because of those archaic expectations. And you get bumped off partner track because it's the quantity, not quality, of work that's valued - even though that quantity would return to 100% after a few years.
So why would you take the pay cut if you're still working the hours? Until law firms find a way to allow true flexibility - for an expected, and understood, pay cut - they will continue to lose incredible talent, both female and male. (Of course, they also rely on this attrition, as they simply can't make everyone a partner.)
5
I love these "Women: Is there anything they CAN'T do better than men?" articles. Each one is like an episode of an old Norman Lear sitcom.
6
Let's remember, that having children, by and large, is a choice.
13
If you're an employer, it's also a "choice" to structure your firm in such a way that your employees can't have a life outside of work.
4
As an employer, it's also my "choice" to put my capital, reputation, time, etc. at great risk in hopes of establishing a going concern that eventually hires "employees," SD. Any worker who thinks she can do better for herself is welcome to "chose" to structure her own firm in the way that best suits her lifestyle choices.
1
You are not doing your children any good by going to their school plays, parties, athletic events, etc. Some things are important---home for dinner---but going to these "events" without a parent teaches them independence.
You have no obligation to be a unpaid teacher's aide or "fundraiser". That's the school's responsibility.
You have no obligation to be a unpaid teacher's aide or "fundraiser". That's the school's responsibility.
6
These women have found what many parents seek, flexibility in the balance between parenting desires and work roles. Many employers deny these special family requests, and many people have no choice but to leave work as a result.
But, we can't say these women have it all. They have a flexible, but diminished work life, and a busy parenting role. They get a little of each, and satisfy the desire for both in that regard.
As partners and managers of their own small business, every hour they are away is an hour they are not pushing their business forward or finding new clients. They are working part time in their profession and leaving compensation and business on the table in favor of family time. And their company culture is suffering, as was shown my their only male colleague leaving due to lack of company comradery. They've become a safe haven for women looking to split time with family commitments.
The fact that they have no office and essentially work out of homes also tugs at the legitimacy of this business. They are not an unfunded startup, they are a law firm billing nearly $300/hr. The lack of office may serve their work styles, but it leaves an age old picture of a mother doing extra work out of her home while caring for 3 children running around. That mother just happens to be in the legal profession. This is not a legal professional who takes occasional time to go to school events, it is a stay-at-home mom trying to also have a career at home.
But, we can't say these women have it all. They have a flexible, but diminished work life, and a busy parenting role. They get a little of each, and satisfy the desire for both in that regard.
As partners and managers of their own small business, every hour they are away is an hour they are not pushing their business forward or finding new clients. They are working part time in their profession and leaving compensation and business on the table in favor of family time. And their company culture is suffering, as was shown my their only male colleague leaving due to lack of company comradery. They've become a safe haven for women looking to split time with family commitments.
The fact that they have no office and essentially work out of homes also tugs at the legitimacy of this business. They are not an unfunded startup, they are a law firm billing nearly $300/hr. The lack of office may serve their work styles, but it leaves an age old picture of a mother doing extra work out of her home while caring for 3 children running around. That mother just happens to be in the legal profession. This is not a legal professional who takes occasional time to go to school events, it is a stay-at-home mom trying to also have a career at home.
19
Open your mind. They are doing the work. Maybe not to your liking, but they're doing it.
2
Strip away the gender and the parenting aspects, and there is nothing novel about any of this. These lawyers are self employed, and not tied to traditional brick and mortar overhead. Therefore, they are able to manage their work and non-work lives more effectively at lower cost. From time to time articles are published about the male lawyer wearing khaki pants, a blue shirt, and no tie, practicing in his new "virtual law firm," the sun room of his mini mansion. Same concept; Nothing novel.
6
But you can't strip away the "gender and the parenting aspects," no matter how much you want to.
But even if this were "nothing novel," so what? It's an interesting news piece. How is that so terrible?
But even if this were "nothing novel," so what? It's an interesting news piece. How is that so terrible?
3
Nothing terrible at all. The point I am making is that each of us, whether male or female, have the option to be self employed. If self employment provides greater flexibility over work and non-work hours, then that would be the right choice for that individual. These women choose to parent. Others might choose to play golf, swing dance, or hang glide. I have often said that everyone should be faced with "self employment" for six months- the need to pay the employer and employee portions of FICA and Medicare, to pay one's own medical insurance, to fund one's own retirement, to make rain, to prioritize work flow, to manage all aspects of work and play, and to enjoy the "flexibility" that comes with being your own boss. These women are doing just that. So is every other self employed person.
5
This sounds fine if you are a high flying lawyer working in a liberal, family oriented law firm. What about the other 98% of us? Well, we don't count, do we? This is another situation in which a set of workplace rules applies only to a small and exclusive segment of the working force.
Not one puts a gun to your head and forces you to work for a white-shoe law firm. And before you cry "student loans!", don't forget you can have your loans forgiven if you are willing to do public interest work.
1
I'm sure it'll trickle down to you.
Readers interested in this topic should look to Kaiser Consulting in Columbus, Ohio, which for more than 20 years has successfully accomplished what the law firm in your article is trying to do. It's hard not to be impressed when you click on this link to the firm’s “Our Team” page: http://kaiserconsulting.com/team.html
Meeting the challenge of how to give all employees the opportunity to find whatever balance they seek is an incredibly important issue. It’s heartening to see people who are not ashamed to say that balance doesn’t have to mean “outsourcing” your personal life.
Meeting the challenge of how to give all employees the opportunity to find whatever balance they seek is an incredibly important issue. It’s heartening to see people who are not ashamed to say that balance doesn’t have to mean “outsourcing” your personal life.
1
I worked for ten years at a large law firm, then took a massive pay cut to work part time (3 days per week) at a small law firm run by two men. I now work in house full time close to home. These women's jobs sound way more stressful than any I've had. I don't recall having much of a problem ducking out for things when I wasn't busy. It's the being too busy that gets you, not the facetime, at least after about year five, and barely anyone has kids before that. Also, I'm sure they're still outsourcing. Having a nanny and a housekeeper helps a lot, and it's absolutely necessary if you can't be home full time-- someone has to watch the kids. Being able to go to a few school events and generally being home for some daylight hours is great, but it's not all that novel, and it's not all that different from what lots of attorney moms are doing in various types of practices.
2
I'm glad to hear this accommodation for working mothers, but how about the fathers of their children? Are they doing their 50% of childcare? And no male lawyers in this firm...hmmm. After bearing 4 children for 2 prominent lawyer husbands (not married to both at same time), I was accepted at Emory law school but could not attend because neither lawyer-father was willing to do his share of childcare, and neither provided sufficient child support for me to afford law school and I could not hold a job AND go to law school AND take care of 4 young children. Only when fathers are required to be as responsible for children as mothers will we be able to balance the scales.
7
When women get pickier and choose better fathers for their children, that might happen. Why would anyone allow her offspring to be sired by a disinterested dud? Quite perplexing.
And why would "society" exert itself to "require" what the mothers of the offspring themselves don't even "require." Women's choice in mating partners is the first line of defense and they abrogate it day in, day out.
And why would "society" exert itself to "require" what the mothers of the offspring themselves don't even "require." Women's choice in mating partners is the first line of defense and they abrogate it day in, day out.
6
I don't think fathers should be "required" to do anything. Running the household and raising children should be something men and women agree to before marriage and having children.
Women who place professional advancement above child-rearing will find like-minded husbands.
Women who place professional advancement above child-rearing will find like-minded husbands.
5
Under what theory is child support intended to fund the custodial parent's law school education?
And what are the billings of this woman-owned law firm, about 77% of a male-owned firm? Are we now going to hear about these women lawyers being underpaid for "comparable work?"
1
Did you not read? They have a lower overhead.
1
Relax, you don't have to jump on the defensive bandwagon. The women out and out said that they charge less, specifically to attract clients. They did not once mention that the pay was unfair, or that they could not make more because of gender; only that they chose the price point so that they could manage their firm and time as they saw fit.
Not everything has to be expressed in terms of gender warfare.
Not everything has to be expressed in terms of gender warfare.
2
yes, Cathy, except that should their numbers (low by choice) be aggregated into surveys, etc., the figures will be used as ammunition by the "working moms earn less" faction likely without the qualifier "by choice."
3
They article begins with "women can have it all" and then dissproves the statement till conclusion. No one in the history of the world can have it all its a meaningless concept. These women are deluding themselves and their families. Admit it to your offspring there are choices to be made there are consequences to those choices. It's life
12
Not to mention the NYT keeps trotting out the Helen Gurley Brown phrase and trying to twist it into some reference to parenting when it had nothing to do with "balancing work and family." Brown's idea of "having it all" was luxe living, glamorous occupations, a robust love life, etc. -- not the mommy track.
8
Ms. Simon's and Ms.Geller's lifestyle sounds stressful. I would not want to be at the doctor's office with my kid, proud of the fact that I fired off six work emails when my child finally calmed down. IMO, starting any kind of business is a 24/7 commitment for at least the first 5 years. It's great that these women can allocate their time differently so they can take a few hours off in the afternoon, but my guess is they're up till midnight or 1AM working. The stress level seems high for both women, but running their own law firm may ultimately provide them with the freedom from corporate America they crave.
I don't work in the legal profession, but I have been self employed for a long time. I never had children because I knew running a small business and having a family was more than I could manage. I didn't want to be at the doctor's office trying to simultaneously calm my child and fire off work emails. I knew I couldn't be dedicated to both a family and a business so I had to choose and thus far I've been satisfied.
I know my choice isn't right for everyone, but more Americans need to realistically assess what they can accomplish in a day/week/year before they take on the demands of both a career and family. There are some who can do the go-go-go lifestyle presented in this article and can walk away unscathed at the end of the day, but those individuals are few. Most of us need some time to decompress and I don't see any built-in decompression time for these two women.
I don't work in the legal profession, but I have been self employed for a long time. I never had children because I knew running a small business and having a family was more than I could manage. I didn't want to be at the doctor's office trying to simultaneously calm my child and fire off work emails. I knew I couldn't be dedicated to both a family and a business so I had to choose and thus far I've been satisfied.
I know my choice isn't right for everyone, but more Americans need to realistically assess what they can accomplish in a day/week/year before they take on the demands of both a career and family. There are some who can do the go-go-go lifestyle presented in this article and can walk away unscathed at the end of the day, but those individuals are few. Most of us need some time to decompress and I don't see any built-in decompression time for these two women.
20
Your point is well made, but there really is no job on the planet that should consume someone 18 hours a day, six days a week, much less 24/7. Much of the work that consumes our professional lives is unnecessary -- we do work that is not tied to the bottom line or adds no real value in other contexts. There is a lot of make work in professional work. People are simply not all that efficient and it is seen as terrifically important that people appear to work incredibly hard. But is it really necessary? I could probably cut 15% off of my work hours and still do the same job and get the same amount finished. There are always too many meetings and they last too long. THere are lawyers and small business owners the world over -- not sure most countries have workers putting in the hours of Americans. Did lawyers in the 1950s and 1960s work these kinds of hours? No. When I was a kid our pediatrician's office was in his home. He was a terrific doctor and he didn't have 10 patients lined up.
He was relaxed, competent, knowledgeable. Pretty sure he saw kids 8 hours a day five days a week. A real 40-hour week. Americans should be demanding affordable education, affordable daycare and afforable health care. THen they can start actually having it all without busting their backs.
He was relaxed, competent, knowledgeable. Pretty sure he saw kids 8 hours a day five days a week. A real 40-hour week. Americans should be demanding affordable education, affordable daycare and afforable health care. THen they can start actually having it all without busting their backs.
4
Some people enjoy an intense workload, you know.
2
And some jobs do much good in the world (as opposed to the general harm of putting more kids into it), and are intensely satisfying.
1
I think subsidized and/or low-cost quality marriage counseling could help a great deal. While I recognize single-parenting is common and I have no judgment about it, there's no question that an already difficult task--raising children while working, especially a demanding job--is a lot harder on single parents (and kids) than two-parent households that at least have someone else to rely on and juggle with who is as invested in the quality of the childcare and the child's well being.
My husband and I--both lawyers in NYC--were pretty close to divorce about 4 years ago. We started seeing a therapist and, while 4 years is a long time (we just stopped counseling), it is a pittance compared to our intact and much, much better marriage that neither of us can now imagine wishing to end.
My husband and I--both lawyers in NYC--were pretty close to divorce about 4 years ago. We started seeing a therapist and, while 4 years is a long time (we just stopped counseling), it is a pittance compared to our intact and much, much better marriage that neither of us can now imagine wishing to end.
3
Nice play on the gender-neutral word "partner" in the headline, but the truth is this is about the needs of moms in particular. And for every mom tailoring her schedule to take time for childbearing and rearing, there is someone making up for for absence at work, no matter what the official family-leave policy of the firm. My spouse was That Person for way too many years, working 12-plus-hour days while a mostly absent colleague had baby after baby. (The kicker was that after this fecund woman completed her brood, she jumped ship to be in-house counsel at a private company, a comfortable 9-to-5 job. She had been using the firm as a sort of high-benefit safe harbor, it seems. No one is going to confront an employee or partner for having too few billing hours when that woman has the iron-clad excuse of pregnancy. No one. She milked it.)
So on this Mother's Day weekend you might spare a thought for the non-moms who take up the slack, and their spouses and partners as well. Because I don't think people do think of them, ever.
So on this Mother's Day weekend you might spare a thought for the non-moms who take up the slack, and their spouses and partners as well. Because I don't think people do think of them, ever.
24
The thing about picking up the slack for parents is that most of us are, or will be, parents ourselves. It all comes around.
Nope. Many of us opt not to have kids, ever. And we get punished for that, oddly enough.
1
I said "most" not "many." For most, society returns the favor. There are mutual benefits. Been that way for centuries. Kind of cool, when you think about it.
There are all kinds of models. My ex-wife and I shared our kids 50-50, right down the line. The week off made the week on doable, and I was outsourcing my kids to their mother. She was probably worth what I paid her. There are endless permutations to this having it all thing. If your spouse is expendable, 50-50 might work for you.
1
I have practiced law for 39 years. I started in a mid-sized firm but have been a solo practitioner since 1985. I make a very comfortable living and am considered one of the best in my area. I deliberately chose practice areas with very little court time, no litigation and few hard deadlines. Since 1985, only one client has left me because of my "flexibility." I raised one child as a single mother after a divorce, who is now a 35 year old working mother of 3 with a demanding professional job. Admittedly, I do not make as much money as my peers who are with huge downtown firms, but I have more than I need and no intention of retiring any time soon. You can do it all but you may not be able to make a top salary. I have great work like balance and no regrets.
19
"women-led" law firm, is just another word for anti-male law firm.
2
There is absolutely *nothing* in the article to indicate that.
5
Women-led law firm does not equal anti-male law firm while the reverse can actually be true.
Male chauvinism alive and well.
Male chauvinism alive and well.
1
I am an attorney and a parent, and at one point I worked for a firm led by two male partners who were extremely flexible about my need to work around my kids. They treated all their associates and staff this way, whether male or female. It's really just a question of being open minded about when and where work is completed, as long as the final product serves the client well. This approach works best of course, in firms where frequent court appearances are not necessary.
6
Can we stop the whining as female professionals already? Did all the women before us who were first in their class to graduate as female lawyers, doctors etc. do this so we could graduate and only want to "work part time," or "work from home." For future female lawyers, realize that you are going into a profession, this means you will need to: get clients, keep clients happy and their matters moving forward, bill time, go to court, write briefs, apply for a line of credit, pay your bills, you get the drift. It's not easy, but nobody told you law was going to be easy. Your children won't resent you when they see you put in a full day of work, or work a few hours on the weekend. And no, they don't have to have you at absolutely every performance or soccer game. They will learn from your occasional absence that my mom is a professional, she takes her work seriously, and she is a real role model. Toughen up ladies.
24
My Mom never worked and she still spent less time with us then it seems these women feel they need to do!
4
You can always opt not to have kids, too. The world is overpopulated enough.
1
And this post is precisely why I will encourage exactly none of my children to pursue law. It is a lot of work and education for a ton of stress and not all that much money. Been there, done that, really glad it's over.
I don't know what she is talking about when she says she didn't know any woman partner at a major law firm with kids whose husband was not a stay at home dad. I am a woman who recently retired as a partner at one of the largest firms in the U.S., and while some of my female partners were unmarried or had a husband who stayed home with the kids, the majority of my female partners had children and had husbands or partners who worked as lawyers, doctors and businessmen -- as did I. It wasn't easy; but it wasn't any harder for us than our male partners who had working wives. It is great that she is making a space for working parents who need some flexibility in their lives, but it can be done at big firms too.
10
What does the term "fully present in their children's lives" actually mean? Isn't it just as nebulous as "having it all"? As a veteran of this balancing act (full-time working parent for 17+ years of two teenagers), I have never felt that I have gotten the balance right despite having deliberately taken roles that offered more flexibility, sacrificing climbing the corporate ladder or being considered the superstar performer. It's still hard and I know there are often times when I'm not fully present at work or fully present at home. But I'm doing the best that I can and the kids seem to be okay knowing that I make them my top priority as best that I can while still keeping the other balls in the air that are required to pay the mortgage.
47
Women in the developed countries are far better than other nations in the world( And they still complain sometime for the choices they made). If you want gender equality stop treating you as a different(Fact biologically we are different).I grew up in developing countries(in 80's). Most of the women(1-3 kids) in middle/upper middle/lower income group used to work. The household chores they do: Fill the water (as no continuous water in those countries), Cook the FRSH food(Lunch/breakfast) for whole family, Clean the house do the,laundry, get kids ready(feed them food) and then go to the work on time (if you are late -late mark!). Work 9-5,10-4,11-5 (M-F or M-Sat). Come home and again cook dinner for the family. No washing machines or dishwasher . If you have money you may find Maid for house work. But still there was(is/will)always a strong bond and free time between a mother and kid. Kids were well cared in good families. There was no Winning about work-house balance. Yes, but those women were certainly busy.
I don't want to cry for Work/life balance because I have seen women work harder( with less facilities) in other part of the World without WHINING. You can't get everything-face the choices you make!
I don't want to cry for Work/life balance because I have seen women work harder( with less facilities) in other part of the World without WHINING. You can't get everything-face the choices you make!
Fathers?
I am a bit baffled as to why there is no look at what it's like for kids when the father is not meeting the mother halfway on the uncompensated family work, including meeting the child's needs.
What is it like for a kid to have a mother that is trying to do the father's half of this? Does that even work?
I am a bit baffled as to why there is no look at what it's like for kids when the father is not meeting the mother halfway on the uncompensated family work, including meeting the child's needs.
What is it like for a kid to have a mother that is trying to do the father's half of this? Does that even work?
12
Oh yeah, I was also "a bit baffled" about why my children's father was not meeting their mother halfway.
Of course it works.
Why don't you ask the millions of women who are single/divorced/unmarried heads of households, often not by choice, but necessity?
By the way, what, exactly, is the father's half? Whose rules are we following?
Of course it works.
Why don't you ask the millions of women who are single/divorced/unmarried heads of households, often not by choice, but necessity?
By the way, what, exactly, is the father's half? Whose rules are we following?
3
Denverite: It has had to work for decades. Would it be better for the child to have two active, loving, engaged parents who split the "work" of child care (even with nannies, there is still parental care, you know)? Yes. Does it often happen? More now than 40 years ago, yes, but still, it's minimal. So women still have to step into several pairs of shoes.
3
Most children in such arrangements probably see what the mother sees: he's contributing in ways that aren't measured as is "uncompensated family work."
This was the type of firm I needed 21 years ago and it just wasn't there. I did not have the resources to go out on my own at that time. After a series of firms I worked part-time for 12 years for my husbands firm since it was the only flex time job I could get. Eventually the firm folded and needing affordable health insurance I found a non legal job that made use of my lawyer skills. Its a shame that so many excellent women lawyers or other professionals are always forced to choose between family and career. Flexibility should be built in to the job. If you get your work done and your clients are satisfied it should not matter when or where you work- From the the park, in the office or home with a sick kid.
9
Some of the comments make me want to check the calendar. 2015? Yes. Wow.
Those who are concerned about an undue burden for people with no children in this type of workplace- this firm is explicitly crafted to be family friendly. You can join another one which is not as family directed. I just hope you don't ever get sick or have a sick family member, because your coworkers would feel it is unfair to pick up the slack for you. So what that you have a broken hand/dying sibling. It not FAIR for others to pick up your slack. Suck it up!
Or you could join a family friendly firm and use the flexibility for own interests- hobby, volunteer, etc.
As to those who say they are not really present with their kids. You don't need to be engaged 24/7. Kids need to learn independence, resilience, and that yes, parents sometimes have jobs or chores. Would there be the same kind of criticism if it was a picture of a mom grocery shopping with a child? Look- she is shortchanging both the grocery store and her child!!
I think what these people do is amazing and wish them great success.
Those who are concerned about an undue burden for people with no children in this type of workplace- this firm is explicitly crafted to be family friendly. You can join another one which is not as family directed. I just hope you don't ever get sick or have a sick family member, because your coworkers would feel it is unfair to pick up the slack for you. So what that you have a broken hand/dying sibling. It not FAIR for others to pick up your slack. Suck it up!
Or you could join a family friendly firm and use the flexibility for own interests- hobby, volunteer, etc.
As to those who say they are not really present with their kids. You don't need to be engaged 24/7. Kids need to learn independence, resilience, and that yes, parents sometimes have jobs or chores. Would there be the same kind of criticism if it was a picture of a mom grocery shopping with a child? Look- she is shortchanging both the grocery store and her child!!
I think what these people do is amazing and wish them great success.
29
I would point out that broken hands and dying siblings are involuntary as compared to parenthood, which is voluntary.
Also that people who demand parenting-related breaks and perks in the workplace also have illness, accident and ill family members and they want slack cut for that too, as well as for their own voluntary lifestyle choices.
The net is that some workers are more dedicated, by choice, to their careers, and others are not -- again by choice. For the latter to claim the moral high ground in the workplace is ridiculous.
Also that people who demand parenting-related breaks and perks in the workplace also have illness, accident and ill family members and they want slack cut for that too, as well as for their own voluntary lifestyle choices.
The net is that some workers are more dedicated, by choice, to their careers, and others are not -- again by choice. For the latter to claim the moral high ground in the workplace is ridiculous.
10
What those commenters are saying is that the same flexibility is not extended to non-parents; if it were, they would not have a complaint. But if it were, who is going to take up the slack then? Everyone would have to at times, if everyone is to be free to take time off. Are parents willing to take on extra work when their childless co-workers have other things to do? I doubt it. Extra work means extra hours, exactly what they can't do.
7
I have a full time practice as a partner in a mid-size firm. I'm amazed at the hostility of some these comments toward working women in general, especially all the commentary claiming that the photo "says it all" and claiming clients must be getting poor work. Come on people! There is no other reason a little kid could be poking along and need some urging? It must be because his evil mother has no time for him? And everyone's time is finite. It doesn't matter if you're juggling multiple clients or other things. My kids are adolescents now, arguably an even higher needs age. The homework! The social dramas. But, I'm devoted to them. I'm devoted to my clients too. I deliver excellent work. I love my job and my family, just like most of my male colleagues, who, it must be said, certainly make time for their own families or other priorities. Think your male lawyer is not heading out the door to see his kid's game (or even coach it?). Some people seem to only see a problem when women are practicing law and making choices. (.2 ranting on nyt)
60
"I love my job and my family,…" I couldn't help but notice you placed your job first, not your family following the word "love."
Hmmm, this is interesting
"The Geller Law Group is determined to show that parents can nurture their professional ambitions while being fully present in their children’s lives."
It seems to me that the Gellar Law Group needs to forget about law and sell this Time Creation Machine! Unless they have such a thing it's literally impossible to have a job and be fully present in a child's life. To say it can be accomplished is saying there is no additional value to a full-time parent being fully present in their child's life, which is nonsense.
"The Geller Law Group is determined to show that parents can nurture their professional ambitions while being fully present in their children’s lives."
It seems to me that the Gellar Law Group needs to forget about law and sell this Time Creation Machine! Unless they have such a thing it's literally impossible to have a job and be fully present in a child's life. To say it can be accomplished is saying there is no additional value to a full-time parent being fully present in their child's life, which is nonsense.
4
You might want to check the time-use statistics that are out there. Working women now spend MORE hours with their children than stay-at-home mothers did 30 years ago. Those children 30 years ago then must not have had mothers who were "fully present" in spite of not having paid employment, so basically, at no time in history have children been raised by "fully present" mothers. There is no historical precedent for a parent who doesn't have to engage in hard daily labor in the home (as home economics was hard labor 100 years ago) and could just play with their kids all day. There's no reason to think that actually is healthier for children than a working mother (something mothers have historically always done, either in the home or outside it).
5
" it's literally impossible to have a job and be fully present in a child's life"
Millions of children with working parents would disagree with you. My parents both worked when I was growing up, and they were certainly fully present in my life. (And were wonderful parents, I might add).
Also, Jane Mars is 100% correct-- time-use studies do indeed show that mothers actually spend more time with their kids now than 50+ years ago. In my grandmothers' day, you sent the kids out to play and they largely entertained themselves until it was time for dinner. There wasn't that much one-on-one interaction between parents and children (especially if you had a large family, which was more common back then).
Millions of children with working parents would disagree with you. My parents both worked when I was growing up, and they were certainly fully present in my life. (And were wonderful parents, I might add).
Also, Jane Mars is 100% correct-- time-use studies do indeed show that mothers actually spend more time with their kids now than 50+ years ago. In my grandmothers' day, you sent the kids out to play and they largely entertained themselves until it was time for dinner. There wasn't that much one-on-one interaction between parents and children (especially if you had a large family, which was more common back then).
4
I have done both. Those who work full-time and think they are fully present are kidding themselves, for the most part and those who bow out and think there's no penalty are also kidding themselves, for the most part. You cannot be two places at once, unfortunately.
I think this is great - but the central point of the article is this is a voluntary arrangement - not forced by government. You want to set up your business this way you are free to do so. We don't need more regulations forcing businesses to operate this way.
2
While Silicon Valley has been cited by the NYT for its misogynistic tendencies, law firms are rarely better. With a focus on quantity of work rather than quality of work, there is often little reason for firms to give much time to people that can't bill as much and as long as possible. The Law Society of Upper Canada (Ontario, Canada) has been reporting on this issue for years, with little traction for the two thirds of women in Ontario that leave the Bar within their first 5 years.
My guess is that the reform of law from a per hour fee for service to a flat rate system will be a paradigm shift for those seeking a better work/life balance. Better technology and the proliferation of shared workspaces should also help to bring down the ridiculous overheads of many firms as well. Good on Ms. Geller and Ms. Simon on their trailblazing efforts.
My guess is that the reform of law from a per hour fee for service to a flat rate system will be a paradigm shift for those seeking a better work/life balance. Better technology and the proliferation of shared workspaces should also help to bring down the ridiculous overheads of many firms as well. Good on Ms. Geller and Ms. Simon on their trailblazing efforts.
3
After working in New York at several of the largest and most successful law firms in the country for many years -- I have mixed feelings on this piece. On the one hand, I feel great that these women have formed a business model that works for them, and their kids. On the other, I see the staggeringly different salary numbers ($125K) that these highly educated professionals earn in relation to peers at other firms. Bear in mind that big firms pay associates with no work experience 160K to start. And finally, as much as I love these women - the impression I come away with is that the frantic pace hasn't stopped at all - they just control a tiny bit more of it. The description of using flex office space is entirely unnerving and makes me wonder where in heck my confidential client files might be sitting - in a trunk somewhere on their way to a child's baseball game?
9
Honestly, I attribute the frantic feel to the author's writing, which I found mildly ignorant at best. I found the repeated use of Ms. to be insulting, and he framed things like traffic - which every parent picking up their kid would have to deal with - in a way that made it seem unique to this parent.
And the fact is, they AREN'T a big firm - so it isn't fair comparison to a group of 6. Furthermore, this firm is picking up experienced professionals from large firms, who have already made (and hopefully saved/invested) that kind of money, these aren't recent grads looking for the best job to get their loans off of their backs.
The question is - are you surprised hearing that this particular small group of law professionals, who work in the areas outlined in the article, are making what they do?
And the fact is, they AREN'T a big firm - so it isn't fair comparison to a group of 6. Furthermore, this firm is picking up experienced professionals from large firms, who have already made (and hopefully saved/invested) that kind of money, these aren't recent grads looking for the best job to get their loans off of their backs.
The question is - are you surprised hearing that this particular small group of law professionals, who work in the areas outlined in the article, are making what they do?
1
That's why they're paying $300 rather than $850 per hour.
After 30 years in the profession I make far less than the $160K those first-year associates make. I love my job and have no regrets for not going for the "brass ring."
1
Men want children but they don't want to give the necessary support to the women who produce and care for them -- not in the workplace, at any rate. They want the family and they want the superman job both, and no one criticizes them for it. When women want the superwoman job and the family, they are criticized for it, because they take on the necessary child rearing work and the real cost of raising a family is seen up front. Our whole society does not want to acknowledge this cost, unlike most other advanced Western countries, where child-caring has societal (governmental) support in the interest of better lives all around.
8
Or maybe society has taken a look at the costs and realized they vastly outweigh the benefits on a planet teeming with 7 billion humans, headed to 11 billion before long (per the WHO.)
2
When I graduated from graduate school with both architecture and engineering schools, in the early 80's I too dreamed of having it all. I didn't realize how good I had it at my first engineering / contracting job only working 50-60 hrs a week. I was so naive and didn't like the call so and so and let him know what so and so bid ( aka bid rigging). This was mild at this company in comparison to what I saw later, but you are taught in school it is not Kosher.
Next company expected 80 hrs a week of face time. I could get my work done in less than 60 because I didn't waste my time chatting about SEC football and NASCAR like the guys did after hours. When I got up one afternoon at 6:30 to leave one of the guys said where are you going. My response was I am done with my work, I have to make it to the dry cleaner by 7:00 to pickup my dry cleaning, I do not have a wife to do it.
... Biggest problem for professional women, is why should we have to support stay at home husbands. I only ever wanted a partner. I divorced both the fathers of my children because they thought they were going to mooch off me. Without taking care of the children or the house. I never agreed to a man sitting at home. I could hire a maid, I could hire a nanny. I still expect a man to go out and get a job, even if he makes 1/2 of what I do. If he doesn't work in a career I have no sexual desire for him.
Next company expected 80 hrs a week of face time. I could get my work done in less than 60 because I didn't waste my time chatting about SEC football and NASCAR like the guys did after hours. When I got up one afternoon at 6:30 to leave one of the guys said where are you going. My response was I am done with my work, I have to make it to the dry cleaner by 7:00 to pickup my dry cleaning, I do not have a wife to do it.
... Biggest problem for professional women, is why should we have to support stay at home husbands. I only ever wanted a partner. I divorced both the fathers of my children because they thought they were going to mooch off me. Without taking care of the children or the house. I never agreed to a man sitting at home. I could hire a maid, I could hire a nanny. I still expect a man to go out and get a job, even if he makes 1/2 of what I do. If he doesn't work in a career I have no sexual desire for him.
3
Mmm, for the same reasons that professional men support stay-at-home wives, maybe?
No profession demands more of its workers than the full time practice of law, at least in contrast to other services industries. The work is not physically and medically taxing if you were to compare it to someone who worked, say, as an oil rig roustabout, a bus driver, or a sandhog, but you act at the mercy of another's goals, schedules, financial risks, even their illnesses.
For these reasons, in the private sector, at least, Ms. Geller and Simon's goals are likely to be met by employing precisely the worklplace model they've created.
There are those exceptional lawyers and exceptional law firms, most of them small, traditional, and outside the urban centers, who really do enjoy and respect their colleagues, where families and colleagues are given similar or even identical priority with the goals and aspirations of clients. Even that tolerance goes only a short distance. When a judge or a client calls, wanting to see the lawyer, the lawyer better be there, irrespective of other demands.
A first year law school professor told us virtually every class, "the law is a jealous mistress". It is one of the principles to which I have found no exceptions in over 40 years of practice, although I have worked hard to assiduously to carve out a way to be with my wife and to attend my children's ball games and symphony concerts, and go to the movies with them. While the costs that often attend these choices are unavoidable, over a lifetime the rewards justify the expenditures.
For these reasons, in the private sector, at least, Ms. Geller and Simon's goals are likely to be met by employing precisely the worklplace model they've created.
There are those exceptional lawyers and exceptional law firms, most of them small, traditional, and outside the urban centers, who really do enjoy and respect their colleagues, where families and colleagues are given similar or even identical priority with the goals and aspirations of clients. Even that tolerance goes only a short distance. When a judge or a client calls, wanting to see the lawyer, the lawyer better be there, irrespective of other demands.
A first year law school professor told us virtually every class, "the law is a jealous mistress". It is one of the principles to which I have found no exceptions in over 40 years of practice, although I have worked hard to assiduously to carve out a way to be with my wife and to attend my children's ball games and symphony concerts, and go to the movies with them. While the costs that often attend these choices are unavoidable, over a lifetime the rewards justify the expenditures.
2
Though I don't agree with your calculus at the end, I do agree that being an attorney (a litigator especially) is the most demanding of the service professions. Period. I, for one, couldn't handle it and left. I have enormous respect for those who stick it out. It is so difficult.
1
Not a single word in this article about the sperm donors in these women's lives.
11
Indeed!
I think this is a great thing for these lawyers and their kids. I wish I had done this when my kids were young. But then I had partners who would have frowned on bringing one's kids to work. Now thankfully, as a solo practitioner, I bring my beautiful bloodhound Kyno with me to the office every day save those during which I must take a deposition or meet with a client too stodgy to appreciate my goofy-looking lady-friend Kyno.
Having Kyno with me while working has been a truly mutually beneficial arrangement: she doesn't have to spend the day all alone in my backyard; as for me, her presence helps keep calm and centered in a sometimes very stressful environment. For example, when I have to deal with an opposing counsel who acts like a jerk, one look at Kyno's slobbery countenance is all that's needed to make me smile or laugh, and thereby refocus on the work at hand. I suspect lawyers and others who bring their kids to work derive similar benefits. Of course if dogs or children unintentionally inflict more emotional distress at work than they reduce, or they otherwise get in the way of doing the job required in a proper manner, ethical and fiduciary obligations mandate keeping the dog or child at home. And by "proper manner" I mean the work one is hired to do is performed thoroughly, with no shortcuts or superficiality in the work product. But it all boils down to the adaptability of the child or dog (or cat, python, gerbil, goldfish or other pet) to the workplace.
Having Kyno with me while working has been a truly mutually beneficial arrangement: she doesn't have to spend the day all alone in my backyard; as for me, her presence helps keep calm and centered in a sometimes very stressful environment. For example, when I have to deal with an opposing counsel who acts like a jerk, one look at Kyno's slobbery countenance is all that's needed to make me smile or laugh, and thereby refocus on the work at hand. I suspect lawyers and others who bring their kids to work derive similar benefits. Of course if dogs or children unintentionally inflict more emotional distress at work than they reduce, or they otherwise get in the way of doing the job required in a proper manner, ethical and fiduciary obligations mandate keeping the dog or child at home. And by "proper manner" I mean the work one is hired to do is performed thoroughly, with no shortcuts or superficiality in the work product. But it all boils down to the adaptability of the child or dog (or cat, python, gerbil, goldfish or other pet) to the workplace.
2
Maybe, every workplace should have a nursery or a playroom where the parents could leave their kids until the workday is done. If the kids are in school perhaps, they could be bused back to these playrooms. Then you have a workforce whose efficiency will rise besides the increased loyalty factor to the firm. This arrangement would be at a very low cost to the firm. Of course, the best solution would be to have a longer school day when after a typical day the kids are allowed to play like kids and also get their homework done. And if the teachers protest, they can be told that taking care of kids after school can be done by two or three teachers at a time, all of them taking turns just like Doctors and Nurses who take turns at taking calls. ( FYI - Doctors don't get paid extre and the Nurses are paid 11/2 times their wages as overtime ).
1
I loved this article, kudos to this law firm.
What precisely did I love? These mature, intelligent people have figured out how to make the trade-offs; have developed an economical model that works. They have made trade-offs that work for them. They have incomes, their children have involved, engaged parents. What is heroic is that they are not asking anyone else to change, not asking for freebies, not asking for accommodations. not asking for a special status, not stimulating other people's guilt into giving them something for free. They are doing it all on their own, and are self-sufficient. Bravo.
It inspired me, and hope it does to some who want the village to take care of their children while they are trying to maximize on their self-focused goals.
Kalidan
What precisely did I love? These mature, intelligent people have figured out how to make the trade-offs; have developed an economical model that works. They have made trade-offs that work for them. They have incomes, their children have involved, engaged parents. What is heroic is that they are not asking anyone else to change, not asking for freebies, not asking for accommodations. not asking for a special status, not stimulating other people's guilt into giving them something for free. They are doing it all on their own, and are self-sufficient. Bravo.
It inspired me, and hope it does to some who want the village to take care of their children while they are trying to maximize on their self-focused goals.
Kalidan
2
"She takes home roughly half the $250,000 to $300,000 she estimates she would earn at a large firm..."
I'm glad these women found the balance they're looking for but isn't this just an admission that you either dedicate yourself to your work, or spend more time with your family and settle for less?
I'm glad these women found the balance they're looking for but isn't this just an admission that you either dedicate yourself to your work, or spend more time with your family and settle for less?
5
"Dedicating yourself to your work" is not the same as making more money. Someone might work less hours or have less clients but give every one of those projects or clients 110%. I could even argue the reverse: taking on too many clients/ projects in order to make more money but only giving 50%.
There's research supporting results-oriented work environments (i.e. measuring effectiveness via say client outcomes/ satisfaction) instead of time/ face-to-face oriented work environments (i.e. where time put in is valued over actual results). People need to get off these ladies' backs -- ultimately if it works for them and their clients, that's all that matters.
There's research supporting results-oriented work environments (i.e. measuring effectiveness via say client outcomes/ satisfaction) instead of time/ face-to-face oriented work environments (i.e. where time put in is valued over actual results). People need to get off these ladies' backs -- ultimately if it works for them and their clients, that's all that matters.
1
Curiously, does the only man on their staff (from their website) also get the same courtesy to pick up his children?
The larger issue is the 'woman can have it all, really!' mentality which has been sown through our culture. As mentioned here, a punishing 50% loss in income is the market's way of saying, no, you really can't, but you can have time for your family. I applaud the idea, but, if I am a large client looking to hire a firm, would a family-first, kids-friendly avant garde firm appeal to me? Law is a crushing profession with unforgiving hours, surely everyone on staff knew the rules of the game before signing up?
The larger issue is the 'woman can have it all, really!' mentality which has been sown through our culture. As mentioned here, a punishing 50% loss in income is the market's way of saying, no, you really can't, but you can have time for your family. I applaud the idea, but, if I am a large client looking to hire a firm, would a family-first, kids-friendly avant garde firm appeal to me? Law is a crushing profession with unforgiving hours, surely everyone on staff knew the rules of the game before signing up?
7
I look forward to a follow-up on how the business model is working, in a couple of years.
There are no easy answers to women trying to have it all. As a lawyer, wife and mother myself, I have left private practice after many years (where I practiced at a large law firm doing fast-paced transactional work) and have gone in-house. I have long outsourced much of my personal life. While I am now much happier and more professionally fulfilled, my life may not serve as a good role-model for younger women. But that's okay! Everyone has to figure out what works for themselves. And it may take a few (mis)steps along the way to figure that out. Again, that's okay!
2
so, summed up, you have to be a Lawyer or work for Google to have a job that caters to being a Mother. If your talking any other job, the system is basically telling you not to replicate yourself. 3cheers for Essure Procedure!
I recently started working for a women-owned consulting firm where most women have families, and about half of us work slightly less than 100%. I think we are at least as productive as a company where everyone works 40 hours a week from 9-6pm. Though I don't have children myself, I was attracted to the flexibility and respect for each other's lives that a women-owned and female-dominated company offers. We all block off personal time on our calendars at many random times of the day, and have great respect for each other's schedules - there are no requests for, "is it possible to join this call at 4pm?" if someone's calendar is blocked off.
This respect greatly reduces stress levels, as you don't have to work as hard to "protect" your personal time. In turn, people work at hours when they can be most productive, and we don't have unnecessary meetings.
Also, as someone without children who has many non-work interests, it was often hard in a "traditional" company to make time for, say, a yoga class, which people don't see as valuable as picking your kids up from school. But everyone's non-work time is equally valuable, and allowing employees to take that time will ultimately lead to happier and more productive workers, and a better bottom line.
If more "traditional" companies could simply come to respect people's non-traditional schedules a bit more, the juggling would be a lot easier!
This respect greatly reduces stress levels, as you don't have to work as hard to "protect" your personal time. In turn, people work at hours when they can be most productive, and we don't have unnecessary meetings.
Also, as someone without children who has many non-work interests, it was often hard in a "traditional" company to make time for, say, a yoga class, which people don't see as valuable as picking your kids up from school. But everyone's non-work time is equally valuable, and allowing employees to take that time will ultimately lead to happier and more productive workers, and a better bottom line.
If more "traditional" companies could simply come to respect people's non-traditional schedules a bit more, the juggling would be a lot easier!
9
That sound absolutely horrific: "She recently took all three children to the doctor. “I had five minutes once Emily calmed down,” Ms. Geller said, thrilled to have a productive window during the chaos of the annual checkup. “I sent six emails.”"
How can you present, patient, attentive to 3 small children while you think about how to answer emails and squeeze in phone calls with clients.
Women are not machines!
The best advice I ever got: "You can have it all -- but not all at once."
I am very grateful to have left my career for 5 years to concentrate on raising my daughter and have returned to my career after the hiatus. I kept a foot in my career through occasional freelance jobs and teaching which made it easier to find a new opportunity after the 5 years, as my network was still intact.
How can you present, patient, attentive to 3 small children while you think about how to answer emails and squeeze in phone calls with clients.
Women are not machines!
The best advice I ever got: "You can have it all -- but not all at once."
I am very grateful to have left my career for 5 years to concentrate on raising my daughter and have returned to my career after the hiatus. I kept a foot in my career through occasional freelance jobs and teaching which made it easier to find a new opportunity after the 5 years, as my network was still intact.
5
The fact that this is a news story is disheartening. What are we to take from this...that women still see themselves as primary caregivers? That firms must be women-led in order to be truly family-friendly? So long as our society continues to believe this to be so, so long as advertising plays along and gears their household/family ads to women, and so long as TV and film make dads the butt of jokes ('they are just another child for the mom to take care of' etc.) young boys and girls will internalize these messages and act accordingly as grownups. There is no reason why men can't be just as effective and important parents in their childrens' lives, and many men demonstrate that each and every day. We need to stop considering such men an aberration..
4
I agree - I am a full-time attorney and my husband is home 4 days a week with my kids. Yesterday someone sent me a picture of him & my son at "Mommy & Me" (its time they come up with a new name for that!) and he was on the floor playing with him, while the moms in the background were chatting with each other and checking their phones. I have more flexibility since I am in a smaller firm so often go to school events & group playdates - most of the time, the men are more engaged with their children than the stay at home moms. A major problem is there is not nearly enough support in the community for him as a stay at home dad. People contact me to set up playdates and I arrange all of the ride-sharing, etc. because people seem "uncomfortable" dealing directly with him. I know other stay at home dads who feel the same way.
I do temp legal work as an attorney. I never know where I'm going to be from one week to the next and some agencies keep you on call, telling you to go home after you have arrived at a manhattan project site (unpaid). I am switching to becoming a teacher because last year for several months, I didn't see my five year old child for three or four days straight because she was sleeping when I left the house and sleeping when I got home. I have no control over my schedule whatsoever. I have also had the misfortune of dealing with many law firms while working as a temp, and most are most unhelpful when I ask if I can come in early, either 7 am or 8 am, so I can try to leave work at a normal time and spend time with my child in the late afternoons, to help with homework or eat dinner. The legal profession is an appalling profession for working mothers, especially mothers of small children. Many, many abuses by legal employers who know how to get rid of employees in a way that appears without discrimination, when in fact the sheer numbers of women not becoming partners shows how ingrained that discrimination in fact is.
5
"The legal profession is an appalling profession for working mothers, especially mothers of small children. "
If that's the case, why choose the profession if you are determined to make childbearing a priority? Adjust to reality, don't expect reality to adjust to accommodate your personal whims.
If that's the case, why choose the profession if you are determined to make childbearing a priority? Adjust to reality, don't expect reality to adjust to accommodate your personal whims.
1
Did you not know this before you chose this profession?
Most women do not make partner because they did not bill the hours and, if they put their personal life before their careers, they were not good candidates for partnership.
There is nothing more to it than that, as the same rules apply to men, but more men than women will sacrifice everything to reach the top.
Law has bee and always will be a demanding and cutthroat profession for people who like to work hard and make a lot of money. It is certainly not for me, which is why I did not chose it, but if I had, I would not whine that life is not fair.
Most women do not make partner because they did not bill the hours and, if they put their personal life before their careers, they were not good candidates for partnership.
There is nothing more to it than that, as the same rules apply to men, but more men than women will sacrifice everything to reach the top.
Law has bee and always will be a demanding and cutthroat profession for people who like to work hard and make a lot of money. It is certainly not for me, which is why I did not chose it, but if I had, I would not whine that life is not fair.
Why can't men seek this life too? I did, so my wife and I could have Wednesdays off. I make perhaps half as much as I used to, but I work about 80% less by choice, I still have wonderful clients who give me very challenging commercial real estate work, and my commute is approximately 150 feet to my downstairs office.
Could I be making a million dollars a year? Probably. But to what end? I get to spend time with family, help with care for my grandchild with cancer, travel when possible (I can work from anywhere in the world with an Internet connection), and enjoy a little.
In other words, life is short, so go get one whole you still can.
Could I be making a million dollars a year? Probably. But to what end? I get to spend time with family, help with care for my grandchild with cancer, travel when possible (I can work from anywhere in the world with an Internet connection), and enjoy a little.
In other words, life is short, so go get one whole you still can.
115
"Why can't men seek this life too?"
Perhaps because so many men are trying to out-macho each other
in meanness.
Perhaps because so many men are trying to out-macho each other
in meanness.
These attorneys have used creativity and flexibility to make their professional endeavor work for them, their families and their clients. The nontraditional office space and virtual office, the lower fees (I'm sure their clients appreciate that), the flexible work schedules. They may not make the same money they'd bring it at a larger firm, but the trade-off is worth it. More American businesses should follow suit so they can have engaged, talented women contributing to their growth.
40
The real question is why clients are so eager to support the outrageous billable hourly rates, millionaire partners and extreme overhead of large law firms, when they could save their companies' money and probably get equally good service from a firm like this.
Most of us must choose between the demands of home (kids, parents, fixing the fence, etc.) and those of work. One always takes a hit. But there are places in the world -- a few in this country -- where the job makes room for the person. Sadly, that is not generally the American corporatist experience.
6
In my house, it's the house that gets left behind. I do my work and play with my son...and eventually get the dishes washed and the clothes sorted.
1
As a partner at a law firm and a mom, I have crafted work into my life in such a way that I am very present in my children's lives. Fortunately I have talented associates and paralegals that handle much of my work that I closely review and oversee, while I keep direct contact with my clients, making sure their needs are met. Nonetheless, I sometimes sense annoyance by others that I am not in the office as much as they may be. I’ve learned to let it go. My clients are well taken care of, receive an excellent work product and tend to be extremely satisfied. My trade off is that I earn significantly less than if I handled more matters and put in more hours, but to me, being present in my children’s lives, is more important than maximizing professional and financial "success".
Everyone makes his or her own choices. Having put-in significant time earlier in my career, I thank goodness every day that my firm structure, allows me to make the choices I make now. As my children get older, no doubt, my choices will change.
I am pleased for Ms. Simon and Ms. Geller that they have been able to craft a situation that works for them. Most parents do their best to do it all: be present in their children’s lives and keep a roof over everyone's head, food on the table, etc. Unfortunately, we are living through at time where most people earn less, have less governmental support and then are demonized for the difficult choices they make.
Everyone makes his or her own choices. Having put-in significant time earlier in my career, I thank goodness every day that my firm structure, allows me to make the choices I make now. As my children get older, no doubt, my choices will change.
I am pleased for Ms. Simon and Ms. Geller that they have been able to craft a situation that works for them. Most parents do their best to do it all: be present in their children’s lives and keep a roof over everyone's head, food on the table, etc. Unfortunately, we are living through at time where most people earn less, have less governmental support and then are demonized for the difficult choices they make.
25
Do the talented associates and paralegals that enable your life have those choices?
5
'...My clients are well taken care of...'
By your associates and paralegals.
By your associates and paralegals.
2
If this doesn't illustrate, clearly, that the US lags far behind in taking care of the family, I don't know what does. We need good, affordable child care, universal health care, and realistic family leave policies. No woman or man should have to make a choice between having and raising a child and making a living (notice I did not say "having a career" - that, in America, would be WAY too much to ask, unfortunately). The fact that some have become comfortable with that is mind-boggling. And sad.
6
Did you miss the part where the owners themselves of this "family friendly" company have found it prohibitive to provide more than a short, partially paid maternity leave?
If they are motivated to do so, and that's the best they can come up with when keeping the needs of the company and other workers in mind, then perhaps it's time to realize that choosing to become a parent is incompatible with choosing certain careers, at least while the children are very young.
Trying to beat a square peg into a round hole just because some women demand to be fulfilled on all fronts -- reproduction, finances, career -- no matter how unrealistic that is, and no matter whose time/money have to be tapped to achieve it -- is not the responsibility of employers or fellow citizens. Take responsibility for your own choices and the resulting sacrifices and tradeoffs.
If they are motivated to do so, and that's the best they can come up with when keeping the needs of the company and other workers in mind, then perhaps it's time to realize that choosing to become a parent is incompatible with choosing certain careers, at least while the children are very young.
Trying to beat a square peg into a round hole just because some women demand to be fulfilled on all fronts -- reproduction, finances, career -- no matter how unrealistic that is, and no matter whose time/money have to be tapped to achieve it -- is not the responsibility of employers or fellow citizens. Take responsibility for your own choices and the resulting sacrifices and tradeoffs.
1
How does this article illustrate any of the things you cite?
The people profiled in this article make more than enough to afford child care. None of them are forced with the choice between having and raising a child and making a living.
The people profiled in this article make more than enough to afford child care. None of them are forced with the choice between having and raising a child and making a living.
“Once he sees me, I can’t leave,” she said. “I’m going to have a sugared-up kid.”
How is it that the world has made it this far without a mother being with their child in school. Once he sees me I can't leave??? Rhetorical question: Who's in charge? This article raises much more important issues than a business that is parent friendly, seriously.
How is it that the world has made it this far without a mother being with their child in school. Once he sees me I can't leave??? Rhetorical question: Who's in charge? This article raises much more important issues than a business that is parent friendly, seriously.
6
When you push a living person out of your body, you end up not wanting to see this person cry a lot...
My son and two daughters all cried when they got "pushed out." They still cry when when we have to say good-bye. The youngest (30 yrs. old) is about to have a baby. My informed guess is that she will be able understand when it's time to say good-bye, tears and all.
Bravo! You don't need permission to "have it all." TAKE IT ALL! Here's an anthem suggestion for you: Fleetwood Mac's "Go Your Own Way."
As a father of two adult, 30-something daughters, I appreciate your plight. Enjoy, savor your family life. It all passes by too fleetingly.
As a father of two adult, 30-something daughters, I appreciate your plight. Enjoy, savor your family life. It all passes by too fleetingly.
4
60-70 hours a week for $125k-$150k a year is not competitive with *many* other white-collar jobs that don't carry with them a crushing educational debt. Not exactly getting the appeal.
31
Not to mention the stressful nature of the work.
Is she not working the same crushing amount of hours, this time for half the money? Am I missing something?
1
I started law practice at a big NY law firm in 1980, working the typical 70-hour workweek for 6 years. Boy, did I learn a lot! Depositions, motions, preliminary injunctions, trials, appeals, mentoring by the very best in the profession. Did I mention that I was married, had one child and another on the way? No, I did not. They might as well have been on Mars.
On Saturday afternoons in the coffee room, I would hear about the latest new-fangled technology which enabled partners to "have dinner" with their families from the office, via speakerphone. And bragging rights over who had gone the longest without sitting down, in person, with their wife and kids around the kitchen table. Me? I had married my wife, not the firm, so after due deliberation having been had, I voted with my feet, and left to work elsewhere, where I could be an integral part of the lives of our growing family.
Living a monastic existence at the office works for some people, but don't kid yourself: ultimately it is a choice, not a necessity. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't been there. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor Abraham Lincoln cut themselves off from the rest of humanity to practice law. After 35 years in this game, when I come across someone who has, the first thing I wonder is what other areas of their thinking are also suspect.
On Saturday afternoons in the coffee room, I would hear about the latest new-fangled technology which enabled partners to "have dinner" with their families from the office, via speakerphone. And bragging rights over who had gone the longest without sitting down, in person, with their wife and kids around the kitchen table. Me? I had married my wife, not the firm, so after due deliberation having been had, I voted with my feet, and left to work elsewhere, where I could be an integral part of the lives of our growing family.
Living a monastic existence at the office works for some people, but don't kid yourself: ultimately it is a choice, not a necessity. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't been there. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor Abraham Lincoln cut themselves off from the rest of humanity to practice law. After 35 years in this game, when I come across someone who has, the first thing I wonder is what other areas of their thinking are also suspect.
92
"After 35 years in this game, when I come across someone who has, the first thing I wonder is what other areas of their thinking are also suspect."
Well said. You were wise beyond your years when you voted with your feet.
Well said. You were wise beyond your years when you voted with your feet.
I'm an attorney and this article leaves me to wonder what kind of law they practice and whether or not it involves any deadlines or court appearances. If I want to leave the office a little early to take the dog for a walk in the park, or stay home sick when I have a head cold, for that matter, I have to worry about missing court or not making it to the jail to visit clients. Parents in my office occasionally miss work for school and childcare obligations and the rest of us are happy to pitch in where we can, but for the most part, you need to be in the office from 8-5 or important work goes undone and actual people suffer as a result. Maybe the difference is that the Gellar firm has clients that pay $280/hour whereas my clients are indigent. Maybe the moral is that rich folks get the best of everything, including happy attorneys who get to eat noodles and watch superheroes with their kids while poor mentally ill drug addicts get a lawyer who coughs her way through an interview because she's too busy to call in sick. God bless America.
20
You must have picked the wrong are of law. I'm a tax attorney, and a partner in big law. I work part time, from home whenever i want. My clients and work tend not to be urgent overnight type of projects. My small team also all work from home all the time (among them, the father of a young child, the mother of 2 young kids, and the mother of college age kids). Many of our large corporate clients work from home too. It's just the norm now in so many industries. We are all high achievers who are senior in our firm. Too bad you picked the wrong firm and practice area. No need to be nasty to others.
If you read the article, they address that point pretty clearly. They avoid litigation work for exactly the reason you suggest--you can't control your schedule. They do other types of law.
OK, let's see. This law firm is owned by these women, they say they make less money, and they limit the kind of law that they do in order to create this family friendly environment. Good on them. But, what if you're a woman and you don't want to be a lawyer? Or, this kind of lawyer? What if you're a woman and you work as a store GM for say, Barnes and Noble? Or you work at Target? It's the upper-class treatment of stories like this that bugs me. Women who aren't at an executive level almost always can't make these choices, and when we see profiles of women balancing work and family, they are nearly always upper-income or upper-middle-class women. I realize that's the Times' demographic, but it's not most women. I work a white-collar job at a university, and it's extraordinarily difficult for me to schedule time in the middle of the day for personal reasons, no matter that I can do my work remotely with relative success. I'm a woman and I have no issue with women having kids, not having kids, not wanting them, whatever. That's your choice. And it's mine. And while I think we definitely need more workplaces that look for ways to incorporate flexible time for families, I really believe we need more flexibility, period. I also believe that when you become a mother, you do it with your eyes open. If you're in a career that doesn't allow you all the time you want or need for your kids, you might be in the wrong career.
25
Wait a second. If Geller and Simon charge $280 an hour, bill only 30 hours a week and work 45 weeks a year (7 weeks leave) they would take in $378,000 a piece. That's not chump change.
If their junior associates are sufficiently billable versus their compensation and with a low cost overhead model, Geller and Simon should be cleaning up, even with those relatively modest total hours. All while enjoying life out of the office.
So where's the story?
If their junior associates are sufficiently billable versus their compensation and with a low cost overhead model, Geller and Simon should be cleaning up, even with those relatively modest total hours. All while enjoying life out of the office.
So where's the story?
6
That's assuming that they collect everything that they bill out. Unfortunately, not even close to reality.
Rent, staff, insurance, marketing, write-offs -- you've ignored all the costs of pruducing the revenue
1
Lawyers exist to serve clients. They take on their clients burdens. Lawyers do not exist to give themselves a nice lifestyle or work life balance. Last week, I stood next to a client who was sent off to jail for a real long time. I can only sleep at night knowing I did everything I could, went the extra mile and really, truly sweated for him like it mattered. I need to know that and he needed to know that. He didn't pay me to have a nice work life balance and spend time with my family, he paid me to give him my all. Its what I owe him in exchange for his money and the privilege to earn a living in this way.
8
One can always choose to serve fewer clients.
7
It isn't about fewer clients. Its about giving each client, however many, your all.
4
Rita,
No matter how few clients one chooses to have, if you are in the middle of a criminal trial on a serious matter there will be little time for anything else. Of course that pace doesn't continue throughout the year, but while it is going on a lawyer who takes his or her responsibilities as seriously as Daniel describes needs to put everything else on hold (or outsource).
No matter how few clients one chooses to have, if you are in the middle of a criminal trial on a serious matter there will be little time for anything else. Of course that pace doesn't continue throughout the year, but while it is going on a lawyer who takes his or her responsibilities as seriously as Daniel describes needs to put everything else on hold (or outsource).
1
This is great - we now have a laboratory to test the various theories espoused over the past decade: Women-led firms have higher rates of return; an egalitarian partnership will attract the best and the brightest graduates; actual hours worked per week does not matter to success; clients are willing to adjust their schedules to that of their professional advisers.
I anxiously await the verdict however.
I would note - their billing rates are half what I charged over a decade ago as an early 30's adviser - and their 'partnership' draws are lower than what a recent strong law school 20-something graduate with absolutely no experience would command. Other than those minor concerns - good luck.
I anxiously await the verdict however.
I would note - their billing rates are half what I charged over a decade ago as an early 30's adviser - and their 'partnership' draws are lower than what a recent strong law school 20-something graduate with absolutely no experience would command. Other than those minor concerns - good luck.
8
Money is not the measure of all things.
Isn't focussing just on the bottom line a cause of so much that is wrong in this world?
Isn't focussing just on the bottom line a cause of so much that is wrong in this world?
5
Funny - I always called focusing on the bottom line: 'managing a business' - but times do change.
I guess they could claim not-for-profit status if that is so.
But I think it might be a result of their business model more than their 'balance' concerns.
I guess they could claim not-for-profit status if that is so.
But I think it might be a result of their business model more than their 'balance' concerns.
Front page news? perhaps in another human interest section.. I think the Editorial boards "Picking up the tab for low wages" article next to this is on the mark for a news worthy and article of national relevance....
Female Law firm and day care? no
Female Law firm and day care? no
3
If you join a firm or a business this is the known policy great. I wonder how the people who have to pick up the work slack feel about such policies.
7
Did you notice that they are actually working 60-70 hours? They are just doing in the time and place of their own choosing. So what slack is there to pick up exactly?
2
I can also see this working well for a professional who is caring for an elderly parent or an adult special needs child. As an attorney, I would find this energizing and fun. Sitting in evening traffic with my day-cared babies in the back seat, I added up all that I was spending on their care and the after school programs, the time we spent in traffic together, and concluded that I needed to quit working not only because of the money and the traffic but also because they were growing up not really knowing each other or me. I find the "chair warming" mentality of many business entities to be absurd.
4
Presumably some significant amount of the time spent at work should be directed towards doing the job.
While an absence of men in the firm may prove troubling to the EEOC once it reaches a critical mass that requires the firm to comply with existing law (assuming it has not already done so), what this story confirms is that there really is a difference between men and women when it comes to carrying out the roles that nature ( or perhaps God ) programed us to carry out. Thoughtful people can arrange their business affairs to accommodate for these differences, while recognizing that some trade-offs are required. More free time, less money, a wills and trusts practice, not litigation. Good for them.
2
It's interesting that the difference was that the man needed more human contact and affirmation at work than he was getting. I'm not sure what that says about are traditional notions of biological differences.
Why in the world would the division of labor between firm 'rainmakers' doing schmoozing and worker bees at desk be considered an injustice? It's a symbiotic relationship where people are doing what they do best. Without each other, the firm perishes, whether it's an egalitarian family-friendly firm like this, or the most white-shoe firm on Wall Street.
2
Pay differential?
1
Rita - a pay differential is not automatically an injustice.
Mr. Scheiber says that Anne-Marie Slaughter's article, "Why Women Still Can't Have it All," "is a particular source of irritation" to Ms. Simon. Then Ms. Simon, or Mr. Scheiber, has clearly not actually read the article. Because what the article says is that the only way women can have it all is if we make changes in our society and in workplace arrangements to make it possible for women to be devoted parents and successful careerists. And that is exactly what Ms. Simon and her partners are striving to do--change workplace arrangements so they can have it all. They are exemplars of Ms. Slaughter's prescriptions, so they would actually champion the article if they read it.
16
I feel the point made here is that women with families have to look hard and even form teams/firms that support and nurture this lifestyle. I looked long and hard and eventually opted to do contract work rather than be at the beck and call of an employer. It took several attempts (most contract positions didn't pay enough to warrant the level of commitment and pay) over 4 years to finally find a fit. I work from home so blending homework with returning emails is routine. My kids get to see mom working everyday versus an annual take-you-kid-to-work day. They know that if I don't work, we don't have money. I am also free to run over to school for a PTA meeting, bring a forgotten lunch or to go grocery shopping in the middle of the day. Plus, I am home each day when they get off the bus. Something I always wanted as a kid when I was growing up.
36
I now live the exact same life as you after nearly 20 years in an office. What a delightful change - especially since I too have young kids and serve on the PTA. I highly recommend that parents consider this path - especially mothers. Oh, and I'm earning MORE as a consultant than I was before I became one.
1
I wish I had this when I was a recently divorced dad with two little kids at home. But tech culture doesn't allow for it.
4
Tech culture doesn't allow for it, or not enough dads are brave enough to DEMAND it? Remember, there was once a time when American culture didn't allow for women to do little things like, say, VOTE.
Women had to band together and fight to demand this basic right, and it took some conflict to create change. But it happened and we are better off for it.
Why, I wonder, do most working dads still accept a work environment that pretends they don't have obligations to their offspring, instead of fighting for this right the same way women had to fight for their rights to create change??
Women had to band together and fight to demand this basic right, and it took some conflict to create change. But it happened and we are better off for it.
Why, I wonder, do most working dads still accept a work environment that pretends they don't have obligations to their offspring, instead of fighting for this right the same way women had to fight for their rights to create change??
1
What a society we've created for ourselves. It's hard to imagine primitive man being so detached from his family, instead having his entire identity wrapped up in being the world's most successful hunter.
These people see the big picture, and it looks humane to me.
These people see the big picture, and it looks humane to me.
1
I'm really conflicted. For them as individuals, I like that they aren't prioritizing profit and status in their lives. Broadly speaking, I think, wow, you're still making your life hectic, stressful, and ultimately physically and mentally unhealthy to make - lets face it - a lot of money. What about workers who don't have highly desirable, knowledge-based skills? What about manual laborers and minimum-wage workers. Well-educated, upper-middle class people have always had options and these women simply haven't CHOSEN to make gobs of money at the expense of basic parental responsibility. They've chosen to be innovative and strive for more work-life balance. But this is not hopeful news for American women or working-class Americans in relation to the labor market. Capitalism is still royally screwing you.
3
In just the few comments I've read here, I'm amazed at how threatened some people are by this type of business model, especially since everything in our country is focused on the children, the children, the children and profits, profits, profits.
Here is a firm that has deliberately made its mission to balance both.
I congratulate them, and here's to the hope that they multiply most fruitfully.
Here is a firm that has deliberately made its mission to balance both.
I congratulate them, and here's to the hope that they multiply most fruitfully.
17
Picking up your 4-year-old son from school at 5:50 PM? She is lying to herself about great this is for her and for him. Check back in on these folks in 2 more years; the picture will have changed.
3
So you're suggesting that parents should not work even 9-5 jobs (assuming that commuting to/from work takes 30-60 minutes each)? For how many years? And who will pay for everything?
1
Better strategies are needed.
First, find a home close to the office.
Second, use childcare that is close to the office. In the same building (coop with other offices), if you can.
Third, have someone on staff who will run errands for parents and dedicate their time to improving parental efficiency.
Fourth, most children will "want to go home" with mom. Why not schedule parties and events late in the day to accommodate the needs of the child?
Fifth, always close by noon on Fridays.
Bonus, join a gym near work or near the home.
If you are really serious, have a child psychologist visit with the children and their teachers on a somewhat regular basis. This will offer some quality control and provide these children with an advocate.
I don't think the body language of mom and her child in front of the school would be used for a website home page promoting their childcare program.
These policies incur costs. If these things can't be done at the pay grade of this group, what chance do other working mom's really have?
First, find a home close to the office.
Second, use childcare that is close to the office. In the same building (coop with other offices), if you can.
Third, have someone on staff who will run errands for parents and dedicate their time to improving parental efficiency.
Fourth, most children will "want to go home" with mom. Why not schedule parties and events late in the day to accommodate the needs of the child?
Fifth, always close by noon on Fridays.
Bonus, join a gym near work or near the home.
If you are really serious, have a child psychologist visit with the children and their teachers on a somewhat regular basis. This will offer some quality control and provide these children with an advocate.
I don't think the body language of mom and her child in front of the school would be used for a website home page promoting their childcare program.
These policies incur costs. If these things can't be done at the pay grade of this group, what chance do other working mom's really have?
1
Why oh why would you let a reporter sit in on a client meeting and report on it?! That client is a defendant in a lawsuit, and he has just waived his attorney-client privilege. Not a good way to advertise your firm.
30
People who make a lot of money have more flexibility in their workplace. Got it.
22
So private initiatives are the future of this country? Well, that sounds promising... When will this country grow up and understand that this is the role of government to insure social justice/equality?
1
Equality of what? Outcomes, income, what?
I wish these lawyers well, but given the deadlines and realities of the entire legal structure as it exists today, from lawyers to client's needs, to courts and judges, at some point everyone has to learn you can't ask for the impossible.
You can argue that your kids and their school plays should come first, but you can also argue that client's with difficult legal issues to address also should come first. Life is endless prioritizing and compromising. I hope they find the set that works as well as possible for them, but at some point someone, clients or children, are going to take a back seat. It's inevitable given the legal culture today. Of course, you can try to change the entire culture but it will likely take decades. Still, good luck in your efforts.
You can argue that your kids and their school plays should come first, but you can also argue that client's with difficult legal issues to address also should come first. Life is endless prioritizing and compromising. I hope they find the set that works as well as possible for them, but at some point someone, clients or children, are going to take a back seat. It's inevitable given the legal culture today. Of course, you can try to change the entire culture but it will likely take decades. Still, good luck in your efforts.
2
Time off to raise your family is awesome...but it's not going to drum up new business.
6
If she's working over 60 hours, how many more are you supposed to work to "drum up new business". You can keep that job!
You can't pencil in time with your kids.
Being there. Being available and truly accessible to their needs.That is the thing working mothers don't want to hear but is what healthy, secure child development often requires. Sometimes just having a parent in the next room is comforting and builds security even when its not the scheduled "mommy (or daddy) and me" time.
As they age, pencilling in time with them is even tougher. Teens don't open up to you during the two hour block you have set aside. They open up on their terms and the more time you invest in them early on, the more time you are just "there", the better the communication and relationship.
Certainly economic policy for 30+ years has necessitated two incomes for middle class parents and has driven many mothers to work who would prefer to be home.
I don't know the answer. But unfocused, distracted parenting, which makes the mothers feel like they can have it all is not it.
Being there. Being available and truly accessible to their needs.That is the thing working mothers don't want to hear but is what healthy, secure child development often requires. Sometimes just having a parent in the next room is comforting and builds security even when its not the scheduled "mommy (or daddy) and me" time.
As they age, pencilling in time with them is even tougher. Teens don't open up to you during the two hour block you have set aside. They open up on their terms and the more time you invest in them early on, the more time you are just "there", the better the communication and relationship.
Certainly economic policy for 30+ years has necessitated two incomes for middle class parents and has driven many mothers to work who would prefer to be home.
I don't know the answer. But unfocused, distracted parenting, which makes the mothers feel like they can have it all is not it.
1
I congratulate the members of this firm who appear to have found a business model which supports their personal and professional goals. In my experience, professional partnerships can offer considerable flexibility, but it depends on managing overhead and managing the compensation expectations of the partners. If you expect to make a high-six or low-7 figure income from practicing law, and if you expect your law firm to occupy the top floor of the newest skyscraper in the area, then you have to adopt certain expectations regarding production, hours, fees, etc. On the other hand, if your partner income expectations are more modest and your clients are comfortable with your office not being located in a penthouse in midtown Manhattan or similar, then there are a lot of things that you can do, and you will probably enjoy the options.
3
How nice that these careerist women are willing to spend a little time with their kids.
2
Hard to see this working in a market where law school enrollment is down, and many graduates can't get jobs (with all that debt, too). The top candidates will get jobs, of course, but a lot of the routine discovery is done by computers these days. Not a great time to be carving space for nontraditional practice.
This is happening in every profession, though. People are trying to reclaim their lives sacrificed after the recession and diminished gradually since the Reagan administration, but we are also outsourcing and automating so that fewer jobs exist (except minimum wage service jobs). This musical chairs labor market will cause another great disruption - a paradigm shift - that will make the Industrial Revolution look like a hiccup.
This is happening in every profession, though. People are trying to reclaim their lives sacrificed after the recession and diminished gradually since the Reagan administration, but we are also outsourcing and automating so that fewer jobs exist (except minimum wage service jobs). This musical chairs labor market will cause another great disruption - a paradigm shift - that will make the Industrial Revolution look like a hiccup.
2
Why is it so often 1980 in NYT?
My lawyer -- who was regarded as the best around in her field until she retired -- was not only a mother but a single mother. I live in a part of the world where it's entirely normal for well-paid, high-up-the-ladder men and women to race off at five to pick the kids up from wherever they are, and where the words "part-time" and "salary" can go together. Flex time and telecommute, normal. If my kid were sick today, I'd be working from home, no problem. I might even take part of the day off, since I've got leave stacked up for family caregiving.
What these women are doing is revolutionary only within their tiny context, a context which richly deserves extinction. White-shoe law firms, major law corporations, are important to almost no one. But if you want to report on the insanely sexist and indeed dehumanizing labor practices in these places, knock yourself out, and be straightforward about it. I see no reason for the "plucky and adorable Shiva-armed gal with briefcase and baby, teetering on heels/talking-dog" treatment. It was offensive 20 years ago and it's still offensive now.
My lawyer -- who was regarded as the best around in her field until she retired -- was not only a mother but a single mother. I live in a part of the world where it's entirely normal for well-paid, high-up-the-ladder men and women to race off at five to pick the kids up from wherever they are, and where the words "part-time" and "salary" can go together. Flex time and telecommute, normal. If my kid were sick today, I'd be working from home, no problem. I might even take part of the day off, since I've got leave stacked up for family caregiving.
What these women are doing is revolutionary only within their tiny context, a context which richly deserves extinction. White-shoe law firms, major law corporations, are important to almost no one. But if you want to report on the insanely sexist and indeed dehumanizing labor practices in these places, knock yourself out, and be straightforward about it. I see no reason for the "plucky and adorable Shiva-armed gal with briefcase and baby, teetering on heels/talking-dog" treatment. It was offensive 20 years ago and it's still offensive now.
8
No one is forced to work in a white shoe law firm. People do it for the money and those who work the hardest and longest should reap the rewards, just as those who decide to work less to spend time with their families will reap those rewards.
2
This is truly well and good, and I hope this model can work for everyone who can benefit from it, attorney, children and clients alike. But where are the fathers? Even divorced, surely they have some role and responsibility in the running of their child's life? Why do women who want to have it all always seem to have to do it all by themselves?
8
What do their clients think? Really, that's all that matters...
5
This method obviously won't work for every competent female lawyer--I for one can't function on 6 hours of sleep a night. But kudos to them for honoring both their parenthood and their career aspirations. All the commenters taking time to sneer at them obviously don't wish women the best.
10
Indeed, many entitled white mothers believe they should be able to work less than their male and single colleagues. I see it all the time now in corporate settings and professional settings. Message to all mothers out there - you can't have it all. Men can't have it all, why should women?
13
I remember working more hours than one of my male colleagues who spent his time watching sports and gambling. My favorite was the single woman who called her relatives in the UK, used the company office supplies to print flyers etc. for her pool league and took afternoons off now and then to go to the movies.
I stayed at my desk and worked. I had a family to support and couldn't afford to risk my job.
I stayed at my desk and worked. I had a family to support and couldn't afford to risk my job.
1
Men CAN have it all too...that is the point. Any male or female human who creates other small humans has obligations to be there to raise those humans. It's just that women have been forced to make these demands on the workplace because the greater burden of childrearing has historically been placed on them. Men should absolutely be out there fighting for the right to work AND to raise their own children. Children need their dads as much as their moms. But working dads need to step up and make these demands themselves, just like working moms have had to do to create cultural change.
1
A better use of their time than driving 1.5 hrs one way to work- fight for equal paternity and maternity leaves. that way work culture will shift towards equal parenting expectations. it is brutally unfair that very few jobs offer paternity leave. hence the title of the article focused on moms' sacrifices!
2
There are wide variations in the demands of the different types of matters that law firms handle. If Ms. Geller and Ms. Simon can maintain a practice that they enjoy on their schedules, that's great for them. But it is unrealistic to suggest that this could be a model for the profession generally. Firms that handle high stakes litigation, major corporate transactions and the like need lawyers who are willing to work long hours and to subject their personal lives to work-related interruptions because the nature of the matters requires that level of commitment, not because the firms are insensitive (although some may be). Of course, these types of matters can be very profitable and the firms can compensate the lawyers who work on them very well. And at least for some of us, they are also intellectually and professionally challenging and interesting.
The result is that lawyers need to make choices as they plan their careers -- lifestyle, income and types of matters -- but they can't have it all.
By the way, I hope that Ms. Simon explained to the client who permitted Mr. Sheiber to sit in on their meeting that by doing so he had waived attorney-client privilege.
The result is that lawyers need to make choices as they plan their careers -- lifestyle, income and types of matters -- but they can't have it all.
By the way, I hope that Ms. Simon explained to the client who permitted Mr. Sheiber to sit in on their meeting that by doing so he had waived attorney-client privilege.
8
That's why firms have teams to handle large matters. What happens, do you think, when an attorney becomes ill or dies? The large case goes on, nonetheless. Yes, lawyers make choices. But that does not mean they need to hurt their families the way they did in the past. Technology, team spirit and willingness to share the load (and rewards) could benefit many law firms. Think instead of the productive associates you'll lose to firms that are more humane. Change is coming and that is a good thing.
The photo speaks volumes. The caption could read:
Come on, sweetheart. I have driven you to school and I have another hour before I get to the office. Hurry up. Come on. Sweetheart, let's get moving. You don't want to make Mommy late, do you?
It all boils down to time. 24 hours in a day does not allow for having it all.
Come on, sweetheart. I have driven you to school and I have another hour before I get to the office. Hurry up. Come on. Sweetheart, let's get moving. You don't want to make Mommy late, do you?
It all boils down to time. 24 hours in a day does not allow for having it all.
28
That's probably a true caption but not a depressing one. I myself have a 4 year old and know that pushing them to do things on a reasonable pace can be difficult but most likely not harmful. A SAHM may not hurry to a meeting but probably does not have infinite patience either, and these situations are just everyday occurrence whether you're employed or not.
I read a study a few weeks ago showing that women without children (but not men without children) pick up the slack at work when the moms are off tending to their kids.
In my experience this is perceived as right and natural -- "it takes a village" and "hell, those women without children have nothing of their own going on anyway" and all that. The assumption is that putting more people on this planet is a benefit for us all, so we should all help out in raising them. But this assumption is so, so wrong! Having kids today is like buying an SUV: if it's what you need to be happy, go for it -- but don't pretend you're doing the world a favor by doing so. The child tax credit should be replaced by a carbon tax, and employees with children respected and treated as people with an expensive, time-consuming hobby they care about very, very much.
I'm still waiting for a national Not-Mother's Day: you're welcome.
In my experience this is perceived as right and natural -- "it takes a village" and "hell, those women without children have nothing of their own going on anyway" and all that. The assumption is that putting more people on this planet is a benefit for us all, so we should all help out in raising them. But this assumption is so, so wrong! Having kids today is like buying an SUV: if it's what you need to be happy, go for it -- but don't pretend you're doing the world a favor by doing so. The child tax credit should be replaced by a carbon tax, and employees with children respected and treated as people with an expensive, time-consuming hobby they care about very, very much.
I'm still waiting for a national Not-Mother's Day: you're welcome.
45
Absolutely agree and I am a mother of two.
No one 'owes' me anything for having children, most certainly not my coworkers.
Unlike many parents, I do not see my child's soccer game as any more reason to leave early than my childless coworkers pub crawl with friends. If I can leave early on Fridays, they should be able to also. Everyone or no one should be the rule.
No one 'owes' me anything for having children, most certainly not my coworkers.
Unlike many parents, I do not see my child's soccer game as any more reason to leave early than my childless coworkers pub crawl with friends. If I can leave early on Fridays, they should be able to also. Everyone or no one should be the rule.
12
What if your parents had the same thinking process as you. You would NOT be around to enjoy this world, read the NYTimes and write witty comments in the editorial section. I would like to think your life is worth more than the sum carbon and methane (green house gasses) you have been emitting and responsible for all your life. Aren't you?
2
And when you need to receive social security payments, who do you think the workforce will be? That's right... other people's children. Happy Kids Day, everyday, to you and everyone else. BTW, the women in this article are picking up their own slack.We all belong to families and what this society needs is more flexibility to meet human concerns. Even those of people without children.
4
This is so amazingly fantastic!
1
Great. The NYT is celebrating a business model built around the comfort of employees and not service of customers. Let's see how this works out over the long run.
Between this article and your editorial on the minimum wage, it is clear that the NYT believes that employment is purely a means of delivering income to the employee, totally divorced from the act of work itself. I wonder whether the NYT pays its employees according to their lifestyle needs, and not their talent and productivity? If so, where do I apply for a job?
Between this article and your editorial on the minimum wage, it is clear that the NYT believes that employment is purely a means of delivering income to the employee, totally divorced from the act of work itself. I wonder whether the NYT pays its employees according to their lifestyle needs, and not their talent and productivity? If so, where do I apply for a job?
6
An endocrine practice run by partners who are parents, both at the same time: a dream, not sure if it will come true in near future, but in the meantime, I get by with sleeping less than six hours, wishing if I could get three of my clones, anxious asking myself, am I doing enough at all the fronts, personal, professional? But thru all this, at its peak & troughs, trying to hum along that I need to work to show my kids that if we all work together, we can have it all: Kids can have attentive and present parents, working wives can have supportive husbands, husbands can show daughters & sons what a good man, a husband & a father should look like & more than anything, we all can show them that a working woman & good mom are not mutually exclusive, but a choice that woman should make on her own & have a right to not be judged for it. That role model both for daughters & sons has to be born & nurtured within the bounds of home first & fostered at work places. If not, decades later my kids & their partners will be reading same articles! That would be sad.
1
You cannot have it all at once and that is true for everyone.
1
It's encouraging to see more organizations experiment in this way. Balancing the roles of parent (mother or father) and professional is a challenging, messy, but worthy endeavor. Ms. Simon and Ms. Geller have uniquely demanding jobs which make this balancing act even more challenging. It would be worthwhile to see what this kind of arrangement could be in other occupations which are less demanding. While "outsourcing yourself" is practically possible, there is truly no replacement for stable, nurturing parents who push their child[ren] towards success and kindness. What these women are doing is vitally important to the health of their families and, consequently, our society. Brava!
As technology allows, as more women own businesses to provide proof on concept, and as the European model of happy employees=productive employees finally gets through, I see more of this coming. We certainly can't go any faster, it's time to slow down.
These folks are free to organize their business as they see fit and this article is a great marketing tool for them to attract people attracted to this type of politically correct firm. Any service business that is not built around the customer's needs, though, is never going to get very far and it will fail to attract the kind of ambitious people that make businesses thrive. This firm steers clear of demanding work intentionally and leaves others to that market. My own experience in a large competitive law firm is that most women with children don't work hard enough for the firm and don't spend enough time with their children. An all around lose lose proposition for them.
3
My daughter is a single mother, works in Las Vegas as a casino dealer at M.G.M.. M.G.M. has a child care facility on site. The only casino that has this wonderful asset. The family leave act is also helpful and M.G.M. honors this without any problem to their employees. Still it is difficult for single parents, getting the child up and about for school, events etc. Money is always a problem for honest working parents, not enough child care, tax help from the government etc. Single parents always find it difficult to handle child care and work regardless of how lenient the company is. Nobody seems to be able to solve this important problem for single parents, mostly women, yet.
4
Is it news that a two parent household has two incomes and more money?
That said, I support taxpayer-funded daycare, as it would help all parents and create living wage jobs.
That said, I support taxpayer-funded daycare, as it would help all parents and create living wage jobs.
1
Kudo's to them! I went out on my own and formed a financial planning firm dedicated to women like them 11 years ago. I too faced similar challenges. Although I hate when people say they want to have it all like men do. Men did not have it all. They used to only have jobs or careers. They rarely had the joy(and pain) of taking care of children or taking care of a home. As men begin to be part of that process- as many are, they can enjoy both work and family life. My husband does housework too and shares in raising the children. I remember once when my kids were little and I said something like, "Can you babysit the kids?" His response was, "They are my children too. I don't babysit my own children. I care for them just like you do." What a guy! The other thing I like to point out to stressed out women, is it is okay to have a house cleaner come in- let it go! You never see "She kept a great house" on anyone's gravestone.
6
Bravo, ladies. BRAVO!
What about the ordinary staff office workers at the firm? Are they allowed to "have it all" as well? Or are they the ones burning the midnight oil?
9
This sort of arrangement may be workable for small firms focusing on small practices… but only barely. The model is incompatible with complex serious legal work for demanding clients. Cutting a client meeting short because the client is a half-hour late so that a partner can pick up a child, does not serve the interests of the client. Leaving the other partner in charge raises the question of why the departing partner was there in the first place. Serious legal practice is almost as incompatible with toddlers’ school schedules as an obstetrician who specializes in delivering babies.
4
It depends. I do the very serious and complicated work of appeals part time. The deadlines are very long and meetings with clients are rare, well planned and not emergencies. There are at most a dozen court dates per year,and none weeks if not longer in advance. This work is highly compatiabke with a toddlers schedule.
If a firm that makes its income by hourly billing has X amount of square footage, it wants to make sure that office space is filled and billing as much as possible. This is a problem that won't go away, unless a firm specializes in contingency cases - which is a concept with ethical problems of its own and why contingency cases are illegal in Europe - then the hourly billing urgency goes away and presumably someone who works smart (rather that just bills and bills and bills) could have a life and also remain vital to the law firm. I can tell you one thing: people who shift from an hourly billing environment in a law firm to a different kind of office where hourly billing isn't the basis for revenue, are almost uniformly grossly inefficient. Because they came from an environment where inefficiency was rewarded. So while contingency cases have ethical problems (motivating lawyers to win perhaps at the costs of values that should not be sacrificed) they at least motivate efficiency rather than inefficiency, which as a nice side effect provides the opportunity for some employees to have a life outside of work. It's not just mom's, you know, who want to be around for their kids, and for others in their lives.
This is fantastic. Thanks, ladies.
1
The only thing that I see wrong with this is that Ms. Simon needs to find a good more convenient daycare facility or option, otherwise great business model!
1
Women are better multi-taskers. We can - and do - run the world already. Men just don't know it. Many of them sit in their offices and pretend that they're focusing on their work, while they're on Facebook and emailing friends about their football pool. We don't have time for that. I would elaborate, but I'm running my company from home today, because both of my kids are sick.
10
I don't know why more women who want to commit themselves to a career don't go for childlessness. There are too many people in the world anyways.
17
it may not be you or me but many women and men have an innate desire to have children/families. and the "the too many people in the world" argument is really a stand-in for those who either do not have the minimal resources to care for children or are not empowered enough to control their reproductive choices through birth control, etc.
for women like these, it's not an issue.
for women like these, it's not an issue.
Memo to the Times and its readers: the practice of law is not defined by Manhattan "Big Law". There are plenty of law firms where attorneys do good work, work hard, yet still enjoy their lives. I have worked for a major New Jersey firm for more than 20 years. From the first day I got here, I understood that the firm valued my private life. I never miss one of my kids' games, I take them to school almost every morning, I can leave if one of my kids is sick at school without anyone batting an eye, etc. The theme of the Geller Law Group is not unique, and has not been unique for a long time.
35
I applaud anyone, man or woman, who attempts to pursue a demanding career and raise children simultaneously. To succeed without outsourcing one's obligations, it necessarily requires compromise - which is too often viewed as a dirty word. For every choice one chooses to make, one chooses not to make another. Success requires the ability to shift gears smoothly, to be fully engaged in the moment, and to know when perfection is not a reasonable goal. Perhaps instead of demanding that we "have it all," we (and likely our colleagues and families) would be happier if we passionately sought to "have enough."
1
It's a nice arrangement and any effort made for a work life balance can only help in creating a more accepting cultural atmosphere for this kind of thing...BUT...I make significantly less money and am not senior enough to call the shots or even suggest an alternate way of doing things. I'm the breadwinner and the mom, and recently had to take a job with longer hours for less pay. My daughter has definitely been affected, and my toddler son can't tell me he misses me, but it's pretty evident when I walk in the door at night. Childcare is a daily patchwork that often falls through because I can't afford a nanny or daycare for two children. I feel like I constantly have a hand around my neck and there is no end in sight. So congratulations to the women at the top who are able to push for some leeway, but please don't forget to share it with those who have less resources and fewer options. Our kids need us too.
114
But why do people keep having more kids if these are the problems that they face?
2
Where are your parents????
Parents and everyone have to make compromises when it comes to work. Children cannot compromise on what they need to grow up and become successful adults. When we did not have a 24/7 work culture, just in time scheduling for shift workers, and enough employees to keep the work week at 40 hours there was time for family life. Once raising profits became the only quarterly goal we started to see the disintegration of family and personal life in America. We saw the outsourcing of entry and middle level jobs to make pennies on the dollar. We see children who are not learning how to deal with life because the time parents spend with them is always special.
All parents and people suffer when you live to work because it's required. What we really need is adequate sick and vacation time for all, universal high quality preschool and after school programs for all, and the chance to have lives outside of work.
All parents and people suffer when you live to work because it's required. What we really need is adequate sick and vacation time for all, universal high quality preschool and after school programs for all, and the chance to have lives outside of work.
79
In my opinion what we need is a shift to good part time jobs so parents can be the ones raising their child and providing the interaction and educational experiences which young children thrive on. When did we decide that preschool was better than spending time learning from an engaged parent?
When my Father hired young lawyers into his firm, he told them to always put their own health and family first. He believed that gave a solid foundation to their practice.
Breastfeeding lawyers and legal assistants were welcome to bring their infants to the office too.
When he died while still practicing at age 91, the local headline read, "Beloved Attornery Dies".
Breastfeeding lawyers and legal assistants were welcome to bring their infants to the office too.
When he died while still practicing at age 91, the local headline read, "Beloved Attornery Dies".
206
What a lovely illustration of a man who truly understood the human value of his employees. My father is an expert in the human resources field, and his advice for employers has always stuck with me. He encourages fabulous benefits, competitive pay, and simply treating your employees really, really, really well. Do just this, he says, and you will get the best and the brightest sticking around for a very long time. It's simple, and it works. Your father clearly contributed to the transition from looking at employees as "personnel" to valuing them as "human resources."
Cheers to wonderful fathers and their memory.
Cheers to wonderful fathers and their memory.
4
What a wonderful man. You must be very proud.
4
On the one hand, Ms. Geller wants to be a fully engaged parent. On the other, she pushed for her career to the point of marital divorce. These ideas obviously do not go together. The parent who wants the best for their kid, prioritizes their marriage over career. Sure she can tell herself that being happy will make her kid happy. There are exactly zero studies to promote that, and tons demonstrating better outcomes for kids with two parents.
The question for this law firm is not whether they can allow for more parent time. Any law firm can decide they want to allow for more of anything....and grant it as well. The question is, while doing that, can they be successful? If you have less productive people, can you be successful? More people working less hours might make it work, meaning also less pay per lawyer.
The question for this law firm is not whether they can allow for more parent time. Any law firm can decide they want to allow for more of anything....and grant it as well. The question is, while doing that, can they be successful? If you have less productive people, can you be successful? More people working less hours might make it work, meaning also less pay per lawyer.
23
Of course it means less pay per lawyer. That's understood. Pay should always trump everything else? Like kids?
I'm sorry, "she pushed for her career to the point of marital divorce?" Amazing that you have such insight into a private relationship as to determine that it was her ambition that caused the divorce. Apparently, only after the divorce did she even begin working *full-time*. Perhaps your comment speaks more about your view of a woman's place in society and the home than it does her private relationship.
3
you have no idea why she is getting a divorce. I'm pretty sure no reasons were given and it's very presumptuous to assume it was her career ambitions.
3
Maybe, once the realization sets in that one does not require an infinite amount of money to be happy ($75,000 per year as per a Princeton study,) and we stop worshipping those with a hoarding disorder of $$$, we can get back to understanding that life is for much, much more than "making money."
http://www.inc.com/news/articles/2010/09/study-says-$75,000-can-buy-happiness.html
http://www.inc.com/news/articles/2010/09/study-says-$75,000-can-buy-happiness.html
39
Agreed. I took a pay cut in order to have a situation that gives me more free time. I have a quality of life now that no amount of money could ever buy.
1
If you put your heart and soul into building a company and someone brings a lawsuit against your company, which, if successful, would put your company out of business and all of your employees out of jobs, I don't think you'd take too kindly to one of your lawyers blowing a deadline, or losing a key motion, or losing the case because he/she was tending to a life/balance issue.
The flexibility lauded in this article is for lawyers on a different track than those who take their professional responsibilities more seriously.
The flexibility lauded in this article is for lawyers on a different track than those who take their professional responsibilities more seriously.
1
WOW, 75 a year, I make half that and consider myself well off and happy.
Grateful to have raised my children myself......and so are my children.
Look at that incredibly ugly school yard. Could never leave my kid there.
People think they need all these "things" in order to be happy......
Grateful to have raised my children myself......and so are my children.
Look at that incredibly ugly school yard. Could never leave my kid there.
People think they need all these "things" in order to be happy......
Very very cool but what if you are a lawyer working there who does not have any kids?
I can see how this could become unequal at the workplace unless managed VERY carefully. Deadlines occur and then who gets the work? The one at the desk or the one driving to a preschool?
I am glad this works for this firm but I worry about over generalizing this firm's workplans to other law firms.
82
I worked at a consulting firm where we had a mixture of parents, single people etc. The people who didn't have kids had other things they wanted to do, one was into theatre, another was into martial arts etc. All of us worked 50-60 hour work weeks and all of us pitched in and adjusted our schedules as needed. No one was ever made to feel that their outside interests were any less important than someone's family and everyone got to do the things they needed and wanted to.
4
Simple. Have them sign a contract that at no point in their lives will they freeride by accepting help from, falling in love with, or attempting to buy goods and services from other people -- you know, those expensive creatures to whom other other people devoted 20 years or so and roughly a quarter-million dollars, uncompensated, in order to have them and raise them to adulthood -- and they'll never have to pitch in. Of course, that'd leave them some difficulty when it came to finding employment, since that relies upon others whom other people bore and raised, and housing unless they're building their own somewhere out of wood they've felled themselves. Etc. And of course going to doctors and dentists and other such specialists is out of the question.
It won't kill you to pitch in, doll. Take a look around and notice how heavily you depend on the willingness of other people's parents to have brought them up.
It won't kill you to pitch in, doll. Take a look around and notice how heavily you depend on the willingness of other people's parents to have brought them up.
2
I was wondering if that, more than the the more tactful "lack of camaraderie" cited, was the reason the lone male staffer left.
2
Each step - by women (mothers) - provides a compassionate inroad for children who look to parents for guidance (and presence). Keep strong in your convictions. Thank you for your efforts. Your children will thank you.
16
I'm a little skeptical. It depends on what type of law is practiced and at what level. In corporate transactional work, civil litigation and criminal trial work, all where the stake are huge, the side that works smarter, harder and (yes) longer usually wins.
One of the alleged flaws in our justice system is that the lawyering really does make a difference.
I wouldn't want to tell a disappointed client that I was just "trying to have it all."
One of the alleged flaws in our justice system is that the lawyering really does make a difference.
I wouldn't want to tell a disappointed client that I was just "trying to have it all."
49
You many be a "little skeptical" but from my own experience working in high tech and involvement with attorneys, the issue is primarily work load. If those running a company assigned work loads that are doable in a 40 hour work week the issue of work/life balance would not exist. Working smarter is what wins; working longer and harder, more often than not, gets in the way of working smarter. I'll chose a refreshed and sharp attorney any day of the week over an overworked, stressed out one.
59
They do sound like dabblers. I wonder if these law partners are the primary breadwinners for their households.
6
Apparently you missed the part where the lawyer says if something demanding comes in, she will be pulling an "all-nighter." It's attitudes like yours that has prevented innovation and advancement for women in the legal field. As a very successful civil litigator of 15 years (and mother of 3 happy kids) it's not only possible to do both, it enhances the ability to make a compelling argument to have compassion and empathy that comes from living a fully human experience. Perhaps you should be more worried about telling clients that you don't have those qualities. Mine are quite satisfied, as am I.
6
There is only x amount of time per day.
You can't be good at all things. Children need real nurturing and time invested with them. There seems to the feel good emphasis vs be good emphasis here
You can't be good at all things. Children need real nurturing and time invested with them. There seems to the feel good emphasis vs be good emphasis here
26
Good point. I am reminded of the study that came out a few months ago that concluded that there is no relationship between time spent with a child and a child's success - with success very broadly defined.
I could be misremembering but I think The Upshot tore it apart. Sounded like one of those self-serving studies produced by social scientists who have an interest in the outcome.
I could be misremembering but I think The Upshot tore it apart. Sounded like one of those self-serving studies produced by social scientists who have an interest in the outcome.
1
I think the important thing is to have a choice in how you want to parent and work. Also if you know ahead of time what kind of parent you want to be you might not pick the law profession, wow, it sounds rough. Of course knowing ahead of time is usually not possible. I side on using my "village" to help me and hiring consistent help for my kids. It keeps me sane and a happier Mother, but that is my choice. There is no one size fits all in balancing work/family life. I do think the hierarchical, sitting at your desk just to show your face type of work place needs to go!
21
Best wishes to them. Law remains a brutally sexist profession where the bench and bar are still mostly insensitive to trifling concerns such as raising children or keeping a family together. What is striking is that this insensitivity often applies to judges and lawyers of both genders. The deadline-driven, this-case-means-everything nature of the legal guild often seems straight out of a Mad Men episode circa 1962. Heaven help the lawyer in a trial or facing a filing deadline whose child is sick and needs an early school pick up. And we wonder why young people are increasingly avoiding three years of law school and $150,000 of student debt only to buy into this sort of a pathological work culture.
126
There's a very simple reason for this "deadline-driven, this-case-means-everything nature of the legal guild" and it isn't sexism. It's that either the nature of the matter or the client demands it.
7
Please don't conflate family unfriendly and sexist. They are not the same. Yes, there are ironclad deadlines and obscene hours. But how is that sexist? You know men want to see their kids sometimes too, right? I left law for that reason. Is big law insane -- yes? But it is not sexist so don't paint it with that brush.
5
To clients, cases do mean everything. Yes, in certain areas, long hours are driven by greed. In other areas, they're driven by the need to serve a client, not serve oneself and one's desired lifestyle.
3
Excellent reporting, Mr. Scheiber. The Geller Law Group seems to do a lot of things right, especially given the lack of financial support it and others from the federal government on family leave, so it is important that these new-style firms succeed. Here's hoping.
55
Next we will have an article about female lawyers making less than male lawyers while ignoring that women make different career choices. I read an article last week about how female doctors get paid less. I asked my doctor if there was a different billing rate for male doctors and female doctors on insurance forms or Medicare. She said billing for doctors is gender agnostic. She said women doctors tend to work less hours and see fewer patients. Now we learn that female lawyers do the same. So should women who work less hours and do less work receive the same yearly salary as men? Why? Why should men work 60 hours a week and receive the same income as a female who works 30 hours a week? Makes we wonder whether there is more behind Bruce Jenner's decision. Does Rob Kardashian make the same as Kim Kardashian? Somebody needs to find out, discern why, and publish it in the Times.
42
The answer's simple for the social justice crowd -- yes. The contribution made by the women in their time away from their professions -- having and nurturing children - is valuable and should be compensated through their jobs.
Makes no sense whatsoever. Our country is based upon individual justice, at least through the present.
But you put your finger on the flaw of this si-called 75% delta in pay between men and women. It's a gross number and doesn't take into account these choices women make. Nuanced studies show that the real delta is about 96%; a 4% wage differential, which should be addressed.
But, if something is repeated over and over again - 75% or "hands up don't shoot" - it becomes truth. Look for Mrs. Clinton to make use of these "truths". They will win her The White House.
Makes no sense whatsoever. Our country is based upon individual justice, at least through the present.
But you put your finger on the flaw of this si-called 75% delta in pay between men and women. It's a gross number and doesn't take into account these choices women make. Nuanced studies show that the real delta is about 96%; a 4% wage differential, which should be addressed.
But, if something is repeated over and over again - 75% or "hands up don't shoot" - it becomes truth. Look for Mrs. Clinton to make use of these "truths". They will win her The White House.
2
Maternity leave - without pay - is generally accepted in my experience. And this length of time where I work for the four women who had kids in the past year - is 3 months. On the other hand, I, a new dad, dared to take off 3 weeks and while I was able to get away with it, I got some significant grief for doing so. So while I earned for a period of time that the new mom's did not earn, I would have preferred the opportunity not to. But it's not acceptable, and not available. The mom's who take those 3 months are guaranteed that their jobs will be waiting for them when they get back. A new dad doesn't have that perk.
So you can look at these things two ways: the opportunity to earn more is one thing - and of course the new moms CAN do that if they choose; but the other side of the coin is the opportunity for more home time, and the dad's CANNOT do that. They don't have that choice.
So you can look at these things two ways: the opportunity to earn more is one thing - and of course the new moms CAN do that if they choose; but the other side of the coin is the opportunity for more home time, and the dad's CANNOT do that. They don't have that choice.
2
Well spotted, Un. That is in fact the point of the whole piece: we're here to rob you by devaluing your work! I'll tell you what: the minute that parents are paid a healthy stipend reflecting the value of their work in raising children, including a Social Security and retirement-plan benefit, I promise to devote a great deal of time to the important issue you raise.
1
Bravo to the firm and its founders! Part of the genius of capitalism is your ability to structure your business in a way that works for you and reflects your goals and values. In that way you can maximize the kinds of profit most important to you, in this case, the profit to your family, while making a good living. Again, bravo!
111
Part of the greedy, inhuman part of capitalism is that working-class mothers have no such options if they want to meet their family's basic needs. Like none. Zero. Zip. Zilch. This is not good news to the effect of "everything's fine people; keep movin'." We're talking about how highly valued knowledge workers are struggling to find work-life balance and how these women - true exceptions - are trying something different. How in the heck do you think someone with only a high school education is faring?
5
You mean Brava!
Don't children of female lawyers in capitalist America have father's? What do they do – care more for their profits than their (or any) children?
Kerstin in suspect 'socialist' SWeden
Kerstin in suspect 'socialist' SWeden
The picture of Ms. Geller says it all. Her son gets compromised attention and her clients do as well. One can't play with your kid and negotiate law at once and those who say it is possible, simply have an agenda. A woman I know recently complained to me about her doctor who happens to be female. She said it takes her 3 days to get back to her for any issue and appointments are difficult to schedule. When I asked why she continues going to her, she said proudly, "She's a mother, and she's trying to juggle both her career and her kids." I said nothing but privately was embarrassed at the feeble excuse for accepting substandard medical care. To each their own. The writer Fran Lebowitz said it best, the reason men are better at some things lies in one component, Testosterone. Women don't have it. Having kids puts women at a disadvantage in competitive fields where full attention is demanded. A law firm intentionally made up only of women, who rent rooms as office space is scary stuff and the very antithesis of progress and a need for better maternity leave for women who work in a less politicized environment. Frankly, I find it ridiculous.
64
I wondered how your mother would feel about these idiotic comments. Surely she was doing other things while raising you.
2
Oh, come on. Why is it set in stone that a you have to work exactly 70 hours a week to be a committed lawyer? There are lots of types of law and clients that don't require or benefit in any way if their lawyer is working a killer schedule. The only reason that "good" lawyers have historically worked crazy hours is because their firms mandated it for profitability reasons. But the vast majority of lawyers know that to be a "good" lawyer in the qualititative sense doesn't necessarily require long hours. Same applies outside the law: My friend works in an industry where people log long hours, and my friend has always left by 5:30 or early, and from home a lot. He's done exceptionally well through a regular promotions over his peers, and we laugh at how few hours it requires, becuase apparently he's just good at his job.
I commend these women for their great idea. I work part time (from home at least once a week) in law and it's really not a problem. I usually have a lot of smaller projects with non-urgent deadlines. The firm has been very supportive and its not a problem for my clients or my family. Granted, the firm won't promote me to income partner on this schedule - with no reason other than its not done. That will be the next hurdle in biglaw and we'll see that change in the next 10 years .
I commend these women for their great idea. I work part time (from home at least once a week) in law and it's really not a problem. I usually have a lot of smaller projects with non-urgent deadlines. The firm has been very supportive and its not a problem for my clients or my family. Granted, the firm won't promote me to income partner on this schedule - with no reason other than its not done. That will be the next hurdle in biglaw and we'll see that change in the next 10 years .
2
If you look at the picture carefully, she is looking at kids play stuff while playing her son and not work documents. Shame on you for not encouraging these women so obviously doing a good job at 2 very demanding roles! Maybe men can't multitask but women definitely can and want to.
4
Great idea. I wonder the reactions of clients. Which type of client is drawn to this firm because ofthese policias and which type of client i avoid it?
6
I work for a law firm run entirely by men. But for 20 years they've given me the flexibility to be home with my children most days earning an excellent salary working part time. It is one of the great blessings of my life.
114
You are lucky to be in such a supportive environment! Firms such as yours are still not the norm and that's why it's refreshing to read about The Geller Law Group. It's a big step forwards and I'm looking forward to read more about how they fare, and how they are dealing with the inevitable pressures and choices that arise for a working parent. I too worked part time for many years, then full-time and do not have any regrets. There are those out there who don't have or can't afford these choices, and for them such a model could prove invaluable.
What a "lucky" lady you are. Please be sure to emphasize the "luck" part of the equation. People tend to think other peoples' circumstances (when they are optimal) are "normal", when in fact, they are the exception. In all things there are compromises to made and negotiated. If, however, there is no negotiation, the compromises made are usually very 1-sided.
Let us not forget that most of this could not be accommodated without technology!
Let us not forget that most of this could not be accommodated without technology!
1
You are right that I am lucky. And technology has played a huge part in that. If I'd had children earlier the arrangement wouldn't have worked. Through great happenstance technology and my childbearing intersected. Also in the years before I had kids I very much " leaned out" focusing on the kind of work ( research, critical motion amd appeallate work) that could easily be done part time and for which working at home was an advantage not a detriment ( think about where you'd do a better job writing a 50 page terrm paper...I had in home care for my kids and a private office in a quiet part of my home)