In this age of ever-advancing technological resources, telecommuting and flex-time are becoming more acceptable in the workplace. However, it seems that the business world is catching on more quickly than the legal world. To be fair, many firms have, clearly, embraced these concepts. Nonetheless, some have not -- and the resistance to such programs is persistent. Many law firm leaders appear to be entrenched in a paradigm that values -- and, more importantly, rewards -- "face time." Perhaps it is the perception of accessibility that fosters this mind-set.

A SHIFT IS REQUIRED

The reality seems to be that productivity and crisis management capabilities are significantly enhanced by the development of an infrastructure (both technology-based and culture-based) that supports remote lawyering. That is to say, the lawyer who is only able to bill hours and react to a crisis while on-site will not be in a position to respond to client needs once he has left the office (which, even for the most ardent attorney, must happen at some point in the day). Most firms are filing electronically with courts and providing remote access to e-mail and law firm networks; therefore, the technology-based infrastructure already exists. What still needs significant encouragement is the culture-based infrastructure.

Unfortunately, the effect (not necessarily intended) of this face-time paradigm is that women (and men) who are not in the office after 6 p.m. run the risk of missing better assignments, invitations to socialize with senior attorneys and, consequently, important mentoring and advancement opportunities.

Oftentimes, flexible work arrangements are confused with a lack of ambition or part-time lawyering. To the contrary, the concept of a flexible work arrangement is designed to lead to increased productivity, improved work product, higher revenues, lower overhead costs, improved communication with clients, better recruitment and retention and a less stressful work environment.

STATISTICS CONFIRM THE PROBLEM

The American Bar Association's Commission on Women in the Profession's report "A Current Glance at Women in the Law 2007" (.pdf) indicates that woman comprised 47 percent of total JD enrollment and 48 percent of total JDs awarded. Unfortunately, the similarity among women and men in the legal profession ends there.

According to the ABA, women comprise only 30 percent of the legal profession, 17 percent of partners in private practice, 16 percent of the general counsel for Fortune 1000 corporations and 17 percent of the GCs for Fortune 500 corporations. The ABA further reports that women lawyers' weekly salary as a percentage of male lawyers' was, respectively, 69 percent, 77 percent, 73 percent, 78 percent and 71 percent for 2006 and the previous years.

A variety of reasons account for the disparity between men and women in leadership roles. Familial demands are one of the more obvious. According to the MIT Workplace Center study "Women Lawyers and Obstacles to Leadership" (.pdf), more than 60 percent of women and 40 percent of men lawyers who leave firm practice cite difficulty integrating work with family and personal life.

As explained by Gita Z. Wilder in NALP's "Women in the Profession: Findings From the First Wave of the After the JD Study" (.pdf), "Law is a demanding profession and its demands often compete with other aspirations of its practitioners, whatever their gender. Because, more often than not, women are faced with irreversible choices about family life at about the same time their careers are in ascendance, their aspirations and the career paths they take may differ from those that men have traditionally taken."

THE BEST ENVIRONMENTS

In 2007, Flex-Time Lawyers, a national consulting firm advising attorneys and legal employers on work-life balance and the retention and advancement of women, conducted a national survey in conjunction with Working Mother magazine on work-life balance and women's issues at law firms and produced a list of the best law firms for women.

In her article titled "What Makes a 'Best Law Firm For Women?'" (.pdf) Flex-Time's founder and president, Deborah Epstein Henry, explains the survey was an effort to "invigorate a dialogue, measure where we are, arm firms with information to change, and create competition and a compulsion among firms to raise the bar of what makes a Best Law Firm for Women." The survey had six main sections:

• Work force profile (concentration of women at the different levels);

   

   

• Benefits and compensation;

   

   

• Parental leave and related benefits and policies;

   

   

• Child care;

   

   

• Flexibility; and

   

   

• Retention and advancement of women.

Among the firms that comprise the top 50 "Best Firms for Women," the following breakdown applies:

• Women represented 47 percent of the associates, 37 percent of counsel, 22 percent of nonequity partners and 16 percent of equity partners;

   

   

• 88 percent of the firms offered paid paternity leave to the men;

   

   

• 16 percent offered on-site or near-site full-time child care, and 82 percent offered emergency backup corporate child care;

   

   

• 94 percent had written policies for reduced-hour lawyers, and 92 percent allowed lawyers to work reduced hours for reasons other than child care;

   

   

• 16 percent had female managing partners, and 2 percent had female chairpersons;

   

   

• Women represented 11 percent of the top 5 percent of rainmakers; and

   

   

• Women partners represented 10 percent of the top 10 percent of the most highly compensated lawyers in the firm and 6 percent of the top 5 percent of the most highly compensated lawyers in the firm.

These percentages indicate that while law firms are doing better with flex-time and child-care issues, the retention and promotion of women remains a challenge that firms continue to struggle with.

Pennsylvania boasts four firms on the "Best for Women" list: Duane Morris, Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, K&L Gates and Reed Smith.

Lauren Lonergan Taylor, a partner at Duane Morris specializing in commercial finance, restructuring and bankruptcy, said that Duane Morris "has never made any distinction based on gender. I have always been afforded the same opportunities for assignments, client development and professional growth. I have had the benefit of working with extraordinary mentors, both men and women, who were committed to making me into the best lawyer that I could be. That commitment was never compromised by any value that I personally place on family."

Another firm that seems to be getting it right in Philadelphia is Hangley Aronchick Segal & Pudlin. Ashely M. Chan, a partner at the firm specializing in bankruptcy, corporate restructuring and litigation, said that she was made partner one month before taking her second maternity leave. Chan took five months' maternity leave after her first child was born and seven months' after her second child was born. Upon her return after both births, she worked a 60 percent schedule. She returned to full-time status within a year after her return from her second maternity leave.

She said, "The firm has been very supportive of my requests regarding part-time status and maternity leave, and that flexibility has allowed me to successfully balance my family values with my career and my value to the firm and our clients."

Despite what some believe about certain practice areas being better suited for more flexible work schedules, Henry said, "For lawyers seeking better balance in their lives, the answer is not to steer them into certain practice areas. The result is the creation of pink ghettos. The profession is in a work-life crisis, and with Millennials wanting to practice law differently and Boomers wanting to phase into retirement, the answer, instead, is to re-think the way law firms are structured.

"In late 2007, I developed a methodology called FACTS that provides work-life choices for all law firm lawyers. If we continue to consider this only a 'mommy's' issue, we will not make the progress we need in order to increase satisfaction, productivity and the bottom line."

FACTS is an acronym for work time that can be Fixed (allowing lawyers to choose less high-profile work for more predictable hours); Annualized (high-intensity assignments followed by lulls);  Core (blocks of time established where the lawyer will be available that are less conventional, allowing the lawyer flexibility to meet family and other obligations); Targeted (an agreed-upon goal of hours, set annually, customized for each worker, with compensation adjusted accordingly); and Shared (job sharing).

In her article "Facing the FACTS: Introducing Work/Life Choices for All Firm Lawyers Within the Billable Hour Model" (.pdf), Henry explains that the FACTS methodology hinges on replacing the terms "full time" and "part time" with Target hours (the T in FACTS). She says full time and part time are misnomers that often result in stigmatization (because they are not uniformly defined or applied) and inequity (because salary and treatment do not match contribution).

It seems intuitive that rather than relegate women to certain areas of practice because there may be less courtroom time required, or more predictable hours, the current wisdom seems to be that the profession as a whole needs to evaluate the way it operates and overhaul some antiquated practices. In a culture that promotes diversity, encouraging the retention and promotion of women benefits every law firm. Well-defined policies concerning flex-time, telecommuting, law firm expectations and advancement opportunities are some of the first steps in shifting the paradigm toward a more balanced and, yes, productive, work force.

Maureen Steady and Rachel Shapiro are managing directors in Major, Lindsey & Africa's Philadelphia office. Steady can be reached at (215) 636-9834 or msteady@mlaglobal.com. Shapiro can be reached at (215) 636-9831 or rshapiro@mlaglobal.com.