Just over 10 years ago, LawTalk spoke to women lawyers caught in the work/family dilemma. They all spoke of the constant juggling act required to maintain a commitment to a professional career and a young family. While some firms offered part-time or consulting work, the overall feeling was that most law practices had been slow to offer more flexible work options, and that the practice of law generally was not family friendly. Here we review the situation, talking to women interviewed for that original article and some others.
When she had children, Deborah Hollings left a big firm and became a barrister sole to give her control over her work commitments. She eased back into full-time work three months after her first daughter was born but with her second daughter Zelda, now 9, she worked from home for two years – "because I'd realised just how much work a young baby is … something had to give".
Phone calls were transferred directly from the office to home so "clients didn't even realise I wasn't at my chambers". Her secretary worked with her at home and she employed her mother to help with the children and housework.
These days, Deborah is in the office by 9, after dropping the children at school, and leaves by 5:30pm. She has noticed a slight shift in attitude within the profession.
"A couple of things signal that … one woman partner, with a big family, was recently head-hunted to become a partner in another big firm. That was unheard of 10 years ago. Generally there are more women with children in big firms now."
However, there are still "major problems" and partnerships are still too rigid, she says. "It's that: you must work as hard as each other and must all bring in the same fees. There needs to be a more flexible structure, similar to a barrister’s practice, which allows for women with young children to earn lower fees and take a lower income for a period of time."
Jane Meares also sees a need for more flexible options for paying partners if firms want to retain women with children at that level.
Ten years ago, with two children (then aged 4 and 2), she was a partner in Bell Gully specialising in commercial law, but even with supportive partners and flexible hours plus hired help at home, Jane found life "exhausting" with little time to socialise or for the marriage relationship.
She resigned when her third child (now 9) was three and had two years at home before taking on contract work, which she views as a good option for mothers.
At the end of 2002, she decided it was time "to get a real job" and was appointed to the new position of Manager of Legal Services at the Department of Internal Affairs. There she can take extra unpaid leave and work 30 hours a week – a part-time load she describes as being "right on the cusp of the work-life balance".
Jane finds the government sector presents a good alternative for those who enjoy the intellectual challenge of work but want to work in a more balanced way. Flexible work practices are encouraged and there is a greater ability to accommodate family needs, she says.
However, she expresses some sadness at having to leave the work available in a big law firm. She would have liked the option to be a part-time partner but couldn’t see being offered interesting work because of client demand.
"Clients pay big money for immediate attention and you have to deliver on that."
Ten years ago, as a mother of two, Judith Shea was working full time in the banking/finance field but then took a few years off to be at home with her children. She joined Keegan Alexander in Auckland in June 2002, having spent "ages and ages" looking for a good part-time position. She now works three days a week, mostly on wills, trusts and estates, which she finds better suited to part-time work.
"It doesn't have the same turnaround and time pressures as, say, banking or conveyancing."
The firm is family-friendly, but "nothing's ever perfect", she says. "It's always a juggling act. Trying to get the formula right is difficult, and I think it's always going to be like that. People want to be understanding, but the reality of running a business is that clients' needs have to be met."
In 1993, Fiona Mathieson was the managing partner at Corban Revell in Henderson and the mother of a one-year-old, and referred to her 8.30-5pm regime as part-time. Today, she has her own West Auckland firm, Boyle Mathieson, which she started in 1999 to give her more flexibility. It employs 15 staff and does mostly property and commercial law.
She thinks attitudes towards parenting within the profession have improved in the last decade, even towards non-professional staff. "There's been a positive change in dynamics. If you want to hang on to good staff, you have to be flexible."
However, she identifies several problems with part-time work, one being the cost of providing an office only for part-time use. "Here we have an office that is used by two part-timers and that works well."
Also, it can be difficult adjusting to part-time work when you're used to working full time. "If you have a client base that keeps you active full time, and then you decide to cut down to three days a week, what happens to those clients?"
Prue Kapua, whose children are now 12 and 10, also now has her own firm, Tametekapua Law which includes part-time solicitors on its staff. She feels that while better provision is made now in terms of leave and part-time work, practical implementation of these things still lags behind and attitudes still favour full-time work and people who do not take career breaks to have a family.
Alison McDermott, who is not working at present, also feels that the general attitude has not changed greatly although she personally found Martelli McKegg very accommodating of her needs as a working mother when she returned to work after her third child started school.
Clare Bradley had one child with another on the way and was temporarily "retired" when LawTalk spoke to her in 1993. These days, with three children (11, 10 and 9) she works part-time at TV3 Network Services, dealing mainly with broadcasting standards complaints. TV3 has kept its promise of flexible hours, taking account of her family commitments, even "to the extent of a year’s leave when, as a family, we went to live in Italy".
However, Clare detects few changes within the mainstream legal profession over the past 10 years. "I still have many friends who endeavour to combine work and family life and who strike the same issues - lack of freedom and flexibility.
"I see in other professions a willingness to allow women with family commitments to job-share or work part-time … law need not be any different, but it will require a huge seachange for those options to be accommodated without a negative impact on the women involved."
Deborah Clapshaw also thinks there has been little progress in firms taking responsibility for providing family-friendly work environments. Ten years ago, she was due to have her second child and had taken time off from her part-time job as an associate at Simpson Grierson. Now she is self-employed as a mediator and dispute resolution consultant and teaches dispute resolution at Auckland University. She has two children, "and a very supportive husband".
"I did not believe I could do justice to my own needs and to those of my family if I was working full time in legal practice. I wanted to be available for my children without feeling stressed and stretched."
She did not, and does not, consider part-time legal work within a large firm a viable option.
"You work almost as hard as a full-timer, without the social and other benefits … and you feel neither part of the workforce nor able to participate properly in activities with non-working mothers."
She says there is only token recognition of women's need to work part time. "There is still a perception that part-time work does not really work, and part-time workers are undervalued."
In 1993, Shieff Angland was happy to accommodate the needs of lawyers with family responsibilities in order to attract and retain the skills of experienced women lawyers. Even so, Bronwen Klippel, then a mother of two and an associate at the firm, passed up partnership to set up as a barrister five years ago, citing flexibility.
In her first year as a barrister, she worked full time, but felt she was losing touch with her three children (now 13, 11 and 9) and now works mostly school hours.
Bronwen says the greatest change within the profession has been the growing number of women barristers – nearly three times as many as 10 years ago, with women now making up about 30% of the independent bar. And more women are working part time. Mobile phones and immediate accessibility to information has made this easier than it was 10 years ago, she says.
Kate Davenport also works as a barrister sole for the flexibility it provides. In 1993, she had two children and was working four days a week. She's had another child since but, after separating from her husband in 1997, moved to full-time work.
Kate perceives some improvement in attitudes within the profession - "My instructing solicitors seem more accepting of calling my cell phone, or calling me at home." – but she doesn't think part-time work is any easier.
"The pressures we experienced 10 years ago are still there - the relentless demands of a busy practice, together with the equally relentless demands of family and children."
However, mother of two Kathy Didsbury thinks things have moved forward considerably since 1993, and even then she had been offered a part-time position with Shieff Angland. She says the "work before everything else" mentality is not as prevalent now and part-time work is more accepted.
Now she is a senior associate at Malloy Goodwin Harford in Newmarket, working 9-3, five days a week. "I have at least one week off each school holidays, and four or five weeks at Christmas. There is flexibility to take additional time off to attend school trips, sports and so on."
And Joanne Hodge has been able to combine being a tax partner in Bell Gully’s Auckland office with family responsibilities. She had a four-month-old baby when she joined the firm as a senior solicitor in 1994, and had two more after becoming a partner at the beginning of 1996. For her, the keys to making the career/family mix work successfully have been having good legal staff and being able to afford a full-time (7am-7pm Monday-Friday) nanny.
In her first eight years at Bell Gully, Joanne worked full-time, taking two maternity leaves of four months each, but in the last two years she has cut down to four full days a week, to give her more involvement with her children, including assisting at their school if needed. Bell Gully has been very supportive of this arrangement, she says, as it is of other women partners and solicitors with children.
Joanne thinks tax practice is a more manageable speciality than others such as commercial transactions or litigation. She agrees that in larger firms there is a significant focus on billable work and meeting fee targets, with family commitments having to be accommodated around that to achieve fairness within the partnership.
Jan Kelly, now a district court judge, remembers the challenges of mixing partnership responsibilities with motherhood. She became a partner at Simpson Grierson in Wellington when she was pregnant with her first child and had a second two years later. Initially a litigation partner, she later headed up the Wellington technology team but found both areas of practice equally pressured.
"When the work is on … it is very difficult, impossible really, to say you won’t be there."
It is not a case of firms not trying to accommodate parents – "They are genuinely making an effort and are conscious of the need to retain women after they have had children." – but the competitive nature of practice and the expectations of corporate clients drive the business.
When her children were young, she tried working four full days but after a year returned to full time as many of the requirements of partners – marketing, training, attending partnership conferences and client functions, running a team, recruitment, performance reviews and so on – could not be reduced.
"You are trying to do the same job in fewer hours. I can think of women who manage that, but I personally found it more stressful.
"Ultimately, I decided I had achieved what I wanted to achieve and I resigned to spend more time with my husband and children (now 10 and 8)."
After 18 months at home, Jan was appointed to the District Court in September last year. She thoroughly enjoys the work and finds it more family friendly. The work, including travelling on circuit, is rostered well ahead of time and she can schedule time off more easily.
Senior law lecturer at Victoria University Elisabeth McDonald has two children aged 12 and 13. She stands by her 1993 view that it is hard for a parent to perform as well as those without childcare commitments.
"As an academic, attending conferences is an expected part of the job … yet absences from home for up to 10 days at a time can be complicated. Also, seminars by visiting academics or public figures are held at 5:30pm, which is not really a family-friendly time."
She says the proportion of women academics at the law school has increased from eight out of 31 in 1993 to 13 out of 30 today, seven of whom are senior lecturers. There are, however, no women associate professors or professors in the faculty.
"I have no doubt, if only in relation to myself, that the hours available for research (which is required for promotion) are significantly reduced due to family commitments."
Jane Forrest had two children when she began studying law. After finishing her degree in 1995, she worked full time with Morrison Kent in Wellington. In 2000 she had a third child and dropped back to part-time work, although she did return to work just two weeks after his birth (sharing the parenting with her partner who also worked part time). Initially she worked four hours a day but gradually built back up to a full-time load.
While big firms may have specific family-friendly policies, Jane believes the less pressurised environment at smaller firms can make them more family-friendly in practice. She has found Morrison Kent and Phillips Fox (where she worked for about 15 months before returning to Morrison Kent) very supportive of her and her family. Both had facilities where she could breast feed, express milk or change nappies. Her older children regularly drop into work. She also appreciates the general level of support from staff.
"I think part-time work puts additional pressure on your staff when you are away from the office and I have always had fantastic secretarial support."
However, working part time put financial pressure on Jane and she now works full time as a senior associate in litigation as well as being practice manager – and combining that with family is demanding. Also, litigation, with its requirements to work late and attend seminars and marketing events after hours, is not family friendly.
Lara Connolly became a mother while doing her BA/LLB(Hons) at Canterbury. On graduation she turned down a role at a big law firm, partly because she was not convinced the firm could accommodate her staunch "family first" policy.
Instead, she practised initially at a women's firm in Christchurch, and travelled overseas. In 1998, she was headhunted by Denise Evans at The Law Store in Porirua. While moving to Wellington meant leaving her support network, Lara appreciated Denise's acceptance of her terms: 9-3 and flexibility as required.
She had her second child in 2002, taking 12 months parental leave and now works two days a week, 9:30-2:30. She says Evans is great about this. As a result, Lara feels great loyalty towards the firm, and very enthusiastic in her work. Part-time work inspires people to work harder, she says.
"You need to prove to your boss that you can do the work … even though I supposedly work part time, I do a full-time quota as far as my budget goes. You work hard because you need to get the work done and get home to your kids."
Toni Green, a partner with AWS Legal in Invercargill, is similarly grateful for the support she has received. She has a three-and-a-half-year-old son, Nepia, and has just returned to part-time work after six months on maternity leave following the birth of her second child, Tess, last August. Toni took about 15 weeks maternity leave after Nepia was born before returning to work, where she gradually built up to five hours a day.
She has continued to work part time, even after becoming a partner in July 2002. She often works at night from home and is available by cellphone in the afternoon with access to full office resources via Jetstream links.
Conclusion
So have things changed over the last 10 years? From the stories
of these women – yes and no. It would seem that women who want to have children
and maintain a legal career will find themselves under pressure, no matter what
work option they choose.
But, while some think there has been little change in attitude, overall there seems to be a greater willingness to accommodate their needs. Big law firms generally have family-friendly policies, although human resources spokespeople for those firms concede their readiness to consider flexible working arrangements is constrained by client demand. They acknowledge that the realities of meeting budget and the urgent nature of some legal work make it very tough for lawyers combining work with a primary caregiver role for children.
Some types of work and firms may provide greater flexibility than others, but the fact remains that women lawyers who have children, like all working mothers, continue to face a difficult dilemma juggling competing priorities.
The Women’s Consultative Group believes family commitments may be one of the reasons there are not more women partners in law firms and a future LawTalk will look at just women are faring in the partnership stakes.