Eight years ago, at a conference sponsored by Ms. JD , I attended a gripe-session about the hardships of big law for women, to which I responded by listing the benefits of starting one’s own firm. As I described here, my remarks were received tepidly, and in fact, one woman responded:
Starting a firm is all well and good, but if everyone flees biglaw life, firms will be left stranded as the last bastions of male dominated hierarchy.”
Seems that women aren’t interested in saving big law any longer now that everyone is jumping ship. For example, Joan Williams, who heads the Center for Work, Life Law (tagline: jumpstarting the stalled gender revolution) has now jumped on the disrupt big law bandwagon, with an article in the Harvard Business Review about the new business models like Axiom that are poaching big law talent, then turning around and “siphoning off the [routine] work that big law used to rely on to balance its books.” Moreover, these ventures are offering superior work-life balance options to both women – and men. Moreover – and while not mentioned in the article, the new business models give women more opportunities to run the show – as a growing number of these lawyer-on-demand services – such as those mentioned here are run by women.
While it’s great that the legal profession is embracing new models, why did it have to take so long? Imagine the women who attended Ms. JD eight years ago who might have carved out a different path sooner instead of marching back to big law with hopes of making it better. They could have been at the beginning of a new movement, not the end.
Moreover, are these alternative models actually better for women in the long run? Sure, they provide good salaries and more balanced hours. But at the end of the day, you’re an employee and not an owner, with little opportunity to control your destiny. If running the show matters to you – and matters to women generally – starting your own firm is still the way to go. It may not necessarily afford the same work life balance, but you’ll still be able to control the hours and work-flow.
Finally, the most important lesson in all of this is that if you’re not happy whether at big law or in-house or wherever you are, leap now – no matter what anyone says. You have no obligations to rescue big law or the legal profession at large – at the end of the day, all that matters is your family, your financial security and your dreams.
I tend to agree with you overall (being a solo myself) but I can’t help but feel a little sad knowing that if every woman working in BigLaw decided to take that leap and leave BigLaw, then there will no more female mentors/sponsors for the next wave of female lawyers entering BigLaw. If Biglaw becomes even MORE male dominated, then the vicious cycle of underrepresentation will just continue. I’ve never worked for BigLaw (nor have I ever wanted to!) but there are women out there who do it and we want them to try to stick around and help shape that future.
If women want to stay in BigLaw, I’m certainly in favor of that. But if they don’t (as most conclude eventually), I think it’s absurd to try to convince them to stay in the name of feminism. And this isn’t hypothetical! Various people have told me I’m a bad feminist because I quit my BigLaw job. (Lee and I had this exact discussion in our Authenticity podcast episode.) I don’t buy it!