Is the “Mommy Track” Set to Become an Official Law Firm Track?
I'm convinced that it's only a matter of time before flexible work options permeate the legal profession. Sure, it's not going to happen by tomorrow morning, but soon.... Change is happening in the profession. It's S-L-O-W, but it's happening.
Not all firms are oblivious to attrition or to the mommy track phenomenon. In fact, according to the New York Times, "Some firms are considering making the 'mommy track' a formal option." Basically, the mommy track would be intended for lawyers who do not have their sights set on becoming partners.
Whether a mommy track would be good or bad for lawyers, especially women lawyers who are most likely to be mommytracked, the idea of a mommy track may just help the profession evolve into a more flexible and accommodating profession.
So, what do you think? Should the Mommy Track go Live?
© 2008 Darling Hill. All Rights Reserved.
1 Responses »
Leave a Response
Entries(RSS)
I would not support a "mommy track." However, I would support everyone (caregivers of children or parents, travelers, marathon runners, community volunteers, retirees, etc.) being able to ramp up and ramp down their careers to accommodate personal considerations, while working with their managers to meet the needs of the workplace.
I don't want to be a second class employee, given reduced proportional pay and benefits, fewer interesting and career-building assignments, and no chance for promotion or partnership. As long as reduced work schedules continue to be associated with motherhood, mothers will continue to face workplace discrimination. They will also continue to leave the law in droves, not a very good investment for firms, law schools, or society.
A "mommy track" also deprives fathers and sons the opportunity to devote time to caregiving, and persons without caregiving responsibilities the opportunity to pursue other legitimate and meaningful activities. Non-mothers will also not want to face the stigma associated with reductions or changes in work.
Do any of us really believe that working 80 hours a week for indefinate periods is sustainable or efficient? Let's tackle the root of the problem and change the way we view work. Let's change the belief that in order to be a valuable employee that you have to put work first at all times. Let's change the belief that only mothers want or need to ramp work down at certain times during their careers. Let's change the billable hour structure (encourages more work) and the benefits structure (encourages fewer employees). Then let's reap the rewards of having valuable lawyers who stay with their firms through their lives' transitions. And if it costs 2-3x's an employees annual salary to replace that employee, and if clients leave firms because they get tired of having to keep getting new lawyers up to speed, this is no chump change!