You have1 free article left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.
You have 1 free article left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.

Lawyers Weekly - legal news for Australian lawyers

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

Goodbye job applications, hello dream career
Seize control of your career and design the future you deserve with LW career

Is pregnancy holding women back from partnership?

Lawyers Weekly recently spoke to two female lawyers who recounted how their employers displayed bias and discrimination against pregnancy. 

user iconJerome Doraisamy 09 April 2018 Big Law
Pregnant woman
expand image

In 1977, the Anti-Discrimination Act (NSW) that passed the state Parliament contained exemptions that allowed employers to not hire or dismiss women if they were pregnant at the time they applied, interviewed or were hired for a job.

Those exemptions – which permitted discrimination against pregnant women – were recently removed. But hurdles surrounding pregnancy in the workplace may still exist, including whether falling pregnant and going on maternity leave affects the potential of a female lawyer to make partner in a law firm.

A senior lawyer in a national Australian law firm (hereafter Woman 1), speaking on the condition of anonymity, said she was advised by a partner at her firm not to fall pregnant until she was a partner, at which point she would be better placed to take leave.

“We had been talking about somebody who had just had a baby, and he said make sure you make partner before you do that, because otherwise it is harder to become partner in the first place,” she recounted.

“I think it was actually said as a genuine piece of advice, and he would have thought he was helping me.”

An associate at another national firm (Woman 2), also speaking anonymously, said that upon announcing her pregnancy and impending maternity leave, opportunities that had been promised were suddenly no longer available to her.

“I applied for some CPD training but didn’t get support to do it, because it would fall during my pregnancy and then maternity leave,” she said.

“Also, before I said I was pregnant, I was told it would be fine for me to become a member of a certain legal association, but when I applied for support to join that association, I was denied.”

Woman 2 then learned that her employment status changed from full-time to part-time, with her pay scale changing to a pro rata basis, which led to a refusal of standard pay increases.

“Because I was going on maternity leave when the next salary review was to happen, I was told that my salary was not able to be increased because halfway through the pay period I would be away, so the implication was that I would not be at work and thus didn’t deserve that increase,” she said.

In considering the wider culture of law firms, Woman 1 said she felt like, sadly, the advice she’d been given was actually useful for her career progression.

“I think it unfortunately is true that it was a really good piece of advice, if you are one to prioritise your career over a family, at least for a period of time,” she said.

“I’ve seen people around me have children, and I think it definitely sets them back.”

Woman 2 agreed: “I wasn’t the only woman to fall pregnant and go on maternity leave, but there was an acceptance of those terms and conditions.”

“[There exists a] power imbalance because women don’t want to rock the boat because they’re just happy to have a job.”

The negativity didn’t stop for Woman 2 even when she left that employer, as she has discovered limitations with flexible working arrangements at her new firm.

“I’ve had some experience with inflexibility when my baby is sick and I have to look after her, and have been told I can’t work from home because it’s not a good environment to do that in my new workplace,” she explained.

“Plus, I’ve been told that if I’m working from home even when the baby isn’t sick, they don’t know if I’m doing the washing instead of working.”

The impact of such communication has a deleterious effect, both for these women and females across the board.

“It makes you feel undervalued, which is reflected in salary, respect (or lack thereof) at work, and also in fewer high-level projects and assignments being given to you,” Woman 2 said.

“Even though you might have time and experience behind you, it’s not valued anymore, and that’s upsetting.”

Woman 1 agreed: “The impact upon your personal life is still potentially very significant, and I think some of that has to do with the way that law firms operate internally, and maybe some of the ways operations happen are incompatible with true flexibility, so there has to be more systemic, drastic change in the way the business of law is run,” she said.

At a management level, she said there must be an upheaval of cultural norms so that women can be more open about their plans for the future.

“[They have to] genuinely implement a change or clear progression path where somebody’s merits are considered and not necessarily their age, sex or whether they’re planning to have children,” Woman 1 argued.

She also suggested a strategic approach for individual females approaching childrearing.

“Unfortunately, and while it’s a bit sad, my advice would be to keep those personal decisions quiet and not share plans for having a child if that is in your future, because I still believe it will impact upon progression,” she said.

Woman 2 advocated a practical approach to intra-firm conversation on this topic.

“It would be great if there was someone enlisted to negotiate on behalf of women – an older mentor to go in to bat for them, be in their corner, sit with them in the room so there’s not such a power imbalance for someone who is female, junior and also pregnant,” she said.

Individuals should cultivate mentor relationships with senior or partner level lawyers, she said, who can empathise in that situation.

But, if those negotiations don’t work, she said not to be afraid to look elsewhere.

“Vote with your feet,” she argued.

While recent amendments to the Anti-Discrimination Act removed the aforementioned discriminatory exemptions, there is still a way to go in fully addressing issues affect women’s career progression.

“Sadly, pregnancy and family responsibilities discrimination remains prevalent in Australia,” said Kingsford Legal Centre director, associate professor Anna Cody said.

“One in two mothers [experiences] discrimination at work during pregnancy, parental leave or [when returning] to work.”

Jerome Doraisamy

Jerome Doraisamy

Jerome Doraisamy is the managing editor of Lawyers Weekly and HR Leader. He is also the author of The Wellness Doctrines book series, an admitted solicitor in New South Wales, and a board director of the Minds Count Foundation.

You can email Jerome at: jerome.doraisamy@momentummedia.com.au 

Tags
Comments (16)
  • Avatar
    The real problem is, and remains, the old-fashioned notion that only women are responsible for raising children. We should not be enabling men to not do their share, we will only see real change when men admit this is a problem they are causing and do their share at home. See Scandinavia, my friends from there are horrified to discover they here there are very few men dropping kids at childcare, attending school events and generally being equal parents. Women also need to step up and realise raising kids is not a job, it’s what parents do while also working. If you’re an adult, financial dependency equals an unequal relationship, and sends an awful message to your kids that men work and women are unpaid servants (slaves).
    0
  • Avatar
    It's not only pregnancy - It's time out if the office for any reason. At 3.5 years PQE in a prominent national firm I went to London where I did a 1-year Masters and then worked for 2 years for a top-tier London firm. I returned to find that my London experience had not improved my promotional prospects one iota; I was promoted to senior associate about 3 years after most of my cohort.
    0
  • Avatar
    Wow.

    The comments on here are nothing short of disturbing.

    What a pack of the complainers. You want the same rewards as your male colleagues, make the same sacrifices. Work around the clock, don't have kids, don't see your kids, be accessible 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

    Not fans of equality when it comes to doing the hard work eh girls?
    -4
    • Avatar
      Debbie you are delusional women can and do Work just as hard.
      2
    • Avatar
      Oh my goodness grief - I cannot believe you wrote that. Plain scary that anyone, let alone a woman, could be so judgmental and would criticise women like this. I had to read it again to see if I had read it wrong the first time and then a 3rd time to see if you were trying to be funny.

      Who do you think is looking after the home front for those men who live at or for work?? My mother was one of those. If a woman wants a career as well as be a mother she is either criticised or in most cases expected to juggle both with minimum disruption to her husband's career.
      3
      • Avatar
        I don't think "Debbie" is his real name. Unless it's Debbie the Dinosaur
        0
  • Avatar
    Please please change the headline of this article to "Are attitudes towards pregnancy holding women back from partnership?" The current headline is so assumptive and incorrect that it is offensive. The only thing pregnancy "does" is produce a baby.
    6
  • Avatar
    I'd say the headline is a misnomer. It is not pregnancy holding women back at all. Rather it is the archaic and sexist attitudes and practices of law firms that are holding women back from partnership. The incorrect headline exemplifies the issue at hand, an industry completely unable to see the problems it has.

    I agree with the commenter above that the award giving and back slapping started far to early and prior to any real change having been effected.
    6
  • Avatar
    One of the interviewees is recorded as saying, ”[There exists a] power imbalance because women don’t want to rock the boat because they’re just happy to have a job.” Law firms are full of PEOPLE (ie men too) who don't want to rock the boat because they're just happy to have a job. There are plenty of fresh law graduates pouring out of the universities every year !
    2
    • Avatar
      Agreed those below equity partner in firms do not want to 'rock the boat' because they want to keep their job and their career.
      3
    • Avatar
      Heaven forbid that we should stop talking about men for a moment
      4
  • Avatar
    To my mind, and given my experience, that's not even a question. The answer is an obvious yes. Bias (whether conscious or unconscious) against women with family and caring responsibilities is ubiquitous within the legal profession, and the notion of true, universally available flexible working arrangements (as opposed to the token flexible worker within an office) is akin to the pink unicorn. The legal profession likes to pat itself on the back about how well it's addressing these type of issues (as per the farcical awards given to firms for achievement in this area) when the truth, for those on the ground, is that nothing much has changed at all. (NB. This comment is written anonymously because, in the legal profession, it would be akin to career suicide to put my name to it)
    8
    • Avatar
      When the women's lawyers forums and the law society's that say they are there with the aim of promoting the voices of women in the legal profession start growing a back bone and calling firms out and forcing change only then can that change be made. Agree with the OP - career suicide speaking out/expressing views that do no reflect those of the equity/management of the firm/interfere with profit.
      3
  • Avatar
    Nothing has changed Monday, 09 April 2018
    I took 3 months off ( unpaid) with each of my kids. I was told by my boss” pity you didn’t take longer, I could have replaced you”. I was the first senior associate in my firm to ever return from maternity leave. All my high-billing work was taken off me and given to someone more junior, whom I was expected to train to do it when I got back. I refused, and said the junior could help me on MY files. Was under a new partner with the second, he told me he “ didn’t approve of mother’s with young children working”. I invited him to pay me to stay home, as the main breadwinner 3 months was what I could afford unpaid.
    2
    • Avatar
      When I was on the 'pathway to partnership' at a global firm that frequents the headlines on here. Was told by my mentor that if I indcated during any of the stages that I intended to start a family then I would ruin my chances, so best to keep my mouth shut. Keeping one's mouth shut appears to be the grand theme at the majority of these firms. Lots of work still to be done in the profession.
      6
Avatar
Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!