Panelists Discuss Work-Life Balance Issues By Sharon A. Balsamo 05/19/09
The elusive pursuit of work-life balance in the legal profession was the topic of discussion at a program entitled, “Tales from the Top: Unraveling Work-Life Balance Issues” sponsored by the NJSBA’s Work-Life Balance Task Force. The Final Report of the NJSBA Task Force was distributed to audience members, as well as the just-released report from the Council on Gender Parity in Labor and Education entitled, “Legal Talent at the Crossroads: Why New Jersey Women Lawyers Leave Their Law Firms and Why They Choose to Stay.” Task Force chairs Kathleen Fennelly and David Jay were co-moderators, and Gender Parity Council Chair Dianne Mills McKay was one of the panelists. Other panelists included Judges Esther Salas and Lisa Perez-Friscia, Porzio Bromberg & Newman’s Managing Partner Jeffrey Campbell, Essex County’s First Assistant Prosecutor Carolyn Murray and former NJSBA President Lynn Fontaine Newsome of Donahue, Hagan, Klein, Newsome and O’Donnell. A few key tips highlighted by the panel included: 1. For managers considering establishing alternative work arrangements, it is important that the firms’ expectations from the employee utilizing the arrangement are made clear from the beginning – including how much “face time” will be expected, billable hour expectations, opportunities for bonuses and the ability or inability to achieve partnership status from an alternative work arrangement position. 2. If a court schedule conflicts with a personal matter, let the judge know and ask for a reasonable accommodation. Many judges are willing to consider such requests as long as, again, they are reasonable. 3. Before seeking an alternative work arrangement, consider what you are willing to give up to get what you want. Many firms are willing to consider reduced hour arrangements but in exchange for reduced compensation arrangements. Likewise, government or other non-traditional positions are available for lawyers that offer, perhaps, less demanding schedules, but also offer less generous salaries. 4. If you choose to “opt-out” of the profession for awhile, consider doing per diem or contract work to keep in touch with the profession. Similarly, consider taking technology courses or doing volunteer work to keep up with changing technology and changing research methods. The panelists noted that while the subject of alternative work arrangements was at one time a gender issue, it is now moving toward becoming a generational issue. More than one panelist related incidents of being told by a younger associate that they did not want to be “like you.” The panelists debated whether that meant newer attorneys didn’t want to work as hard or just didn’t want to work in the same way. Mentoring was also noted by the panelists as an important ingredient in achieving work-life balance. Two of the panelists spoke of having understanding bosses early in their careers who encouraged them to explore different options to pursue their work and family lives simultaneously in a manner that made both fulfilling. Both noted without that support, their careers may have turned out differently. Each of the panelists offered something unique to the work-life balance discussion, drawing on their diverse backgrounds and varied current positions. Lynn Fontaine Newsome spoke of the importance of having conversations about work-life balance and encouraging younger attorneys that, while challenging, they can still pursue a successful career while playing an active role in their children’s and families’ lives. She acknowledged little separation between her career and her home life when her two sons were younger, to the point of her son telling an audience of class moms at a Mother’s Day event that he loved his mother because “she’s a lawyer!” Newsome was mortified, but a colleague assured her it was because he was proud of what she did for a living. Newsome began the story to illustrate the difficulty of getting to a school event in the middle of the day, and lamented that, despite the strides women have made over the years, schools still hold those events in the middle of the workday, making it difficult for working parents to attend. When faced with conflicts between a scheduled court appearance and a school event or other personal matter, both judges advised audience members to not be afraid to ask judges for reasonable schedule accommodations. Both said they were amendable to receiving such requests and accommodated them when they could. Both, however, cautioned that accommodations can only go so far. A short adjournment, for example, is probably doable, while an extended adjournment may be more problematic and met with more resistance. Carolyn Murray acknowledged that government positions may provide a more stable schedule than private practice and more opportunity to move to positions with less demanding schedules, such as moving from litigation to appeals for a time; however, she acknowledged the need to be willing to forego higher salaries. She also discussed the broader picture that must sometimes be taken into consideration by management when evaluating requests for part-time or reduced schedules, noting, for example, that the Prosecutor’s Office consists of many other professionals besides attorneys who must be accommodated as well. Jeffrey Campbell described himself as the typical workaholic who consistently bills 3000 or more hours a year. He noted his firm has moved in the direction of accommodating less demanding scheduled, however. The firm has a variety of written policies to address alternative work schedules, but Campbell noted each written policy provides enough flexibility to permit managers to adapt the policy to every unique situation. He spoke of the importance of recognizing the firm’s bottom line considerations in crafting any kind of alternative work arrangement situation, and noted that not just managers, but employees must be willing to compromise a bit as well. When questioned, he described a debate in his firm about whether attorneys who work a 75% schedule should receive 75% compensation. He explained, from the management perspective, that there are certain fixed costs whether an attorney is working 75% or 100% of their schedule, such as office space, support staff and benefits. Ultimately, the policy established at his firm was set with 75% compensation for a 75% schedule, although it appeared he felt there was still room for debate on that issue. Both the Task Force Report and the Gender Parity Council’s Report highlight the benefits to law firms to make reasonable work-life balance accommodations – benefits that help the firm’s bottom line. Both reports, however, as well as these panelists, agree that achieving work-life balance is a two-way street, and those seeking such balance must be willing to work at making it happen. Anyone who wants a copy of either report mentioned above can e-mail me at sbalsamo@njsba.com.
Make a Comment	Recommend this to Others
<<< Previous Blog - Todd's Annual Meeting Blog --- Thursday, May 14th
What's In a Name? - Next Blog >>>