How does maternity leave work for a law firm partner? No FMLA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, it depends on your specific firm. If it's not in the partnership agreement, then ASK SOMEONE AT YOUR FIRM. That is the only way you will get the on point feedback you're so adament about recieving.

Gee, I wonder why female partners have a reputation for being clueless bitches?

Seriously, I hate to pile on, but if you managed to go to law school, graduate, get a job, and become partner at BIGLAW as you put it, surely you can figure out where your HR person sits in your office? And ask the question? Or read your agreement? You are a lawyer, aren't you?

In the piling on category - OP, you know that thread about how people hate to work for women? Yeah, they're talking about you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, it depends on your specific firm. If it's not in the partnership agreement, then ASK SOMEONE AT YOUR FIRM. That is the only way you will get the on point feedback you're so adament about recieving.

Gee, I wonder why female partners have a reputation for being clueless bitches?

Stop being so hateful. And it is not just a simple matter of reading the partnership agreement or consulting hr - internal policy cannot trump the law.

Isn't this a LAWYER asking the initial question? So if it's not a matter of reading the partnership agreement or consulting HR, then the LAWYER asking the question to begin with should be able to do the research and figure out the answer -- or hire someone who can.

I think those of us who do not receive maternity leave are just tired of hearing over-paid partners whine about what they don't get despite all that they do. You BIGLAW partners aren't the only people working exhaustive hours; you're just getting compensated for them. Talk to, say, a trial attorney at the DoJ and perhaps you'll understand just how much greener the grass is on your side of the fence, even without three months of paid maternity leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, it depends on your specific firm. If it's not in the partnership agreement, then ASK SOMEONE AT YOUR FIRM. That is the only way you will get the on point feedback you're so adament about recieving.

Gee, I wonder why female partners have a reputation for being clueless bitches?

Stop being so hateful. And it is not just a simple matter of reading the partnership agreement or consulting hr - internal policy cannot trump the law.

So a self-proclaimed BIGLAW partner is on DCUM, anonymously asking for legal advice? OK, here you go - that Westlaw password you used when you were a lowly associate? Reacquaint yourself with it.

[Anonymous]

Guys, she might have just wanted to do a survey of others in similar positions so she could make the case for paid leave. It may be a place where there haven't been non-equity partners wanting to take leave, so there's no precedent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In answer to your question ... I believe there was an age discrimination case against sidley austin where the eeoc contended that partners were covered by the adea. That might be relevant for fmla too - especially since you are a non equity partner, which is not really like an owner.

At any rate, not covering partners for mat leave is shitty and indicates that the firm in general is not woman/ family friendly. It extends to more than just the partner.

Not sure if the OP is at Sidley, she hasn't mentioned that. Sidley had some unique features that led to that case - self perpetuating mgmt (so partners did not vote on mgmt), closed comp, no or limited partner votes. Many firms go to great pains to try to make partners behave like owners. But of course income partners are different. Some are K1 and some are W2 partners. If OP is a W2 income partner then she is definintely an employee and should be covered by whatever the mat policy is.

Most large firms have a mat/pat policy, including for partners. So agree with PPs suggesting that OP needs to ask what it is. If she can't find the HR director then ask someone else who has had a baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guys, she might have just wanted to do a survey of others in similar positions so she could make the case for paid leave. It may be a place where there haven't been non-equity partners wanting to take leave, so there's no precedent.

Yeah, that's definitely it. "Well, managing partner/firm administrator, 5 anonymous people, who may or may not be biglaw partners, lawyers, pregnant, or women, told me on DCUM that THEY got paid maternity leave, so I should too."

[Anonymous]

This thread is making me despair for women-kind. Yes, op is a lawyer, but as any lawyer knows, that does not mean she magically knows the answer to all legal questions. Asking fellow lawyers is a perfectly reasonable starting place for research. Plus, if she is asking for standard industry practice as opposed to the law, an anon forum is the perfect place to start.

Instead of bitching at each other, we need to stand together and be helpful. Information sharing is one crucial part of this.

[Anonymous]

It's also possible OP just found out she's pregnant and wants info without speaking to anyone in her office. Course that would've been helpful to know in her original post (along with other key details), but obviously being the stellar lawyer she is she's great at being vague.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is making me despair for women-kind. Yes, op is a lawyer, but as any lawyer knows, that does not mean she magically knows the answer to all legal questions. Asking fellow lawyers is a perfectly reasonable starting place for research. Plus, if she is asking for standard industry practice as opposed to the law, an anon forum is the perfect place to start.

Instead of bitching at each other, we need to stand together and be helpful. Information sharing is one crucial part of this.

Last I check, OP bitched at what she felt were non-helpful posts because they didn't relate specifically to her, or the question she posed. Pot. Kettle. Black.

[Anonymous]

What is with all of the idiotic posts? OP was pretty clear that her firm doesn't offer paid leave. She's looking to see what other firms do and for advice about how to raise it with the firm. She's not looking for legal advice or for someone to tell her what the firm's current benefits are. But these things are often subject to change.

Why are there so many stupid people attacking her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is with all of the idiotic posts? OP was pretty clear that her firm doesn't offer paid leave. She's looking to see what other firms do and for advice about how to raise it with the firm. She's not looking for legal advice or for someone to tell her what the firm's current benefits are. But these things are often subject to change.

Why are there so many stupid people attacking her?

Funny that you call people stupid when you didn't understand the original post. She said that they might cut her draw...might, that means they might not, in which case she would be fully compensated while on leave.

At any rate, I'd seriously doubt OP is the first pregnant partner at her firm. It's having a baby, not inventing the wheel. She should ask how others have done it before her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is with all of the idiotic posts? OP was pretty clear that her firm doesn't offer paid leave. She's looking to see what other firms do and for advice about how to raise it with the firm. She's not looking for legal advice or for someone to tell her what the firm's current benefits are. But these things are often subject to change.

Why are there so many stupid people attacking her?

Funny that you call people stupid when you didn't understand the original post. She said that they might cut her draw...might, that means they might not, in which case she would be fully compensated while on leave.

At any rate, I'd seriously doubt OP is the first pregnant partner at her firm. It's having a baby, not inventing the wheel. She should ask how others have done it before her.

ITA. And if she is in her first trimester as one PP suggested and doesn't want to alert even HR to her pregnancy, then she should just wait until she annouces and then do some asking. After all, if she's a relatively new partner -- and it seems like she is -- then she's not about to leave her firm over non-existent maternity leave. And if she is, then she shouldn't have bothered going for partner where she's at, or she should have investigated maternity leave for partners before heading down that path.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks for all of your thoughtful replies. One request, please: I'd prefer not to discuss unrelated associate and federal leave bank issues. I'm a nonequity partner at BIGLAW, so I don't profit share. I'm hoping just to hear from those with relevant experience. Many thanks, ladies.

Wow, selfish much? This is an open forum. People are helping you and are also free to share thoughts about similar things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is with all of the idiotic posts? OP was pretty clear that her firm doesn't offer paid leave. She's looking to see what other firms do and for advice about how to raise it with the firm. She's not looking for legal advice or for someone to tell her what the firm's current benefits are. But these things are often subject to change.

Why are there so many stupid people attacking her?

I for one was sympathetic to her situation until the snip about not caring to hear other experiences not directly related to her. That's just bitchy. I too am now in the camp of hoping she doesn't get paid maternity leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is with all of the idiotic posts? OP was pretty clear that her firm doesn't offer paid leave. She's looking to see what other firms do and for advice about how to raise it with the firm. She's not looking for legal advice or for someone to tell her what the firm's current benefits are. But these things are often subject to change.

Why are there so many stupid people attacking her?

Funny that you call people stupid when you didn't understand the original post. She said that they might cut her draw...might, that means they might not, in which case she would be fully compensated while on leave.

At any rate, I'd seriously doubt OP is the first pregnant partner at her firm. It's having a baby, not inventing the wheel. She should ask how others have done it before her.

The fact that they reserve the right to cut her draw means there is no protected maternity leave.