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

[Anonymous]

It's simple OP, the fact that you are a partner in BigLaw automatically means that you are raking in the big bucks, that's the assumption anyway. Hence very few people on DCUM will be sympathetic to whatever plight you have. If you were on fire, I'm sure many of them wouldn't even piss on you to put it out.

Just the pervasive attitude towards lawyers in this town. It's mean, lawyers are people too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's simple OP, the fact that you are a partner in BigLaw automatically means that you are raking in the big bucks, that's the assumption anyway. Hence very few people on DCUM will be sympathetic to whatever plight you have. If you were on fire, I'm sure many of them wouldn't even piss on you to put it out.

Just the pervasive attitude towards lawyers in this town. It's mean, lawyers are people too!

Lawyer? That's a red herring. I am a lawyer, too. People aren't hating on the OP for being a lawyer, it's because she was rude regarding the people who responded to her post - she didn't want anything on this thread that could be useful for anybody besides herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I came here for guidance not only because I am in my first trimester, and afraid of the repercussions of disclosing my pregnancy too soon, I am the only woman partner to be pregnant in this BIGLAW firm in many many years (if ever, that is). I am entirely surrounded by men, and the partnership agreement does not specify how a woman in my situation will be treated. I am the chief financial support for my family, and am worried about how to continue providing for them given the uncertainty about how I will be "handled" by the firm.

If you wouldn't put all the above into your original post I'm sure the responses would've been more to your liking. The 4 pages worth of threads is your own doing.

ITA. And I will also note that this is something OP should have investigated before accepting the partnership if she is, in fact, the primary financial support to her family. No job decision is made in our house without considering the impact to our finances and the impact to our health care,since those are the two most important things to us, even more so than the amount of money we make every year. OP, it's time you do a little growing up and realize you have to start thinking about more than just money.

I can see how people would have been ruffled by the tone of that one post by OP, sure, but that aside, I don't agree that OP "should have investigated" how maternity leave would be handled before "accepting the partnership." Particularly in a male-dominated partnership. What was she supposed to say when she offered partnership after working, presumably, very, very hard to earn that offer? Hmm, let me think about it, and before I accept, what is your maternity leave policy for female partners? Come on, that would never happen in real life! If you get a promotion, you take it, assuming you want to stay on track in that field and place of business (and if you don't want to stay on track/there, you leave or reduce schedule or whatever, none of which OP did). Presumably the promotion came with greater remuneration, and as such she has more cushion to cover a potential 3 months of unpaid leave, if it were to come to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I came here for guidance not only because I am in my first trimester, and afraid of the repercussions of disclosing my pregnancy too soon, I am the only woman partner to be pregnant in this BIGLAW firm in many many years (if ever, that is). I am entirely surrounded by men, and the partnership agreement does not specify how a woman in my situation will be treated. I am the chief financial support for my family, and am worried about how to continue providing for them given the uncertainty about how I will be "handled" by the firm.

I am a biglaw partner and I find this shocking. I won't defend biglaw, argue that it's family friendly, offers equal opportunity to women, etc.--but what biglaw firm has not had a pregnant partner "in my many years if ever"? Do you mean in your group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can see how people would have been ruffled by the tone of that one post by OP, sure, but that aside, I don't agree that OP "should have investigated" how maternity leave would be handled before "accepting the partnership." Particularly in a male-dominated partnership. What was she supposed to say when she offered partnership after working, presumably, very, very hard to earn that offer? Hmm, let me think about it, and before I accept, what is your maternity leave policy for female partners? Come on, that would never happen in real life! If you get a promotion, you take it, assuming you want to stay on track in that field and place of business (and if you don't want to stay on track/there, you leave or reduce schedule or whatever, none of which OP did). Presumably the promotion came with greater remuneration, and as such she has more cushion to cover a potential 3 months of unpaid leave, if it were to come to that.

Have you never heard the term buyer beware? You don't have to accept a promotion, or a partnership. Ever. And yes, it is up to you -- and you alone -- to look out for you. In OP's case, if she knew she was planning to start a family, she should have looked into the implications accepting that promotion would have, such as not getting paid maternity leave or getting less of a draw. Shame on her for not doing that.

[Anonymous]

Is there a reason that OP keeps capitalizing biglaw??

[Anonymous]

OP here. Thanks so very much to recent posters who have offered their helpful experience and knowledge--they're much appreciated!

Yup, only female partner to be pregnant in many years, although there was one who adopted twins about 7 years ago now, I believe. Given the changes in management and the economy, I can't say her experience is likely to be particularly relevant though. Not so surprising, I guess, when you consider that most of my female law classmates, in accord with the national nunmbers, have left the practice of law altogether.

[Anonymous]

SHAME ON YOU INTOLERANT NAME CALLERS! It is emphatically NOT OP's fault for investigating maternity leave before accepting partnership--not one bit of this is fault oriented. It is not her fault for being one of the first women to succeed in her industry and have a family, if the facts are as she says. This can't be how you talk to your friends, children or strangers, could it? If so, you're disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SHAME ON YOU INTOLERANT NAME CALLERS! It is emphatically NOT OP's fault for investigating maternity leave before accepting partnership--not one bit of this is fault oriented. It is not her fault for being one of the first women to succeed in her industry and have a family, if the facts are as she says. This can't be how you talk to your friends, children or strangers, could it? If so, you're disgusting.

Well, if my friend said, "I wonder what the maternity leave policy is at my job" and I answered, "well, hmm, I don't know, at mine it's xyz" and she answered me: "I don't care about your experiences. Can you focus only on my situation?" Yeah, I'd talk to her this way. And yes, I'd encourage her to ask about it at work instead of going online to find about how other irrelevant places of employment handle it.

[Anonymous]

Well, 12:53, actually, what OP did was to ask for others' experiences as law firm partners, and then a bunch of randoms, who were not law firm partners, started to hijack. I think she asked politely for more experiences from law firm partners. Your example is totally off base, which shows you're definitely a lawyer (and if you are, not a very good one). In any event, why is it irrelevant to ask about other places of employment? You ask mothers of kids who are totally different than your own for advice about how to deal with your kid. What's the difference?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SHAME ON YOU INTOLERANT NAME CALLERS! It is emphatically NOT OP's fault for investigating maternity leave before accepting partnership--not one bit of this is fault oriented. It is not her fault for being one of the first women to succeed in her industry and have a family, if the facts are as she says. This can't be how you talk to your friends, children or strangers, could it? If so, you're disgusting.

I don't get this post at all...wouldn't it have made more sense for OP to have understood the policies in place at her job before deciding to get pregnant and then freaking out that she might not get paid? Or is it better for women to remain purposfully ignorant until they find themselves between a rock and a hard place and then deal with it by lashing out at strangers on the Internet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a reason that OP keeps capitalizing biglaw??

I doubt her firm is really biglaw. If it is, it's doutlessly large enough to have had some pregnant partners recently--at least in other offices, other groups.

[Anonymous]

She wasnt a bitch - she just asked that her thread stay on topic instead of being sidetracked by a poster who has already asked her own question in another thread. It would be good in general if dcum had a community norm that if you cant answer the question, dont post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SHAME ON YOU INTOLERANT NAME CALLERS! It is emphatically NOT OP's fault for investigating maternity leave before accepting partnership--not one bit of this is fault oriented. It is not her fault for being one of the first women to succeed in her industry and have a family, if the facts are as she says. This can't be how you talk to your friends, children or strangers, could it? If so, you're disgusting.

I don't get this post at all...wouldn't it have made more sense for OP to have understood the policies in place at her job before deciding to get pregnant and then freaking out that she might not get paid? Or is it better for women to remain purposfully ignorant until they find themselves between a rock and a hard place and then deal with it by lashing out at strangers on the Internet?

Well said. I love you!

[Anonymous]

Jaysus, quit it with the backbiting, ladies! We do not all have to meet some impossible standard of maternal and professional uber planning and foresight. In this legal market op probably had no choice but to stay at her firm ... If she had put off baby making 5 more years to move to the absolute perfect firm you would be castigating her for waiting too long if she had fertility problems. We can't plan everything percectly. Besides, if she is going to face some discrimination (not unlikely) it makes sense that she would have kept her baby plans underwraps from the partnership til now.