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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?