DLA Piper Modifies Parental Leave Policy - Bloomberg's Claire Suddah Joins in the Growing Vilification of This "Business" Decision

 " ... [DLA Piper is] cutting parental leave benefits for 'non-partner' lawyers, reducing the amount of 'baby bonding' time it offers non-birthing parents from 18 weeks to 12 weeks. Starting May 1, fathers, non-birthing mothers, adoptive and foster parents will see their paid leave duration slashed by a third." - Claire Suddah, Bloomberg, April 18, 2024

Bloomberg joins the rest of media such as Abovethelaw at vilifying this change of parental-benefit policy by DLA Piper. Increasingly parents and those considering becoming parents have become aware of how myriad other nations provide better parental leave benefits than what is common in the US. Ironically, this law firm operates in 40 nations. Some of them such as Sweden have a very progressive approach in providing parental leave. 

DLA Piper defends its policy change by claiming a need to have adequate coverage for the work needing to be done. If the new parents aren't there working, it is assumed, the work won't be able to get done. 

Not only does shortened parental leave cut bonding time. Also, sooner does the meter start running on childcare expenses. Unless the parents have a local support system of relatives they will be taking on those high costs. 

Overall, when it comes to parental leave, the DLA Piper benefits for birthing parents are in the middle. 

This development brings to mind the current pro-se lawsuit against Jones Day about parental leave by two former employees and former US Supreme Court clerks. They are Mark Savignac and Julia Sheketoff. The two have been masters in generating media coverage of the issues involved. The timing for DLA Piper's move couldn't be worse. 

What the question is about the DLA Piper policy change is: Will other law firms also cut back parental leave benefits? Or will there be such a backlash against DLA Piper by so many constituencies, including other law firms, that they will have to ditch the new policy?

In my coaching practice, when I guide lawyers most contend that, unless there is a full-time stay-at-home partner, parenting can get in the way of a career. 

Even if they can afford the expense of childcare there is the extreme undertow of stress about the possibility that the arrangement fall through. In addition, the child could become so sick as to require a trip to a medical facility - that is, the lawyer's being absent from the office. 

Limiting beliefs? Self-defeating? Stuck? Complimentary consultation with Coach Jane Genova (text/phone 203-468-8579, janegenova374@gmail.com) 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Akin Gump Julia Ghahramani's March 2021 Cocaine+ Death - So?

   It had been way back more than a year ago that first-year associate at law firm Akin Gump Julia Ghahramani died from cocaine laced with fentanyl. Yet that story keeps resurfacing.  This week  RollonFriday  revisits it. And  Reddit Big Law  considers the issue if the energy from cocaine is what's making possible those 2,500 hours billed in law firms.  Is what's keeping this on the radar the hunch that use of the illegal substance cocaine is common among those practicing law? After all, in addition to being an energy-booster, it provides a nice reward for such hard-working lawyers. Also, they have the earnings to afford it. Most of the rest of gunners have to stick with boozing. So, why not?  The reality might be setting in that the death could simply have been an aberration. Think about it this way: Ghahramani had bad luck in her alleged choice of dealers. Others might be able to exert more scrutiny in overseeing the content of the illegal drugs they sold. The message c
Read more

Up-or-Out: McKinsey Raises the Pressure, In Contrast Some Law Firms Ease It through Nonequity Partner Tier

" McKinsey & Co.  warned some US consultants last week they are running out of time to win promotion, raising the 'up or out' pressure on staff as the global consulting industry struggles." - Abovethefold Article in Bloomberg , March 27, 2024 This is yet another sign that once-iconic McKinsey is a professional services firm in trouble. One challenge is overcapacity of manpower. It has also warned about 3,000 consultants about "concerns" regarding their performance.  In addition to the overall slowdown in management consulting, McKinsey faces scrutiny from myriad sources about its client list including assignments with China and Saudi Arabia. There also has been that hatchet-job book "When McKinsey Comes to Town." The most damning aspect of the expose is that former employees dump on it. Posts on the professional anonymous network Fishbowl Consulting aren't optimistic about a turnaround at McKinsey or at other players in that sector. In cont
Read more

Down Memory Lane - There Was Actually a Time in When $70k for New JDs Was Big Money

  Let's cut to the chase. The year was 1987.  On a Monday in October the stock market crashed.  Corporate downsizing, made an art at GE by Jack Welch, was purging the system of middle-aged middle managers. Staples caught the wave of accidental entrepreneurs forced out of corporate careers. It created the new category of office supplies for small business. We the purged agonized at Staples about what color business stationary.  It was the worst of economic times, at least since The Great Depression.  Meanwhile, large law firms were getting a lot of attention because they were paying inexperienced law-school graduates starting salaries of up to $70k.  Cravath got the ball rolling on that. The phenomenon was enough to attract a major article by The Washington Post.   The kicker was this: The money wasn't enough for young lawyers to stay with those jobs which they found long in the hours and short on stimulating assignments. Often they were locked into proofreading documents at the
Read more