We use cookies to compile information about how our website is used and to improve the experience of our website visitors.
You can review and update your cookie setting by clicking "Manage cookies preferences". For more information about the cookies we use, please read our
Cookies and Electronic Marketing Policy.
What Maternity Leave Means in the Legal Profession
Published on 16 June 2015
Share This
Mills Oakley partner Helen Suke echoes this perception in an article with Australasian Lawyer as one prevalent among senior management.
“For well over a decade 60-65% of our law graduates have been women, yet the translation of this figure into leadership within the profession lags behind,” Suke said
“[I]t largely hinges on the attitude of those already in positions of influence in the support of women through their career development generally and in particular when punctuated by the child bearing years.”
In 2012, then-President of Australian Women Lawyers, Kate Ashmor, said the focus has been on parental leave for too long, and flexible work arrangements are the future of the industry. In that, Australia has a lot to learn from governments and companies that disrupt the status quo on gender equality issues.
This year, the Swedish government introduced new reforms to their paid parental leave scheme, offering three months of leave reserved for fathers as part of the 16 months available to new parents. The policy operates on a “use it or lose it” basis, with the leave being applicable any time prior to the child’s eighth birthday, and mothers being ineligible to claim the months reserved for fathers.
The extension of parental leave for fathers is a change that Minter Ellison partner Samantha Betzien told Lawyers Weekly she sees as a necessary step towards flexibility for both mothers and fathers.
“It's really important to change what I think is the norm around [parental leave],” Betzien said.
“I don't think we're as empathetic to dads who want to work part-time or who want to take a longer period of parental leave as we are with a woman doing it.”
Ashmor similarly highlights the need for there to be more options available than simply leave for new mothers.
“I’ve had many women say to me they’ll gladly hand back their paid maternity leave if they can get the flexible hours and quality work after they come back,” she said.
Companies like Google and Facebook offer work-from-home arrangements with Google not adopting a policy for the sole purpose of keeping the arrangements entirely flexible. Over at Netflix, the company promotes a “freedom and responsibility culture” focussed on accomplishing great work instead of greater work hours. These kinds of flexible work arrangements are slowly becoming “the new normal” in Australian firms too – and with great success.
Kristy Faichen, a Partner at Herbert Smith Freehills, was in fact pregnant when she was offered her partnership. She now maintains a job-share arrangement with one of the firm’s more senior partners. Faichen emphasises the win-win nature of the arrangement despite clients’ concerns.
“Mike and I were very conscious of the conversations we had with clients,” she said.
“We wanted clients to know that the arrangement didn’t mean additional work or costs for them, it just meant they had two heads instead of one.”
However, she stresses the importance of communication in not only holding the arrangement together but in ensuring its efficiency and success.
“If I thought the communication wasn’t working for Mike and me, then I don’t think I could do it,” said Faichen.
“This is a high intensity environment, with long hours. If I wasn’t comfortable that we were having a smooth transfer of information each week, I just don’t think it could work.”
Ashmor urges Australian firms to follow suit with implementing flexible work arrangements.
“As the war for talent rages, law firms and legal workplaces are well advised to genuinely embrace flexible work arrangements and reap the rewards; to do otherwise is to risk being left behind.”