When asked to identify some of the challenges encountered in their post-articling careers, the vast majority of issues arose in the context of changing jobs or practice areas. The reasons for this change of jobs are varied, and include the lack of hire-backs, the ending of contracts, concerns about the work environment with respect to corporate law firms, the desire for a healthy work/life balance, and the need for adequate mentorship and guidance during and after articles. Almost universally, the largest barrier to changing career paths cited by alums was the unresponsiveness of employers across practice areas (and in some cases across firms/organizations) to the relevancy of past work experience. Employers are risk-adverse and do not want to hire those without directly applicable experience. While it is trite to say that articling with a criminal firm will make it more difficult to obtain a corporate law job than if you had articled with a corporate firm, there other barriers operating as well. For instance, the contacts one tends to build during their crucial first few years out of law school tend to be within and limited to those professionals in a particular area of practice, which can be a limitation when considering changing areas. For recent grads, there is also the so-called “2 year rule”, which says that your ability to obtain interviews for positions within 2 years of being called to the Bar are significantly less than after you’ve been practicing 2 years. What this all boils down to is that there is increased pressure for law students to “get it right” with their choice of articles and practice areas.
Obviously, we are left questioning why the need for post-articling career services seems to be from lawyers who are women and/or members of equity-seeking groups. There are a number of possible explanations. On the one hand, some women may decide to switch careers as part of planning for a family. Another explanation is that law students are not carefully considering their career choices while in law school, and changing their career paths upon realizing their mistake. Finally, it may simply be that Heinlein was right and that specialization is for insects – a change of careers may simply be following a change of interests or a desire to expand one’s practice areas and experiences. Of course, this last explanation does little to explain why more white males are not seeking out post-graduate career services.
1 comment:
I agree with the general comment that we start out our legal career in servitude to the grand Pyramid scheme and Partnership track that leaves so many carcases by the wayside. But what exactly is an equity-seeking group? Does this encompass a member of a visibile minority whose rich parents paid for his or her tuition to attend the best and most expensive law school in the country? I agree that at the end of the day women and visible minorities may be at a disadvantage in pursuing the Partnership track, but this traditional analysis blinds us to other inequities that exist. I'd take being a member of a visible minority with a rich, well connected family over being a poor white boy anyday; nobody even expects the poor white boy to go to law school, especially if his parents are uneducated. Hopefully the diversity we are beginning to see in law school (although still less than other faculties I suspect) will penetrate the institutional hierarchy and make it easier for women and minorities to please their rich mommies and daddies by spending $100k on two degrees before joining the forces of corporate servititude. They can then be proud to join the ranks of rich white kids who have less money in the bank than their peers who joined the trades upon graduation from highschool, started families and led happy lives.
Or maybe diversity will begin to show that the institution itself is inherently flawed. Undoubtedly, society has been adjusting because womens' careers have historically been prejudiced by the decision to bear and raise children, and in a way which mens' careers have not. I think this realization is a good thing for men as well. How many male Partners have failed marriages and children who feel distant from them? They paid a cost too, although it was not as outwardly apparent. Then again, the libertarian in me thinks that individuals are free to choose whether or not to sacrifice their personal lives in the pursuit of money and power.
Certainly race has historically played a roll in discrimination, but so too has looks, height and a myriad of other factors. I think our society has taken the right steps to correct social and workplace injustices, but at the end of the day their is a human element that cannot be legislated and will probably never be cured. The fact is that people like people who are similar to them. A diverse law school will help promote diversity within the profession, and throughout time at the profession's highest levels. If your interviewers like the Yankees and you like the Yankees, you are more likely to get the job. This isn't really fair or related to merit. Nonetheless, one would hope that of two equal candidates, the gut feeling of "fit" is determined by one's propensity to watch baseball rather than race! This would be the case in an "enlightened" society, although we can never count on "enlightening" everyone. To this end our society has been sadly forced to adopt a crude method of equality; equality by numbers. We can't fully correct for human shortcomings and bigotry, so, all things being equal, a diverse profession will spread the discrimination around!
A question one might pose as we assess the enigmatic "fit" so classicly mentioned in OCIs is this: who, in general, has more in common with their interviewers, someone who is physically similar (sex, race) or someone who is socioeconomically similar (familial education, private v. public school, etc)?
Race and sex will continue to be important social justice considerations going forward, but I believe we cannot blind ourselves in such simple analysis. The issue of discrimination is multi-dimensional with many contours indeed!
Post a Comment