Gender Issues at Work, Case Study Example

The fact of the matter cannot be denied, that even in this twenty-first century, we still very much find ourselves in a male dominated society where it is still harder for a woman to excel in her field than it is for a male. The epitome of this stated fact is very much expressed in the highest-end careers such as those in the medical field, in the science fields, and in law. These professions have for long been governed by a male predominance and until recently have opened the doors to women that seek to engage in these professions. Great merit should be attributed to women that are able to succeed in these demanding fields as they often have the responsibility of engaging in two jobs, both as professionals, and as mothers. Since early times, mothers have had the responsibility of taking care of the children while the fathers go out to work; it is for this reason that males often take this responsibility as given, and only find the great work that it implies when faced upon being the one that has to complete the task.  As a result of this erroneous view that men have, women often suffer from having to take parental leave when their children are born and their dedication to the firm is often questioned, even though they were only attending to their family and complying with the greater responsibility. In seeking to go in depth with one of these situations we shall analyze the case of Attorney Evans and the struggles she faced in her firm that denied her from advancing in her field despite her attributed success, and kept her from becoming a partner within her firm.

Attorney Evans is a mother that successfully completed law school with great merit and graduated with tremendous potential and ambition to seek out and make her success flourish. Despite being a single mother with two children she was able to excel in her class and was determined to continue her grandeur after graduating by joining a firm. After finishing law school, she had very prominent job proposals but ultimately decided to go into the firm of Wilson, Barnes, Sauer and Kahn, where she would make great contributions but would ultimately find impediments that can be recognized as gender discrimination that would keep her from attaining the position of partner within her firm. Just by looking at statistical data we find that the firm had somewhat of a bias towards men as most of the partners and people within the firm were men. After seven years of hard work and of giving everything of herself to the company, she decided to apply for a position as partner. At this point she found the greatest discrimination as she is penalized for parental leave, supposedly covered by the company without any form of penalization, and is not recommended positively by most of the males she had worked with on the bases of lacking analytical skills and not being sufficiently prepared for the job as partner. Moreover, she is recommended to work with domestic situations where they feel she would be a better fit. Attorney Evans decides it is too much and is incited to sue the firm on the basis of gender discrimination.

Within this case study, the evident benefits for the firm of having both men and women in the workplace is that they can persuade women into working with situations such as domestic issues where clients often feel more comfortable with female attorneys. Another benefit that the firm has of having both men and women in the workplace is that they can make both parties work very hard and give little layaway only to those that the firm wants to. Based on this case study, the behavior of men is much more dominant while the behavior of women appears to be more submissive. This is a result of the atmosphere that is created in the firm where the majority of the people working are men. As a result of this various things that could often be described as sexual harassment within the work place are taken as “jokes.”

The challenges related to gender are all, for the most part, against women and the responsibilities they often have to attend to as mothers. As aforementioned, just by taking a look at some statistical data such as the number of male partners and the number of males overall within the firm, it is evident that there is sort of a male bias in that firm. The partners within the firm exhibit this situation in the way they are much more inclusive with the males they work with than with women. An example of this is when some male workers were invited to attend the event while Attorney Evans was not invited since the partner apparently believed she would not be able to attend since she had previously taken parental leave. Within the company it is stated that there is plentiful support for parental leave yet the people that need to take it are often discriminated against despite this policy. This discrimination is for the most part influential to women as they are the ones that often need to use the parental leave yet it can also apply to men as evident with Evan’s coworker that had to take it and was indirectly punished as well. Another discrimination that is evident is the opportunities that are provided to the different genders. In this instance, attorney Evans was again not invited to attend an event where meaningful connections could be made yet her male counterparts were invited. The final issue regarding impositions towards the female gender is evident when we analyze the application process for partnership within the firm.

Based on the information from the case study and from strong research in gender issues I am led to persuade attorney Evans to file a law suit against her firm. The fact that women are not made partners can not merely be attributed to the fact that they have their family responsibilities (Rikleen, 2013, para. 3). Women are not made partners within this firm because of factors from compensations and an evident bias on the female gender (Rikleen, 2013, para. 2). The Gender Equity Task Force of the American Bar Association would undoubtedly determine that there is gender discrimination within this firm that specifically targets women (Smith, 2014, para. 5). In seeking to address her issue Attorney Evans should also gather relevant data such as billing rates for men and women within her firm. This data would prove that the firm has biases all around against women that can very well be explained only by discrimination against this gender. Moreover, this trend of having a majority of male partners should also be acknowledged as 19% of the equity partners of firms as a whole are female and the rest are males (Catalyst, 2015, para. 3). The most compelling data that attorney Evans could provide would be her attributions to the firm as compared to a male’s attributions that was made partner but had significantly less productivity than her. This would show major evidence for gender discrimination as she should have been made partner when comparing this data. Moreover she could provide the output of the work that she has provided to the partners she has worked with and the recommendations that do not reflect the great contributions that she has made and show an evident bias against her.

The simple solution that would bring about change within the firm is to make gender equality a goal within the firm. Male workers could be more inclusive with women and invite them to social events or to the golfing hours that they spend together. Women should demand that their rights be respected especially when dealing with things such as parental leave that is specifically outlined as completely covered by the firm. Men should also acknowledge the great attributions that many of these women make, and should strive to help them with whatever they need to achieve the partner status. Women should be equally recognized within the firm and should not be directed subliminally to those subdivisions that seem to be predominantly done by women which is the case of domestic issues. Evaluations should be brought upon by the heads of the firm to be performed by the Gender Equity Task Force of the American Bar Association so that the firm is sure to meet the standards of gender equality. Sexual harassment talks should be held periodically to enforce a safe working environment for everybody within the firm. Finally, women should be provided with equal working opportunities from all the partners within the firm.

References

Catalyst. (2015, March 13). Knowledge Center | Catalyst.org. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-law-canada-and-us

Rikleen, L. S. (2013, August 20). Solving the Law Firm Gender Gap Problem – HBR. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/08/solving-the-law-firm-gender-ga

Smith, J. (2014, May 4). Female Lawyers Still Battle Gender Bias – WSJ. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303948104579537814028747376