Thought For The Week: “Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?” Mary Oliver, Poet

Posted on July 20, 2026
Thought For The Day | Comments Off on Thought For The Week: “Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?” Mary Oliver, Poet

Has The Advancement of Women Lawyers Failed?

Posted on July 16, 2026

Here’s the lead-in to an article I read recently that I think every lawyer in Biglaw ought to read — both female and male. Although the article addresses issues unique to female lawyers, it is very much about the male lawyers who manage them.

“A generation of pledges, targets, mentoring schemes and agile-working policies has barely moved the numbers. The reason is not a shortage of effort or good faith. It is that the two structures which generate a law firm’s profits – the billable hour and the partnership tournament – are the same two structures that push women out. You cannot bolt equality onto a machine built to do the opposite.”

The author is David Burgess, Managing Director at Law Dragon, and is titled “The Structure Is the Bias: Why a Generation of Initiatives Hasn’t Moved the Numbers.”

Although I do not share all of the author’s assertions, I certainly understand the problem. I have been writing about the advancement of women lawyers for the past 20 years, and, fortunately during that time, I have seen women lawyers advance and prosper in the profession on a more consistent basis and without as many of the challenges and impediments that women lawyers of my generation encountered. I also understand that there is still a long way to go before equity is experienced for women in the profession, and I sincerely hope I am around to see it and to applaud it.

Here are some excerpts from the article.

On the subject of the billable hour:

A lawyer who reduces her hours to raise children is not judged against some abstract standard of contribution. She is measured, in six-minute increments, against colleagues with no comparable demands at home. Part-time and flexible working, the policies firms reach for first, do not solve this. They simply let a woman pursue the same impossible number on a pro-rata basis, with less visibility, less of the high-value work that flows to those who are always available, and a quiet question mark over her commitment.

On the subject of up-or-out partnership:

Its design is almost perfectly calibrated to exclude women. The decisive years, when associates must out-bill, out-network and out-originate their peers to win one of a handful of slots, fall precisely on the years of childbearing. And childbearing is only the most visible of the competing claims on those years. The same window, stretching from the late thirties into the forties, is so often when women become the primary carers for ageing parents as well, frequently while they are still raising school-aged children of their own … at the exact moment a partnership case has to be built and defended.

In summary:

The verdict on a generation of initiatives is in. They were not too cautious or too few. They were aimed at the wrong target. Until firms are willing to confront the billable hour and the partnership tournament … the numbers will keep telling the same story, year after year.

There is a lot to think about in this article. You can find it at https://www.lawdragon.com/news-features/2026-07-05-the-structure-is-the-bias-why-a-generation-of-initiatives-hasn-t-moved-the-number”

Career Counselors, Law Firm Managers, Law School Educators, Law Students, Pre-law, Young Lawyer | Comments Off on Has The Advancement of Women Lawyers Failed?

Thought For The Week: “The highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.”

Posted on July 13, 2026
Thought For The Day | Comments Off on Thought For The Week: “The highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.”

Are Far Fees Becoming Just Another Challenge for Many Lawyers?

Posted on July 13, 2026

Recently, I paid my bar association fees (both DC and VA) and got sticker shock. The annual fee for active practice in DC is $357, and the annual fee for active practice in VA is currently $250 but soon will increase to $350 if the State Bar of Virginia has its way. Those fees are not out of line with many jurisdictions throughout the country — and they may be in line with the fees that you pay wherever you are barred.

I have an inactive status, so I pay a reduced fee, but that fee is still substantial. I have chosen an inactive status because I have no intention of returning to law practice but I still want some of the benefits of bar membership. So, inactive status works fine for me and is not a financial burden.

However, what if I was a lawyer temporarily between jobs, who was expecting to return to practice soon? That person would not want an inactive bar status even though the reduced fee might be attractive under those circumstances. That lawyer would be hoping for a a short off ramp term and would want to be able to jump right back into practice without the hassle of converting from inactive to active status and the associated requirements and delays. That lawyer would want to keep an active bar status even though paying the fee might be very challenging under those special circumstances.

And what about the lawyer who is only able to practice part-time due to family responsibilities like childcare or care for elderly relatives? Would that part-time lawyer, who has a reduced income, be able to easily afford bar fees and the other add-ons that are typical for most mandatory bar association memberships?

Bar membership should not be a burden or a challenge to lawyers who have special circumstances and are just trying to hang in the profession. Mandatory bars should not discourage lawyers from keeping their licenses active in hope that their circumstances change and they can return to either part-time or full-time practice. And it does not seem fair to force lawyers, who are only able to have part-time incomes, to pay as much as those who practice full-time and have full-time incomes.

Why would we force any of these special circumstance lawyers to go through the pain of re-activation, including CLE requirements and waiting periods, if we could make it more comfortable for them to keep their licenses active and be ready to rejoin the profession on a moment’s notice?

It’s time for mandatory bar associations to give lawyers a break. It’s time for them to reexamine their fee schedules in recognition of the challenges faced by attorneys with special circumstances.

If this issue bothers you, too, contact your bar associations and register your discontent. Even though escalating bar association fees may not amount to a burden for you, they are a challenge for many lawyers, who we should want to keep in the profession.

Law Firm Managers, Law School Educators, Law Students, Pre-law, Young Lawyer | Comments Off on Are Far Fees Becoming Just Another Challenge for Many Lawyers?

Thought For The Week: “True patriotism springs from a belief in the dignity of the individual, freedom and equality not only for Americans but for all people on earth.” Eleanor Roosevelt

Posted on July 6, 2026
Career Counselors, Thought For The Day | Comments Off on Thought For The Week: “True patriotism springs from a belief in the dignity of the individual, freedom and equality not only for Americans but for all people on earth.” Eleanor Roosevelt

The Goal Should be Bar Examiners Capable of Human Responses

Posted on July 3, 2026

Is this too big an ask —- bar examiners capable of human responses? I’ll let you decide.

I have written and passed two bar exams, but that was a long time ago and not worthy of this discussion. However my two children have taken bar exams and passed them in the last 15 years. So, I consider their experiences relevant, particularly about issues of the performance of bar examiners. Their experiences were completely different. One of them experienced no memorable issues with bar examiners, and the other one nearly had to abandon ship because of inept bar examiners.

So when I read an article about the NY State Legislature urging updated methods and responsibilities for bar examiners to address emergencies, it caught my attention. The article, link below, describes the very unfortunate incident that flagged the issue about the adequacy of bar examiners in NY State, which I am sure many of you knew about already because it got a lot of press at the time. However, situations do not have to be quite this dramatic for it to be obvious that bar examiners need to up their games.

Here is what happened to one of my kids. In what should be an anticipated situation, the computer software failed in the exam room AND the bar examiners had no idea how to fix the problem or even who to call for help. The Bar Association office was closed for the week (which also was a factor in the situation described in the article), and no one was available to troubleshoot with the technology provider, which happened to be in another part of the country. So, what to do? Call mom and dad, right? My husband and I were on a road trip, but my husband knew a guy (my husband always knows a guy!), and the guy was able to contact another guy who was able to contact the head of the Bar Association office and that guy got permission for our kid to complete the bar exam by writing the answers in blue book pages —— but only on one side of the page and NOT in the margins because the bar examiner was “Johnny on the Spot” to deliver the admonishment that nothing on the back of the page or in the margins would be read or considered. So, afterthoughts in response to a question, as brilliant as those thoughts might be, were worthless.

It is stressful enough to write a bar exam, and there is a reason why none of us ever want to write another one. So, adding additional stress because of ill prepared bar examiners, the inability to call on the Bar Association for assistance, and the utter nonsense of imposing stupid rules on a handwritten exam book rises to the level of cruel and unusual treatment and should be prohibited on constitutional grounds.

I urge you to read the article and then find out if the bar association where you are licensed has similar problems that need to be addressed —- like in the next three weeks before the July bar exams. Other governing bodies should follow the example of the NY State Legislature, and it should not take a near death during the bar exam to initiate such changes. It should not be asking too much for bar examiners to be capable of “human responses” as noted in the article.

Our kid made it through. All ended well. My husband knew a guy who knew a guy, and those guys performed well. But, let’s face it, all test takers do not have dads who know a guy who knows a guy.

It is time to stop throwing up new challenges for a profession that is already too challenging for young lawyers. We can do better. Let’s hope we do.

Here’s the article: https://abovethelaw.com/2026/06/so-maybe-bar-examiners-need-an-actual-plan-for-emergencies

Career Counselors, Law School Educators, Law Students, Pre-law, Young Lawyer | Comments Off on The Goal Should be Bar Examiners Capable of Human Responses