The Florida Bar has taken steps to recognize parental leave as a valid reason for a continuance of trials and significant court activity for lead attorneys in cases—including both women and men attorneys. Recently, the Florida Bar Board of Governors voted unanimously to recommend a new Rule of Judicial Procedure to allow lead attorneys to obtain a three-month continuance for parental leave, provided the continuance does not cause "substantial prejudice" to opposing parties. If this rule is approved by the Florida Supreme Court, it will be the first of its kind in the United States.
Getting to this point hasn’t been easy. The vote marks the third time the Florida Bar has attempted to get such a rule passed. Some members of the Bar who opposed the proposed rule in the past believed it to be unnecessary and that continuance decisions should remain at the discretion of the judge.
But recent incidents of judges denying continuances for maternity leave—and even failing to permit short breaks for breastfeeding mothers to pump milk—continue to abound, as suggested here, here, here and here. Admittedly, many great judges do reasonably accommodate expectant mothers, but overall, there’s evidence that the discretion of judges has not worked well. In fact, often the system puts women attorneys in the difficult position of having to justify the "favor" of a continuance, or even filing bar complaints against judges who are hostile towards their pregnancies (when the women may very well have to appear before those judges again). Florida Special Committee on Gender Bias member, Paul SanGiovanni got it right when he said he’s not so much concerned with judges abusing their discretion, but
As indicated by SanGiovanni, this proposed rule is probably as important to male attorneys as it is to female attorneys. While only women have the physical impact of giving birth, many male attorneys are unlikely to even ask for continuances due to the birth of their child.
The Florida proposed rule takes the burden off the attorney having to justify the need for parental leave. Rather, the rule would require the judge to identify in writing how the requested continuance would result in "substantial prejudice" to the parties before he/she may deny a continuance based on parental leave. The rule applies only to lead attorneys in a case, in recognition that lead attorneys are not as easily replaced, and clients should be able to keep their choice of counsel—even if their attorney is pregnant.
Studies show that women are graduating law school and entering the profession in equal or higher numbers than men, but women attorneys are not staying in the profession at the same rate. While not trying to generalize the many reasons why this is occurring, we can agree that, in part, women who want to raise families are more likely to leave the legal profession if they find it hostile to pregnancy and motherhood.
The proposed Florida rule is not about entitlements or special treatment for women. It is about looking at our court system, which has at times been antagonistic to women, pregnancy, and families (even in 2017) and seeing if reasonable changes can be made that will make the system friendlier to parents. Efforts to advance women’s success in law firms have a harder road ahead if women still face unfair reactions and decisions from judges. Why should we make intelligent, capable women attorneys, who undeniably benefit our profession, choose between successfully representing their clients … and becoming a mother?
As a management-side labor and employment attorney—and a woman who had a difficult pregnancy carrying twins—I still recognize the need for striking a balance among the needs of parents, clients, and the court system. I’ve worked with clients who’ve had pregnant employees use their condition to avoid undesirable duties, and critics of Florida’s proposed rule could express concern that women attorneys may also use pregnancy to gain a strategic advantage in a client’s case. I believe the risk of attorney abuse pales in comparison to the reality of pregnant attorneys facing resistance, if not outright hostility, when they request considerations for their pregnancy and childbirth from judges, opposing counsel, and in some law firms, even from their own partners.
Bravo to my home state of Florida for taking the lead on this issue!
Diversity, equity, and inclusion has been the bedrock of our firm since we opened over 75 years ago. As we like to say, it is in our DNA. We believe that to foster diverse leadership and urge diversity of thought, we must do what we can to advance the conversation about diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, and belonging in the workplace and the communities in which our workplaces thrive. Through our blog, we share our insights from the perspective of both an employer and employee, regarding emerging issues that affect diverse leaders and workforces. We hope you enjoy our tidbits of legal and practical information, wisdom, and humor. Thanks for joining the conversation!
Subscribe
Contributors
Archives
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- March 2024
- August 2022
- June 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- October 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- October 2020
- May 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- June 2019
- March 2019
- December 2018
- October 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- November 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016