 The truth is…I really enjoyed this book.
The former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Beverley McLachlin, shares her life story in “Truth be Told”,[1] starting with her small-town roots, to her seat on the bench, her rise to the Supreme Court, and her "retirement". McLachlin tells the story with sincerity and with the clarity of an experienced writer who has kept her audience and the purpose of the book in mind. Perhaps I enjoyed this book so much because I found parts of her story to be very relatable, in particular her childhood experiences in the small town of Pincher Creek, Alberta. I too grew up in the country. The closest village, Mount Pleasant, had a population of, at most, 500 people. McLachlin speaks fondly of life on the ranch, the wide-open spaces, fresh air, and nature. She also highlights the feelings of isolation and hard work that come with living in the country. (We even had the same chores as children: “Bringing in firewood, washing and drying the dishes, sweeping the floor after every meal, helping outdoors..”[2]) Speaking of her regular visits to the small-town library, McLachlin states: “The Pincher Creek Municipal Library saved my life. Or so it seems to me now. Would I have survived without it? Probably. Would I have grown to be the person I am without it? Most certainly not.”[3] Like Pincher Creek, my village had a library with a small collection of books housed in the “Women’s Institute Hall”. The librarian would put on summer reading programs for the local country kids. Much like McLachlin, I looked forward to my trips to the library so I could bury my nose in a book (or two or three). Moving beyond her childhood and Pincher Creek, McLachlin highlights the influence of family and in particular her husband, Rory, who encouraged her to become a lawyer, something she had not considered. She talks about her marriage, her son, her career as a lawyer and a law professor, and the struggles with Rory’s cancer diagnosis and death. McLachlin writes with such honesty I could not stop the tears from streaming down my face. (I happened to be in my hairdresser’s chair when I read about her husband’s passing. My hairdresser was alarmed as she thought she had hurt me.) On her life as a judge and ultimately the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, McLachlin shares her stories with perhaps a little restraint but with a great respect for the legal profession and the rule of law. If you were looking for some legal gossip, you will be disappointed. A few peripheral stories of human interest with an air of conflict but nothing scandalous here. (Which is understandable.) McLachlin also balances her personal story with information about the state of Canadian law and important Canadian cases, including insights into Rodriguez v British Columbia (Attorney General), Murdoch v Murdoch, R v Ewanchuk, Carter v (Attorney General), Bedford v Canada, etc. She discusses the criticism she received from several feminist groups for penning the majority decision in R v Seaboyer (which dealt with rape-shield provisions and the Charter). She explained that: “My personal inclinations could not prevail over the constitutional imperative of maintaining the right to present a full defence. As a judge, my duty was to apply the law and call the case the way I saw it, adding guidelines as to how the law could be amended in conformity with the Charter. Sometimes a judge must make unpopular decisions that may go against her deepest preferences.”[4] What shines through is that McLachlin loves the law and has a deep respect for it as well as the need for judicial independence (despite some unnecessary criticism on Twitter regarding her judicial independence for her joke about naming her puppy “Harper”). It was an interesting book and a well-told story of a woman navigating her career. Of course, she discusses some of the sexism she faced but it’s the same frustrating story I’m sure you’ve heard before, so I won’t repeat most of it here. One story that stood out though was when she spoke at a legal conference a few weeks after being appointed to the Supreme Court. She opened her speech by telling the audience what Justice Bertha Wilson told her after she took her place on the bench after signing the oath: “Three down, six to go” (referring to the three women now at the Court – Wilson, L’Heureux-Dube and McLachlin). The next morning there was an op-ed in the paper where the writer wrote: “How dare the new justice suggest that the Supreme Court of Canada should be composed entirely of women.”[5] Interestingly, just last night at the Women's Law Association of Ontario’s 100th Anniversary Gala, Justice Andromache Karakatsanis also referred to Justice Wilson’s quote in her keynote address (this time "Four down, five to go"). I have yet to see any criticism of the Justice’s comments in any newspaper or more importantly, on Twitter. Perhaps we have made some progress. What also was clear from the book was that McLachlin had many champions in her life, urging her forward, and suggesting the way: her parents, her siblings, colleagues, Rory, her son, and her second husband Frank McArdle. If only all women had the support she had and continues to have. Not too long ago I came across the handwritten notes that I took on my one and only appearance at the Supreme Court of Canada. I laughed when I read the little notation I made at the top: “Beverley McLachlin said my name!” Although I was not speaking that day, Chief Justice McLachlin announced all counsel present and I was beaming with joy. Despite the fangirling, I am aware she is not perfect, we all make mistakes, we are all learning. However, she has contributed so much to the legal profession, to the law in this country and to Canadians as a whole (much of which I have not mentioned here but you can read about in the book). While her presence at the Supreme Court of Canada is missed, I hope this means she will now have time to write a sequel to her novel, Full Disclosure. I recommend this book to all lawyers, law students or anyone with an interest in the law or who enjoys autobiographies. You can buy the book in several places, including Indigo or better yet, check out your local independent bookstore. [1] Beverley McLachlin, Truth Be Told: My Journey Through Life and the Law, (Toronto: Simon & Schuster Canada, 2019) [Truth] [2] Truth at p 38. [3] Truth at p 34. [4] Truth at p 233. [5] Truth at p 201.
0 Comments
 I’ve made a mistake. A mistake that I know I should not make, I never intended to make, and I swore I would never make, but I did: the summer is over, and I didn’t take nearly enough time off. I know there are more serious mistakes for a lawyer to make (the Law Society isn’t knocking on my door, demanding the revocation of my licence to practice law), however, this seemingly small mistake is having repercussions – a rippling effect - on my job and life. How I Messed Up I had the best of intentions to unplug this summer. In the past, I would work extra long days on Monday to Thursday so I could take Fridays off in July and August and enjoy the warm weather. This year I found myself saying, “Sure I can schedule that call/meeting on Friday, no problem”. Or, thinking to myself, “I’ll just pop into the office Friday morning and take the afternoon off”, only to look up and see that it was 6pm. No worries, I thought, there’s plenty of summer left. In July we loaded our three kids into the car and drove to remote Maine for a relaxing seven-day long vacation (I know, I know, “relaxing vacation” and “three kids” don’t normally go together). On our arrival, I found it so peaceful…almost too peaceful. My phone was not making any noises. I wasn’t receiving any emails. I mean none. No OBA emails. No Law Society emails. No “Let me do an SEO audit on your website” emails. What was going on?! I looked at the service bars on my phone…. ack…. No cell phone reception! This might sound ideal to some, but as a sole practitioner and sole owner of a business (Flex Legal), and usually the first point of client contact, I started to panic. I quickly logged on to the WiFi at the rental home and sure enough - “ding, ding, ding” - the emails started rolling in. And, of course, something was up with one of our clients. There was a miscommunication between the lawyer client and a freelance lawyer. Both were looking to me to assist. By the time the issue was resolved it was three days into my vacation. On the seventh day I was finally starting to unwind, and . . . it was time to go home. But, no worries, there was still plenty of summer left, it was only August. On my return to the office I did not feel relaxed. I did not feel rejuvenated. I felt lethargic. I would go to the office with a long to-do list and I would barely get through a few items. Normally I am energised to get to the office in the morning, but 8 hours would go by and I wondered, what did I do all day? Anything? Instead of recognizing that I needed a break, I pushed through, I stayed at my computer all day, everyday. I didn’t get anything done, I told myself, how could I justify taking a day, or days off, now?! And then August was over.(*) We are now well into September (almost October!) which happens to be my busiest time of year. There is always an uptick in business for Flex in the fall and I teach at the University of Toronto. My calendar is full of conferences, networking events, volunteer meetings. My window of opportunity to take a proper break is closing. Take That Vacation, it will Make you a Better Lawyer! I’m not giving you any earth-shattering information. We all know that taking a real vacation makes us less stressed, more focused, and in return, better lawyers, better employees, and better bosses. Even though I love my job, I still need a break from it. I need to unplug and unwind. I need to think about something other than the law. When I do, I return to my practice with more energy and commitment. When I worked for someone else, I always took all my allotted vacation. I felt I was working hard and I rightly deserved the time off. Now that I have my own practice and business and can, in theory, take as much vacation time that I want, I take even less. I need to change that. So, here is what I have learned, and what may help to ensure that you and I take our important vacations:
p.s. VACATION ALERT: I will be out of the office starting on July 6, 2020 and will return to the office on July 27, 2020. I will not be checking email during that time 😊. (*) I did convince myself to sneak off to an afternoon ball game one day in August (photo below), which was quite lovely, but it was not an uninterrupted break. Next time I will leave my phone at home! Photo by chen zo on Unsplash   I loved Professor Backhouse’s biography of Justice L’Heureux-Dubé, so when I saw her book “Two Firsts: Bertha Wilson and Claire L’Heureux-Dubé at the Supreme Court of Canada” I knew I would enjoy it as well.
“Two Firsts” is a lot shorter than the 1000-page biography of Justice L’Heureux-Dubé and much of “Two Firsts” that discusses L’Heureux-Dubé’s life and career was already covered in the biography. However, what I enjoyed about this new book was the insight into Justice Wilson’s career and rise to the top court and how it compared/contrasted with Justice L’Heureux-Dubé’s. Professor Backhouse eloquently tells the story of these two trailblazing women, juxtaposing their personal histories and career progressions. Wilson was Scottish born, married to a church minister, and was a research lawyer at a large corporate law firm in Toronto before being appointed to the bench. She was described by those who knew her as a “stoic Scot” who “stuck to her work”. While L’Heureux-Dubé, a Quebecoise who practiced family law, was described as having a “reputation as a femme fatale, whose flamboyance dominated every room she entered”.[1] While these women had different personal and professional lives, both were subjected to similar sexism and discrimination that arose due to their position as the “firsts”. They were isolated, left out, and “enveloped in a chilly climate that signalled disrespect”. Often their response was to downplay or ignore what was going on. At the Court of Appeal for Quebec, a judicial colleague named Fred, whom L’Heureux-Dubé liked and admired, gave her a “quick slap on the buttocks” “in a gesture apparently meant to be playful”. When the other judges cried out “Fred, you’ll be sued!”, L’Heureux-Dubé just laughed and said, “Oh, it’s so nice. Oh, Fred…I miss it.” Years later she added, “I was the only one. I was not going to alienate everybody there.”[2] When a fellow judge pulled out a chair for Justice Wilson on her first day in court at the Court of Appeal for Ontario, she “put up her index finger and said, ‘Don’t you ever do that again.’ The front row …all Queen’s Counsel, just broke right out laughing”. The chair-pulling judge emphasized that Wilson was ultimately “a great sport about it”.[3] In addition to reviewing the reception these women had as the “firsts”, the book also examines the judicial history of some of the important cases that Wilson and L’Heureux-Dubé decided, including Becker v Pettkus, Lavallee, and Morgentaler for Justice Wilson and Moge v Moge, Canada (Attorney General) v Mossop, Seaboyer, and Ewanchuk for L’Heureux-Dubé. A quick, entertaining, well-researched, and informative read, I think anyone interested in a ‘behind the scenes’ look at being a judge in Canada and the history (or “herstory”) of these “Two Firsts” will enjoy this book. The book is published by Second Story Press as a Feminist History Society Book. [1] Constance Backhouse, Two Firsts: Bertha Wilson and Claire L'Heureux-Dube at the Supreme Court of Canada, (Toronto: Second Story Press, 2019) at p. 14. [2] At p 131. [3] At p. 138. For this post we have the pleasure of hearing from TWO women leading in law: Christy Allen and Nancy Houle, partners at Davidson Houle Allen LLP in Ottawa. Andrea Daly, an articling student at their firm, wrote to tell me: "Impressive and lengthy resumes aside, Nancy and Christy are generally all-around amazing people. They treat clients and employees alike with kindness, respect and empathy. . . As for amazing women succeeding in the legal profession, Christy and Nancy really do set the bar (no pun intended).I am inspired working with them every day and hope that you would consider profiling them." Who could say no to that? 1. Tell me a little about your practice or business: We are a small boutique condominium law firm in Ottawa, and we represent almost exclusively condominium corporations (although we also represent other collective property interest groups, as well as some individual homeowners). Our practice spans most of Eastern Ontario, though we also represent some clients in Northern and Southern Ontario, as well as in Toronto. Condominium law is a far more interesting area of practice than most people realize. It is an even mix of corporate and litigation work, and it touches on a multitude of legal issues and areas of practice. We deal with everything from large scale construction deficiency litigation to helping clients navigate human rights issues, employment issues, statutory compliance issues, and corporate governance issues, to name a few. It is this variety that really keeps us interested in the long run. 2. Why did you go to law school? Christy - I went to law school because it was available to me as a practical option when I graduated from my undergraduate studies, and I liked the idea of a career in law. While I didn’t necessarily realize it at the time, I know now how fortunate I was to have had law as a realistic option, and to be honest, I worry about the future of our profession when I think about the fact that had I graduated from undergrad today, law school might not have been economically available to me. There are others out there with far better and more inspiring reasons than I had to go to law school, and my hope is that we can find a way to ensure that they are given a fair opportunity to become lawyers. Nancy – My goal to go to law school began when I was 12 years old. Actually, it began because I wanted to be a Judge, and was advised that I would first need to be a lawyer! I echo Christy’s comments and concerns about the future of our profession, and the opportunities for those who wish to pursue a legal career. I truly love practicing law. [So much so that I have no intention of ever applying to the Bench!] It saddens me to think that there may be someone with such passion who is not able to realize a dream because of economics. 3. How did you get to where you are today? Design? Chance? Both? We both pretty much tripped over the practice of condominium law, and fell into a practice group within a larger firm that included the amazing partners that we have today. Having stumbled into the area of practice, we both ended up really enjoying the practice – and we particularly enjoyed the people we were working with. Our group ultimately left that larger firm to become the boutique firm that we are today - that start up of our small firm was less about chance. 4. What is your most significant achievement? What are you proud of? One of the best things about the practice of law is the fact that we get to experience some pretty amazing moments as a result of our careers. So its tough to chose, but we both have to say that our proudest career achievements, at this point in our lives, is the fact that we were able to successfully start up a boutique law firm. In addition, one of the best parts about starting our own firm has been that we’ve been able to shape it into a firm that maintains core values that are reflective of our own shared philosophy and beliefs. In an industry as traditional as the legal industry, it can be difficult to move away from the standard way of practicing and doing business. So, its been incredibly refreshing for us to be able to move in our own direction with our new venture. 5. What are some key challenges, and more importantly, opportunities for women in law? The biggest challenge, in our view, is that the traditional model of practice doesn’t generally allow for women to balance the interests of being a lawyer and a mother. This is, in our view, what has resulted in so many women leaving private practice before year 10. Having said this, this challenge in many ways provides all of us with an opportunity to change how we practice law, to allow for more flexibility and more options, and to ensure that we are being more inclusive and losing less talent. There are so many extremely talented lawyers (both men and women) who earnestly want to balance their careers with parenting. And if given the proper opportunity, they may decide to stay in private practice - and in so doing will themselves help to drive the significant change that will be required to overhaul the way lawyers have practiced for so long. 6. What advice would you give a woman starting her legal career? Christy - Even before starting law school, I’ve always believed that each of us has to forge our own path, regardless of what others may say or what obstacles may lie ahead. For women just starting out, I think the best advice I could give is this: Don’t let the statistics scare you and don’t give up just because others say it might be too hard to balance law with whatever other challenge you may be facing in your life. If you want a career in private practice and you also want a family, it is possible. Adjustments may be required, and inevitably some soul searching will take place along the way. But just keep putting one foot in front of the other and try to ignore all the voices that say its not possible. And don’t forget to take whatever opportunities may come your way (particularly later in your career) to seek change for the better, so that this work-life balance challenge that so many women in this profession face will be less of a challenge for future generations. Nancy – In addition to Christy’s advice, I would add the following advice to young mothers struggling to find balance in the profession: As a young mother trying to maintain a successful legal career, you will inevitably be pulled in many, many directions. You might, at some point, feel like a failure in every aspect of your life: work, personal and family. If that happens, reach out to those who have been there too. Share your story, seek guidance and input, but make the decision that is best for you! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you Christy and Nancy for participating in this series, and thank you Andrea for introducing me. And a really big THANK YOU to all of the leading women in law profiled in this series: Suzie Seo, Kim Gale, Alexi Wood, Melissa McBain, Erin Best, Gillian Hnatiw, Melanie Sharman Rowand, Meg Chinelo Egbunonu, Lisa Jean Helps, Nathalie Godbout Q.C., Laurie Livingstone, Renatta Austin, Janis Criger, May Cheng, Nicole Chrolavicius, Charlene Theodore, Dyanoosh Youssefi, Shannon Salter, Bindu Cudjoe, Elliot Spears, Jessica Prince, Anu K. Sandhu, Claire Hatcher, Esi Codjoe, Kate Dewhirst, Jennifer Taylor, Rebecca Durcan, Atrisha Lewis, Vandana Sood, Kathryn Manning, Kim Hawkins, Kyla Lee, and Eva Chan.   I am so excited to profile Suzie Seo in the Women Leading in Law series. I met Suzie on the first day of law school. We were sitting next to each other in the large lecture hall waiting for the Dean's Welcome Address, both a little nervous, neither of us knowing anyone. We were pretty much inseparable for the remainder of law school, even becoming roommates for two years. Although our legal careers are very different and we live in different parts of the country, I am truly honoured to call Suzie a dear friend, supporter, confidante, and an amazing woman who is leading in law. I hope you enjoy reading about Suzie's interesting career path and advice for new lawyers: 1. Tell me a little about your practice or business. I’m currently in a transition period. The first transition is that in October 2018, after practicing in-house at the Senate of Canada for over 12 years -- Legal Counsel (2006-2012), Parliamentary Counsel (2012-2017) and Assistant Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel (2017-2018) -- I decided to start a new chapter in my legal career as Legislative Counsel with the Government of British Columbia in Victoria. Over a 7-week period, I wound down my practice -- advancing as many of my files as possible to see them to completion or to a state to transition over to colleagues -- while at home my spouse and I listed and sold our house privately; culled, packed and shipped our belongings across the country; and got ready for our cross-country road-trip with two kids in tow. I also began the process of being called to the BC Bar. I began my new post as Legislative Counsel in mid-October, exclusively drafting legislation (Bills, Regulations and Orders in Council) and enjoying the benefits that come with having ministry solicitors and policy advisors as drafting instructors! The second reason for the transition period came two months into my new job when I decided to submit an application for a one-year Parliamentary Counsel position that unexpectedly came up at the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. It is now June and I have been at the Legislative Assembly for a little over 4 months. In many ways I have returned to my former practice of law. As in-house counsel to the Legislative Assembly, I provide legal services and advice, upon request, to the House, presiding officers, parliamentary committees, Members and their legislative and constituency office staff, and to the officers of the Legislative Assembly and the administrative departments they oversee that consist of both parliamentary and corporate branches like HR, IT and Finance. As a Table Officer, I sit at the Table alongside the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during House proceedings, providing procedural advice to presiding officers and Members. And lastly, as a member of the senior management team, I contribute to the governance, strategic and other corporate initiatives of the Legislative Assembly. 2. Why did you go to law school? I went to law school because I wanted to become a lawyer in one or more of the following practices areas, which coincidentally all start with “i”: international law; immigration law; intellectual property law. I studied what interested me during four years of undergraduate studies at the University of Toronto: human biology, zoology, anthropology and Spanish. I am an immigrant (“1.5 generation” Korean-Canadian) with most of my extended family in South Korea. Since my elementary school days, I have always been intrigued, excited and agitated by human rights and public policy issues. I thought I could build on all of this by studying law and pursuing a legal career in any one of the three “i” practice areas. Plus, I liked school and wanted to continue studying. 3. How did you get to where you are today? Design? Chance? Both? Probably a bit of both. I strived for and worked hard to achieve each of the stepping stones -- law school, summering jobs, articling, legal jobs -- that led me to where I am today (design). But I didn’t know, as each stone was being laid, what the final destination would be (chance). I would be self-centered and foolish to not acknowledge the role of my supportive and loving family who has always been my cheering squad at every milestone in my life (and in between), encouraging me and keeping me both grounded and buoyant in love. My mom and dad pray for me everyday, so I believe there is also divine design in how I got to be where I am today. What does the future hold for me?! I don’t know... 4. What is your most significant achievement? What are you proud of? Work-wise, I would say working with Senators to work on various pieces of legislation that have become law over the years has been my most significant achievement because I directly contributed to the work of federal lawmakers that resulted in a direct, tangible and sometimes life-changing impact on Canadians. Looking back not too far, I am also proud I let myself reflect on where I was in my legal career and what I wanted to do in the next decade and beyond that led to the major change in my career path and to my family’s and my life last year. 5. What are some key challenges, and more importantly, opportunities for women in law? Not enough women in senior leadership positions in both the private sector (including law firms) and public institutions continues to be both a challenge and area of opportunity for women in law. There is also the societal perception problems that many women lawyers, including those in senior positions, face in their everyday interactions with clients, opposing counsel and others in the course of their practice and the additional work required of them to be constantly mindful of managing the fine line (examples below) that is nevertheless more often than not crossed for them:
6. What advice would you give a woman starting her legal career? Be purposeful in building diverse networks early in your career within the legal community (and outside the law!) and with everyone, especially women. Don’t overthink before calling someone in those networks to think out loud. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you Suzie for sharing your journey with us. I also want to mention that Suzie obtained her Civil Law degree (magna cum laude) while working full time at the Senate and won the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal in 2012. I am sure the future is bright for you, no matter what it might be! ICYMI: Previous posts profiled Kim Gale, Alexi Wood, Melissa McBain, Erin Best, Gillian Hnatiw, Melanie Sharman Rowand, Meg Chinelo Egbunonu, Lisa Jean Helps, Nathalie Godbout Q.C., Laurie Livingstone, Renatta Austin, Janis Criger, May Cheng, Nicole Chrolavicius, Charlene Theodore, Dyanoosh Youssefi, Shannon Salter, Bindu Cudjoe, Elliot Spears, Jessica Prince, Anu K. Sandhu, Claire Hatcher, Esi Codjoe, Kate Dewhirst, Jennifer Taylor, Rebecca Durcan, Atrisha Lewis, Vandana Sood, Kathryn Manning, Kim Hawkins, Kyla Lee, and Eva Chan. Sign up to have these profiles sent directly to your email address and stay tuned for the next post soon! I started this blog series because I was tired of hearing about women leaving law and wanted to hear about women leading in law. The "Women Leading in Law" series focuses on good news stories and highlights amazing women succeeding in the legal profession. Each post includes the profiled lawyer's answers to six questions. Prepare to be inspired!  “How Do You Do It?” and “How Do You Do it All?”: Dispelling Myths About My Life as a Lawpreneur5/27/2019  The two questions I am asked on a regular basis are: “How do you do it?” and “How do you do it all?”
The first question is often from people who want advice from me on how to start their own “thing”, whether it’s their own law practice, freelance law practice, or side-hustle business. The second question, “How do you do it all?”, is often followed by “Three kids, running a business, lawyering, teaching, blogging, when you do find the time?” Both of these questions make me uncomfortable. The fact that people are asking me these questions makes me think I am projecting this fake Instagram image that I am succeeding at all of this and it is easy for me. So, this blog post is dedicated to these two questions and dispelling some common myths that I hear. HOW DO YOU DO IT? A little over a year after I started my solo freelance lawyer business, I was having coffee with an acquaintance and she said to me, “Your business is going so well. You are so lucky! It is not normally that way. What luck you have!” (For some context, this individual had started a few different businesses that never really got off the ground.) I didn’t know how to respond, so I sort of just stared at her and muttered a non-committal answer. But inside my head I was thinking, “Luck? Really was that all this was? Luck?” That night at 3 am, lying in bed wide awake (you know, when my brain decides it’s a good time to work through some problems), I thought about her comment and why it annoyed me. Sure, okay, I concluded, there was some luck involved. I cannot deny that I certainly have the inherent advantages associated with being born into the life of an able-bodied white woman (more context, my coffee companion was also an able-bodied white woman). But I also knew that it most certainly wasn’t all luck. I worked really hard to get my business to where it was. The comment annoyed me as it diminished my efforts and placed my success out of my control. It was something that just happened to me and not something I made happen. And this is myth number one that I want to dispel: Successful businesses or law firms don’t “just happen”. You cannot hang up a shingle and “Voila!” you have a successful law practice. I meet with lawyers all the time who want advice on how to start a freelance or solo practice. When I follow up a few months or a year later to see how things are going, some are disappointed that their practice is not as successful as they thought it would be. I ask them what they have done to grow their business. Often, they tell me they put up a website, printed business cards, and had a few coffees. That’s it!?! You need to hustle! I went to two or three networking events a week (still do). I emailed everyone I knew. I set up as many coffees and lunches as I could. I spent hours writing and re-writing blog posts and articles for legal publications. I built my social media presence. I volunteered hours of my time with different organizations to build my profile. This was not luck. This was hard work. A website and some business cards may be “hard work” to some. Not to me. I’ve been financially independent since I turned 18. I paid for undergrad and law school by working several different summer and part time jobs. I know what it is like to have to work hard or not reach my goals. I guess my point is, you can have great ideas and a great passion for a new business or law practice but if you don’t put in the hours of work it will likely go nowhere. You may love the idea of freelancing or being your own boss (and it is pretty awesome!) but it is not all rainbows and sunshine. I fully agree with the saying that successful businesses are 1% idea and 99% execution. And sometimes even with all of that hard work a business will still fail. But with just an idea and no execution it will fail every time. Remember this when you see those “overnight success” companies or law firms. Likely “overnight” involved years of frustration, no money, hard work, and even failure. So how do you do it? Yes, you need a little luck, but you also need a lot of hard work. HOW DO YOU DO IT ALL? “Three kids? Wow, how do you do it all?” My response: “The same way my husband does it.” But no one ever asks my husband (who runs his own firm, sits on a board, coaches baseball, etc.) “Wow, three kids, how do you do it all?” I have this funny belief that both parents should parent their children. I don’t believe that children “need” their mothers more than their fathers or that somehow, just because our bodies birthed these kids that we are somehow better at parenting than men. So, to dispel myth number two – I am not doing it all because I don’t believe I should be doing it all. I have a perfectly capable partner, we have neighbours, we have grandparents, we have paid help, we have friends. I am fortunate and privileged to have a “village” and I take advantage of that. People always assume I started my own business so I can stay home with my kids and not because I might have had a great business idea and some entrepreneurial drive. How many people think this of men who start their own businesses? Do they automatically assume men become entrepreneurs so they can care for their kids? I understand the nature of my practice (freelance lawyering) and my business (a freelance lawyer company, Flex Legal) might suggest to some that I only work part time in my pajamas from home, but I work full time or more and have had an office since my first year in business. Some weeks I work more hours than I did when I was on Bay Street. However, as an entrepreneur, I can choose when I work those full time hours and I purposefully chose an office close to my house so I can see my kids who come home from school for lunch several days a week. But I am not the one who walks the kids to school every morning (that’s my husband) and we have a caregiver who picks them up everyday. So, I want to dispel the myth that I am parenting my kids full time and running a business full time and doing everything else full time. I am not. I don’t know how anyone could. I have time to do everything I am doing because I have a lot of help (and coffee, lots of coffee 😉). And even with all of this help, I still screw up sometimes. Bottom line: It is not easy. I am not doing it all . . . . I am just doing my best.  It's back! While I wait for some firms to finish their answers for my Equality, Diversity and Inclusion series, I've decided to re-start the Women Leading in Law series that has been on a bit of a hiatus. So check back here often as both the EDI series and the WLL series (along with my own personal musings on law) will pop up from time to time. For this profile I am featuring Kim Gale, who is no stranger to social media, networking, and building a brand for herself. If I could go back in time to my younger lawyer days I would tell myself, "Be more like Kim". She gets it. Like many of you, I first "met" Kim on LinkedIn (I believe she was promoting her blog, Law for Millennials) and then at a legal networking event. I have since had the pleasure of having coffee with Kim and learning more about her estate litigation law firm, Gale Law. 1. Tell me a little about your practice or business. I practice estate litigation at my own firm, Gale Law. My law firm is representative of my values: legal advice that is straightforward, solutions that are cost-effective and a free consultation where clients can have the comfort to ask questions before paying out of pocket. My clients' issues are deeply personal and I find being compassionate and available is extremely important as an estate litigator. I handle matters relating to estate disputes, some examples include misappropriation of estate funds, passing of a common law spouse, and attorney for property and personal care issues. 2. Why did you go to law school? I decided to go to law school in the UK because I wanted to study in a place where I could travel, and experience new things. I thought I would leave Toronto behind and move to London, England permanently. I always wanted to be a lawyer and I thought if I didn’t give it a shot it would be something I would regret. I felt the same way about starting my own firm - it was something I always wanted to do. I guess I figure the worst thing is living life feeling stuck and not reaching your full potential. Life is too short to not follow your dreams. 3. How did you get to where you are today? Design? Chance? Both? In life there is always a bit of luck! As my mom says, “chance favours the prepared mind” (and according to Google she quoted this from Louis Pasteur). My mom, Reeva Finkel, is a top litigator and senior partner at Blaney McMurtry and I’d like to think I’m following in her footsteps as a female litigator. Having her as a role model has deeply inspired me to believe that hard work and preparation are the keys to success. I still call her (many times) for questions and support. I feel lucky to have her as my strong female role model, in addition to many others, and I got to where I am through leaning on others for support and rolling up my sleeves and working hard. I’m also pretty passionate about what I do – I think it helps to like what you do and want to help others! 4. What is your most significant achievement? What are you proud of? I am proud of the group I co-founded, NCA Network , and the team we put together, in addition to my blog, Law for Millennials and of course, my own firm. NCA Network is a networking group for lawyers and students who went to law school outside of Canada. We are making waves to promote diversity and inclusion in the legal community. NCA stands for the National Committee on Accreditation exams which are the exams you must write to qualify a non-Canadian degree to Canadian standards. I wrote 7 NCA exams while working as a paralegal full-time in the UK and I found the NCA process lonely and difficult. I navigated the NCA process on my own and through this difficult time, I gained knowledge and insight that I wanted to pass along to other students so that they don’t have to go through the same struggle I went through. We hosted our first event at the TLA on March 21 and attendees received 40 minutes of EDI CPD hours. We had the Honourable Justice Thorburn speaking in addition to Isfahan Merali and Atrisha Lewis, and I acted as the moderator. The topic was on diversity and inclusion. Our event was a success with almost 100 attendees! We are excited to make this an annual event and continue to work with the Toronto Lawyers Association and our sponsors. Law for Millennials is more fun – easy to understand legal information focused on issues millennials face! Free, not complicated and not dull. So far all of my co-authors are female lawyers and law students, many from the NCA process, and I love using this platform to promote female lawyers. 5. What are some key challenges, and more importantly, opportunities for women in law? I am blown away about how supportive the legal community, specifically, the support from females, I have received. We understand the challenges of being a female in a (still) male dominated profession. We refer work to each other, invite each other to networking events and try to help each other. I appreciate the support immensely and I try to pay it forward. Through this support, we create grassroots to promote females in the legal profession. Just being given the opportunity to write this blog post is an example of female support - Erin thank you so much for this opportunity, you are a true pioneer and inspiration (and great example of females supporting females). 6. What advice would you give a woman starting her legal career? I like to give advice which reflects on my own experience. When I was working as a paralegal in the UK, I was very out of my element and I thought the only way to fit in was to be someone else. Fitting into the British culture became very important to me. Looking back, I think I would have been much happier if I just stayed true to myself. My advice is to just be yourself. The reality is you’ll be a better advocate and provide a higher service to your clients if you are genuine. It is too much effort to be someone else. People prefer to work with real people anyway. None of us are robots. We have our own personality – why not show yours off! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thank you Kim for sharing your journey with us. Best of luck with your new firm. ICYMI: Previous posts profiled Alexi Wood, Melissa McBain, Erin Best, Gillian Hnatiw, Melanie Sharman Rowand, Meg Chinelo Egbunonu, Lisa Jean Helps, Nathalie Godbout Q.C., Laurie Livingstone, Renatta Austin, Janis Criger, May Cheng, Nicole Chrolavicius, Charlene Theodore, Dyanoosh Youssefi, Shannon Salter, Bindu Cudjoe, Elliot Spears, Jessica Prince, Anu K. Sandhu, Claire Hatcher, Esi Codjoe, Kate Dewhirst, Jennifer Taylor, Rebecca Durcan, Atrisha Lewis, Vandana Sood, Kathryn Manning, Kim Hawkins, Kyla Lee, and Eva Chan. Sign up to have these profiles sent directly to your email address and stay tuned for the next post soon! I started this blog series because I was tired of hearing about women leaving law and wanted to hear about women leading in law. The "Women Leading in Law" series focuses on good news stories and highlights amazing women succeeding in the legal profession. Each post includes the profiled lawyer's answers to six questions. Prepare to be inspired!   This month in Ontario, lawyers and paralegals will vote for the next set of “Benchers” at the Law Society of Ontario (LSO). For those unfamiliar with the term, Benchers are the board of directors at the LSO, the regulatory body that governs lawyers and paralegals in Ontario. Bencher terms are for four years. Eligible voters can vote for up to 20 lawyers in the Toronto region and 20 lawyers outside of Toronto. There is a common misconception that Benchers represent lawyers, much like a member of parliament represents their constituents. Benchers actually represent the interests of the public and regulate the profession. Still confused? Precedent Magazine published a helpful article: What do Benchers at the Law Society of Ontario Actually Do?
For this election my Twitter and LinkedIn feeds are filled with #BencherElection2019 posts, conversations, podcasts, endorsements, etc. Looking at this level of engagement, one might think that every lawyer in Ontario is super keen to vote and discuss the pressing issues facing our profession. Unfortunately, this is likely far from the truth. Social media platforms, and especially Twitter, can be massive echo chambers. While lawyers on social media appear to be engaged in the election, the historical data on voter turnout suggests that the majority of lawyers are really apathetic. Large Firm Lawyers Vote (Sole Practitioners, Not So Much) The LSO published a comprehensive report on voter turnout, covering election results from 1987 to 2015. Generally, turnout has decreased with every election. 10,287 of the 18,369 eligible voters (or 56%) voted in the 1987 election. Fast forward to 2015. Despite the technological advancement of online voting and a relatively robust #BencherElection engagement on Twitter, 2015 had the lowest percentage of voter turnout in the years documented. Of the 47,396 eligible voters (notice the significant increase in the number of lawyers in Ontario) only 16,040 (or 33.84%) voted. Interestingly, in private practice, the voting-lawyers are from firms of between 76-100 lawyers (over 77% voted in the last election) and firms of over 100 lawyers (over 50% voted). Could this be due to the constant pressure from management to vote for the lawyers who are running from those firms? Hmm. Sole practitioners, who make up the largest category of lawyers in private practice, had the lowest voter turnout for private practice lawyers with only 36.35%. In 2015, only 24.55% of the over 23,000 lawyers not in private practice (lawyers employed in government, corporations, academia) voted. Also, consistently every year, a slightly higher percentage of lawyers who identify as male vote than lawyers who identify as female. In the last election 35.66% of all male lawyers voted, while only 31.23% of female lawyers voted. Why You Should Vote (and Encourage Others to as Well) These statistics tell me that most lawyers do not prioritize the Bencher election. Understandably, many lawyers would prefer to spend time on other aspects of their lives rather than taking the time to research the issues, research the candidates, sit down at a computer, and vote. The problem is that there are several important issues that the LSO (and the newly elected Benchers) will be grappling with, and these issues affect not only the legal profession as a whole, but you as an individual lawyer. I will not discuss the issues in detail here but a few examples: improving access to justice, ensuring lawyers are competent to practice and providing remedial or disciplinary measure for those who are not, the licensing process, entity-based regulation, diversity & inclusion initiatives, the cost of legal education, alternative business structures, etc. In the past, Benchers have made some important (and sometimes controversial) decisions: changing the name from Law Society of Upper Canada to Law Society of Ontario; introducing the Law Practice Program to assist with the articling crisis; deciding not to accredit Trinity Western University; implementing the Statement of Principles requirement; approving the recent public awareness campaign; etc. If you are interested, the minutes and transcripts from Convocation tell you how the incumbent Benchers who are running again voted on past issues (just click on the year on the left-hand side). As an example, these are the Minutes from December 1, 2017 which involved a vote on Mr. Groia’s “conscientious objector” motion regarding the Statement of Principles. All lawyers and paralegals should care about who will be making the decisions about each of these issues. Want to Vote and Don’t Have the Time to Research all those Lawyers? “What do you mean there are 128 lawyers running? I don’t have the time to research all of them!” I know many of you are thinking this and it is a valid observation. I have a few suggestions for you: First, several people and organizations want to make this easier for you and have compiled the information you need for the election in one place. For example, Colin Lachance has organized and published the website LSOBencher.com where the candidates can submit their profile and their positions on the current issues. The Ontario Bar Association has made a website profiling its members who are running. The Law Times also has a website listing the candidates. Sean Robichaud has a podcast featuring some of the candidates. Or you can follow #BencherElection2019 on Twitter. These are just some of the places you can go to get the information you need. Does that still sound like a lot of work? Another option is to seek out a lawyer you trust (and who has the time and interest to do the research) and ask for their recommendations (thanks, Morgan Sim for this suggestion). Or, there is my approach. I really dislike receiving emails and flyers from candidates. Not only do they fill my inbox and recycling container, I do not think it is fair to those candidates who cannot cover the expense for such advertising. Not all candidates can pay for the email list or can afford to have fliers printed and mailed out. For the last two Bencher elections I have made sure not to check off the box on our annual reports allowing Benchers to email me. Instead, I only look at one thing: The Voting Guide provided by the LSO. Each candidate gets one page and one page only to convince me why I should vote for them. I see it as a level playing field for all candidates. I’m not saying my approach is perfect, but as a rather busy person who wants to vote, this is the best use of my time. (Hint: the Voting Guide is searchable if there was a particular issue that interested you, for example, the Statement of Principles.) So, Vote! No excuses this year. Get out and vote. Encourage other lawyers to do the same. You will receive an email from the LSO in the second week of April with a link and explanation on how to vote. Keep an eye out for it and vote by April 30, 2019. Whatever approach you take, I just ask that you take a few minutes to vote and tell all the lawyers in your network to vote as well!  How does one of the largest law firms in Canada address and advance equity, diversity and inclusion? I reached out to Nikki Gershbain, McCarthy Tétrault's Senior Director, Inclusion and Community Engagement, to find out: 1. Almost all law firms have an equity, diversity and inclusion policy or commitment on their website. What does EDI mean to your firm and is improving EDI a priority? For McCarthy Tétrault, EDI means taking the obligatory commitment that can be found, as you note, on every firm’s website, and turning it into concrete and meaningful action for our people on the ground. It’s not only a priority for our firm, it’s one of our five strategic pillars. At McCarthy Tétrault we’re focussed on diversity, but even more so on inclusion. Inclusion goes beyond representation in an effort to identify and eliminate unconscious biases, creating programs and policies designed to set diverse lawyers up for success, and creating spaces where everyone can bring their whole selves to the workplace. For us, EDI is more than just a head count. As EDI expert Verna Myers has now famously written, “diversity is being invited to the party, inclusion is being asked to dance.” Importantly, what inclusion is not is reverse discrimination. This can’t be said enough. The kind of efforts I’m describing and that our firm is promoting don’t create an unfair advantage for some groups – they simply level the playing field for others. As part of the EDI movement, we need to dispel myths that continue to persist, despite clear evidence that diverse lawyers can face significant barriers to success within the legal profession. We need to drive home the message that merit and inclusivity are two sides of the same coin. Finally, true EDI requires leadership from the top of the house. While diversity and inclusion have been longstanding priorities of McCarthy Tétrault, late last year our CEO Dave Leonard kicked off a renewed and robust internal dialogue that has, within a short period of time, elevated and prioritised these discussions. Leadership matters. 2. What steps (or initiatives) has your firm taken to address and improve EDI? McCarthy Tétrault has always been committed to EDI. We were the first Canadian law firm to appoint a Chief Inclusion Officer, and one of the first to establish a National Inclusion Committee. In recent years, we’ve focused on creating leadership opportunities for women: today, 45% of our senior leadership team and 40% of our board members are women, as well as 43% of our lawyers. Elevating large numbers of women into senior governance roles has put gender issues front and centre at the firm, and has set an example for our women lawyers, who see visible evidence of the fact that they can aspire to positions of leadership at the firm. Some of the many programs and policies we currently have in place to put our values into action include bias-free recruitment policies, work allocation programs, support for parents and nursing mothers, mental health leadership, flexible work arrangements, and firm-wide anti-harassment training. Associates can also take up to one year of parental leave without impacting their salary level or partnership eligibility. These programs have led to our status as one of Canada’s Best Diversity Employers, seven years running. We’re one of just a handful of law firms in the country to currently hold this distinction. While we are proud of our progress, we know there’s more to be done. That’s why McCarthy Tétrault recently created my role – Senior Director, Inclusion and Community Engagement – and launched an innovative, firm-wide program called “Inclusion Now”. The first program we announced under the Inclusion Now banner was outward-looking: a five year, $5M gift to United Way to support members of five equity-seeking groups: women, members of the LGBTQ2S community, Indigenous people, newcomers, and people living with disabilities. We know that poverty is exacerbated by other vulnerabilities, so by targeting our investment to programs serving these communities, we hope to deepen the impact of our giving. We also plan to follow-up this financial gift with the gift of our time, by providing pro bono services to clients of the agencies we’re working with. Scotia Bank recently announced a United Way gift modelled after this approach, and we hope to see more corporate donors follow suit. Turning inward, I’m currently in the process of developing a firm-wide strategy to build on our existing efforts, create new programs and policies to achieve our EDI goals, and ensure that the values of diversity, inclusion and social responsibility inform every aspect of who we are as a firm, and what we do. In short: I have the best job ever! 3. Which initiative has been the most successful and why? I can think of a few! Our work allocation program, which we’ve rolled out in several of our largest practice groups across the country, ensures that our associates have access to great work and career-enhancing professional opportunities. We all fall prey to affinity bias – human beings are naturally drawn to people who are “like us”. In a large law firm-setting, work is distributed by more senior, and therefore a more homogeneous group of, lawyers. In this kind of environment, unintentional bias can impact a young associate’s career. We are proud of this program and have plans to continue to roll it out more broadly across the firm. Lawyers work extremely hard. It’s a career and lifestyle we’ve freely chosen. But for young parents of any gender, the challenges of managing a law practice while raising young kids can lead to enormous career pressure. In order to make this balancing act easier, McCarthy Tétrault’s parental support program offers executive coaching, a maternity leave buddy program, internal "baby rooms", emergency daycare support and reimbursement for nursing parents who need to travel with a caregiver. Most recently, we launched our inaugural “Inclusion Now Awards”. Fifty four members of our firm – students, associates, counsel, partners and employees – were nominated by their peers for the many ways they serve as diversity and inclusion champions in their workplaces and communities. We celebrated ten winners, two per office, by bringing the entire firm together via video conference. Our CEO and Regional Managing Partners hosted the event, and the turn-out and energy in each of our offices was remarkable. By publicly recognizing our colleagues for their EDI efforts, we hope to encourage others to step up. 4. Which initiative was the least successful (what's not working) and why? We’ve never launched a program that wasn’t successful at some level – each effort we’ve made to promote EDI has achieved a certain element of traction. The question I’m asking right now is not “how do we design successful EDI programs”, but rather, “what EDI programs will have the greatest impact”. The truth is, how to make genuine progress isn’t a huge mystery – there is no shortage of credible studies and reports that tell us how we can move the dial to increase the representation of women, lawyers of colour, LGBTQ lawyers etc. The path is there, we simply have to have the desire to take it. 5. What is your goal? What do you hope to achieve through your EDI-focused actions? We have many goals, but let me touch on three. First and foremost, our goal is to help create a culture that works for our diverse students, lawyers and staff. We want folks to choose to build their careers at McCarthy Tétrault, and when they get here we want them to have the same opportunities as everyone else to achieve their full potential. In short, we want diverse people to thrive in our workplace. Second, we want to engage all members of our firm to support these goals, even those who don’t feel personally affected by the issues. That’s why I’ve spent the last four months meeting with dozens of associates, partners and staff, and it’s why I’m working on a strategy that creates opportunities for everyone to actively engage with these issues, and incentives for doing so. Third, we’d like to see this work have an impact on the profession more broadly. While it’s always exciting to feel like you’re on the leading edge of something important and innovative, it’s even more exciting to know you’ve contributed to systemic change. McCarthy Tétrault has an opportunity not only to find new and innovative ways to support, nurture and advance diverse talent at our firm, but to contribute to change for all lawyers.
Thank you Nikki for taking the time to answer these questions and for giving us an insight into your firm's initiatives and goals. ICYMI, previous posts have featured Casey & Moss LLP and Lerners LLP. Stay tuned for the next post soon. Sign up to have these profiles sent directly to your email address!
The idea for this series surfaced last year when I attended a women lawyers conference where the conversation quickly turned to criticizing and calling out law firms for not doing enough to make a positive change. The conversation went on for quite some time with example after example of all that is wrong with law firms. While the criticism may have been warranted, unfortunately, no one talked about possible solutions. . . . . .So with this blog series I wanted to reach out to law firms and find out what they are doing to advance EDI in their firms. Are they doing anything? What is working? What isn't? What is the end-goal? How do they measure "success"? The posts include a set of five questions that each firm will answer. My simple goal is to start a conversation, find out what is happening in this area in law firms across Canada, and perhaps we can all learn from each other.  For this profile in this new series, we shift from the larger law firm setting (see our profile on Lerners LLP) to see what a boutique law firm is doing to address EDI. Starting your own firm means starting with a blank slate. Read on to see what Angela Casey and Angelique Moss have done to address EDI as they build their firm from the ground up (and what the steps they took when they noticed they might be falling into the 'old boys club' trap):
1. Almost all law firms have an equality/equity, diversity and inclusion (“EDI”) policy or commitment on their website. What does EDI mean to your firm and is improving EDI a priority? For us, it started with equality in the partnership. There are no Casey clients or Moss clients. There are only Casey and Moss clients. Our model of partnership is actually very old-fashioned. We are not just partners but friends who genuinely care about each other. We share management duties equally and rewards equally. We have equal voices in decision making. We support each other rather than compete with each other. The culture of our firm is family friendly. Our technology is set up so that our lawyers can practice from anywhere. I once worked from my hotel room between games at my son’s hockey tournament with a colleague who was plugged in at home during her baby’s nap time. We don’t schedule meetings at times that would conflict with daycare pick up and drop off times. We also offer remote work options for staff who need to work around family obligations. We offer our lawyers flexible work and compensation arrangements to allow them to align their career goals and family obligations and/or interests outside of the law. We recognize that there is no ‘one size fits all’ and that goals and responsibilities can change over time. Our compensation structure is intended to accommodate anyone – male or female, with children or without, and those wanting to work fewer or more hours. We also have a parental leave policy which allows firm members – male or female, adoptive parent or birth parent - to take 17 weeks of paid parental leave plus one additional paid month of leave for each year they have been with us. We believe that the key to gender equality is not only to create workplaces friendly to women returning to work, but also to support and encourage men who are doing their share of parenting and household work. At a recent Ontario Bar Association event, one of my male colleagues at another small firm showed me about 50 pictures of his new baby on his phone and was positively giddy about leaving the reception to go home and play with his baby. That made my heart happy. For our staff, we try to create opportunities to contribute in ways that play to their individual strengths. Our clerks are bright, hardworking, and have fabulous people skills. With the type of work we do (estate litigation and estate administration), there are many opportunities to involve them in a wide variety of tasks. Because we are small, lean and specialized, we can offer fixed fee packages and lower hourly rate services by maximizing our use of staff and lawyer time. For each task within a mandate, we ask ourselves who can do the task best, most efficiently, and at the lowest cost for the client. Depending on the task, it might be a student, a clerk, a legal assistant, or a lawyer, and we try to think creatively when developing a work plan. This is great for our clients, who save money by either paying the lowest appropriate hourly rate, or by purchasing a fixed fee package. It also benefits our staff by allowing them to assume more challenging roles and responsibilities as they grow with us. We want our staff to take ownership of their work, so that they feel invested in our clients’ files, and also to know that they have contributed to our firm’s success. Because we could not do the work we do without great support staff. 2. What steps (or initiatives) has your firm taken to address and improve EDI? Being a new firm, we have the advantage of being able to prioritize diversity from the outset. There is no entrenched culture where we try to fit new people into a pre-existing mold. We can keep our minds open about how the firm will grow and develop. Rather than looking at who will be the best fit for the firm, we can focus on building the firm to fit the needs of its team members and clients. It’s a more inclusionary premise. Promoting and encouraging diversity makes business sense for us, given our specialization in estates, trusts and capacity litigation. Our clients are typically going through some type of family conflict in the wake of a death or a dementia diagnosis. These issues are deeply personal. We need to talk about and document details of our clients’ family lives, which they may never have shared outside of their immediate family. Now they are sitting in a boardroom talking (and often crying) about these very private topics. Having lawyers and staff from different backgrounds and with different perspectives is a real advantage for us in this practice area. 3. Which initiative has been the most successful? And Why? We have regularly scheduled lunch meetings with the entire team. At these team meetings, we discuss ideas, ongoing initiatives, draft policies, and ways to improve our work flow. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the conversation. For instance, at our last meeting, we were happy to see our most recent hire asking questions and contributing to the conversation. In addition to our formal team meetings, we regularly gather the whole team to get to know each other in a more social setting. When a team member has a birthday, the firm goes out for lunch together. Getting together for meals in a casual setting outside of the office is a great way to learn more about each other, and this deepens our respect for each other. 4. Which initiative was the least successful (what’s not working?) And why? Initially, we tended to attract potential associates who are like us, not just professionally but also on a personal level. When it was just the two of us, we marveled at how much we had in common – we both ride our bikes to work, we both enjoy craft beer, we share the same taste in food, books, Netflix, and humour. When we added our first lawyer to our team, we were pleasantly surprised to find out that she also rides a bike to work and loves craft beer. Our second associate hire was another bike-riding female lawyer who shares similar interests. Not long ago, a colleague reached out to tell us about a fantastic lawyer who she thought we might want to meet. This candidate had all the qualities we would look for in a lawyer - she was a respected and passionate advocate, an excellent writer, and, as our colleague pointed out to us, she was a funny, bike-riding beer drinker, who would “fit right in”. It was kind of amusing at the time, but it did cause us to reflect about our hiring criteria. Were we starting to do what the “old boys club” was guilty of on Bay Street – subconsciously stacking our team with people who look and think like us? We want to welcome all people who share our firm’s values – not just those who are like us - and we want to make a conscious effort to make sure that everyone on the team feels included. Breaking the mold, our third associate hire was a man (and we haven’t seen his bike…yet). Now, our team of 9 (5 lawyers, 1 articling student and 3 clerks) is a very diverse group. 5. What is your goal? What do you hope to achieve through your EDI actions? We have set out to prove that it is possible to create a supportive and inclusive work environment, while delivering uncompromising excellence in our advocacy work for clients. In order to accomplish this, we believe in investing in our team members for the long term. For instance, the second associate lawyer we hired was pregnant at the time we hired her. We knew that she would be a great fit at our firm – she was an accomplished litigator with a Bay Street pedigree who shared our values and our passion for helping people. She wasn’t really looking for a new job at the time we met her; she was just feeling out what practicing law would or could be like after having a child. We made her an offer immediately. When she told us that she was pregnant and wasn’t sure it was the right time to make a move, our first response was, “well, we’re still in if you’re in”. Ultimately, we want to create a partnership where each new partner feels that he or she has an equal voice in shaping the future of the firm. We also strongly believe that each team member needs to feel his or her contributions to the firm are valued. Finally, we want our team to feel supported when they contribute to their families and communities and otherwise have a life outside of law. We are still a young firm, but we are proud of what we have accomplished so far. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you Angela and Angelique for taking the time to thoughtfully answer these questions and letting us know about your goals. Stay tuned for the next post soon. Sign up to have these profiles sent directly to your email address! The idea for this series surfaced last year when I attended a women lawyers conference where the conversation quickly turned to criticizing and calling out law firms for not doing enough to make a positive change. The conversation went on for quite some time with example after example of all that is wrong with law firms. Unfortunately, no one talked about possible solutions. . . . . .So with my new series, I wanted to reach out to law firms and find out what they are doing to advance EDI in their firms. Are they doing anything? What is working? What isn't? What is the end-goal? How do they measure "success"? The posts will include a set of five questions that each firm will answer. My simple goal is to start a conversation, find out what is happening in this area in law firms across Canada, and perhaps we can all learn from each other. |
  Erin C. Cowling is a freelance litigator, researcher & writer at Cowling Legal Freelance and President and Founder of FLEX LEGAL, a network of freelance lawyers.
Categories
All
Archives
October 2019
|
RSS Feed
|
(C) 2014-2019 Cowling Legal. All rights reserved.
|
Please note I only work with other lawyers, law firms and legal departments and do not represent clients of my own.
Information on this website does not constitute legal advice and is for informational purposes only. Accessing or using this website does not create a solicitor-client relationship. See website Terms of Use/Privacy Policy. info@cowlinglegal.com
3080 Yonge Street, Suite 6060 Toronto,ON M4N 3N1 (appointment only) 416.509.3655 |
|