Diversity fails to pay off at the top as US firms in London dominated by male partners

  • Print
  • Comments (6)

Readers' comments (6)

  • Loving the 1970s trouser suits. Are they staging a comeback in a law firm near you?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @anonymous 10.07am - typical comment on a story about women

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Loving the 1970s response to a female equality story. Would we be talking about the suit if it was an article about male lawyers…?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Articles like this do so much diversity. Not partners but “female partners”, with the necessary genetic qualifications …

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What is this obsession with women not being represented at partnership level? As a woman with no children (and no desire to have any - which is often seen as the reason why women do not make partnership) I have no intention of becoming a partner. I enjoy going into work, doing the best I can for my clients and then going home at a reasonable time and having a life outside of work. I do not want to sacrifice that for long hours either in the office or out "marketing". The problem is that women with similar views of my own often leave the profession because once you get to a certian level of qualification you are expected to either be driving towards partnership or to leave, you are not seen as an asset.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @ Anonymous | 1-Apr-2014 2:53 pm

    Does this suggest though, that there are more "ambitious" men than women? I don't think that this is the case.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (6)