Diversity andFlexibility
Connection
Best Practices

The Project for
Attorney Retention

October 29, 2009
Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

D iversity andF lexibility
C onnection
B est P ractices

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | Best Practices
The Diversity and Flexibility Connection of the Project for Attorney Retention (PAR) consists of
12 general counsel of major U.S. companies, and 12 chairs of PAR member law firms. The general
counsel were chosen because of their history of demonstrated commitment to issues of diversity. The
law firms were chosen based on objective metrics designed to identify firms that have made the mostprogress towards flexibility without stigma, i.e., workplace flexibility programs that do not derail the
careers of lawyers who use them.
The Connection was designed to facilitate a conversation about how in-house and outside counsel
could work together more effectively to support balanced hours programs,1 with the ultimate goalof making the legal profession more inclusive. The Connection seeks to tear down the wall between
diversity and work/life initiatives in order to address the complex issue of attorney retention more
holistically.   Sustained long hours affect all lawyers, regardless of gender, race, or age. When combinedwith the advancement hurdles women and minority lawyers often face, the high hours can be thefinal straw leading to departure when no viable alternatives exist. The Connection’s goal is to bringbalanced hours into diversity initiatives, thereby accelerating the elimination of structural and culturalbiases that create advantages and disadvantages for certain lawyers.   

The Meetings
PAR convened two day-long, in-person meetings of Connection participants at the Chicago office ofSchiff Hardin on March 27, 2009 and July 1, 2009. General counsel and law firm chairs engaged in a
frank, moderated discussion about their shared goals and how each can support the other in making
progress toward those goals. Topics included the reasons diversity and flexibility are good for business,why diversity programs need to include an effective work/life component, client service on a reducedhours schedule, how to implement nonstigmatized flexible work programs in house, how clients can
support law firms’ flexible work programs, and whether everyone’s interests are better served if clientsare aware that their outside counsel is working reduced hours.2
The sense of the group was that widespread agreement on basic principles needs to be accompanied
by an initiative to identify, and commit to, best practices and pilot programs that change everyday
incentives in ways that produce sustained organizational change. These are set forth below. As another
outgrowth of the Connection, PAR has created the Flex Success Award. The award will be given to one
or more law firm partners who have been highly successful working a reduced-hours schedule, alongwith a client who has been instrumental in developing that attorney’s career. The inaugural recipientof PAR’s Flex Success Award will be announced at PAR’s Connection conference on October 29, 2009
in Washington, DC.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | 

The Connection between Diversity and Flexibility
PAR presented information about the connection between diversity and flexibility. Although
discussions about these issues traditionally have occurred apart, in fact, achieving diversity is inextricably
linked to an effective flexibility program that includes reduced-hours schedules.
Why Flexibility Matters to Clients. In normal economic times, attrition rates in large law firms are
20%—more than double those in most industries.3 Clients find high attrition disruptive and expensive,and continue to insist that law firms bring attrition levels under greater control. The Association of
Corporate Counsel’s (ACC) Value Challenge summarizes clients’ concern over uncontrolled attrition.4
The ACC Value Challenge includes the business case for nonstigmatized part-time programs. PAR’s
research on the business case over the past decade shows the following: it makes little business sense
for legal employers to pay large sums to hire and train women, only to lose one after another due
to insufficient flexibility in work schedules and commitments. High turnover is an inevitable—andexpensive—consequence of a rigid and outdated model. For a full exploration of the business case forworkplace flexibility, see PAR’s The Business Case for a Balanced Hours Program for Attorneys,5 and the
Association of Corporate Counsel’s Value Challenge.6
A major cause of attrition is the requirement for sustained high billable hours, with reduced hours
programs that are unworkable, stigmatized, or both.7 PAR’s research shows that many male as well
as female attorneys want to work fewer hours,8 and many associates say they would prefer to sacrificemoney for time.9 Yet many are reluctant to reduce their hours if doing so is stigmatized and stalls
upward career progression.
Why Flexibility Matters to Women. The lack of a meaningful alternative to long hours has a particularly
damaging effect on female lawyers. Law firms hire and train women lawyers, only to lose them as theyfind it unnecessarily difficult to combine long hours and motherhood. Given that 82% of American
women have children,10 and that 95% of mothers aged 25-44 work fewer than 50 hours a week,11 it
is highly improbably that law firms will have a sufficient pool of women eligible for partnership until
this scheduling tension is effectively addressed.
Long hours also have negative effects on women lawyers without children, who may work the longest
hours of any group of lawyers.12 Lawyers, particularly women without children, tell researchers that
their schedules make it difficult for them to find life partners.13 In addition, long hours requirements
put them at a disadvantage in competing with male associates, many of whom have stay-at-homewives. Said one woman of color: “The male associates all had stay-at-home wives who took care of all
the everyday things. So even if they didn’t have children, their dry cleaning was picked up, their dinner
was cooked, their house was cleaned. And women have to do all that stuff on top of their work.”14This background helps to explain why the proportion of women law firm partners has stalled: in thelast decade it has risen from 14% to only 18%15 despite the fact that more than 40% of new associates
entering firms have been female since for at least 1991.16
Why Flexibility Matters to Diverse Attorneys. While extensive research exists on the link between
flexibility and retaining women, less research exists on the link between flexibility and racial and ethnic
diversity. Programs that address attorneys’ need for work-life balance are important for attorneys ofcolor, given that a disproportionate number are women.17 Women attorneys of color clearly havedifficulty meeting billable hours requirements—nearly half reported they did not—although the roleof work/life balance as opposed to other factors remains unclear. 18
Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | Research is emerging that suggests that the conventional wisdom that attorneys of color do notwork part-time is exaggerated. When PAR and the Minority Corporate Counsel Association sent anoutreach requesting to speak with attorneys of color about work/life balance, one in four respondents
interviewed said that they worked part-time.19
In addition, some respondents who worked full-time hours stated that, although they would like toreduce their hours, the stigma associated with part-time at their firms made that unrealistic, whencombined with challenges faced by all attorneys of color. 20 Moreover, 70% of women of color attorneys
are the sole or primary breadwinners in their households.21 This means that finding a job that offers
an extremely flexible full-time schedule, or one in which full time is defined as shorter hours, may well
be more attractive options than staying at a firm and working part time—particularly where part timeis stigmatized.
Minority female lawyers have the highest attrition rate of any group of lawyers, and lack of work/lifebalance plays a role. To quote the ABA Commission on Women’s path-breaking report on women ofcolor in the legal profession, Visible Invisibility, “Many women of color left firms to work in settings(especially corporations) that were lucrative, where they thought others’ decisions about their careers
would be less idiosyncratic, based more on merit, and where they had more flexibility to balance
personal life, family, and work.”22
Attorneys of color who need to care for ill spouses or elderly parents also are negatively affected bylong workweeks. A 2001 survey by AARP found that Asians were most likely to be caring for an elder
relative (42 percent), whites were least likely (19 percent), and other groups fell somewhere in between(Latinos at 34 percent and African Americans at 28 percent).23
The bottom line is that failing to address the issue of sustained high billable hour requirements makes
it more difficult for law firms to retain women of color. Unfortunately, no studies have explored theimpacts of long hours on men of color.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | Issues and Solutions: Connection
Best Practices and Pilot Programs
1. Nonstigmatized Flexible Work
Background: When PAR was founded a decade ago, “part-time” at law firms typically meant thatlawyers faced the “haircut” (e.g., 60% of a full-time salary for 80% of full-time hours), were taken
off partnership track, and encountered uncontrolled “schedule creep” (where a part-time schedule
creeps back up towards full time). Due to the work of PAR and others, today many firms have
moved away from old-fashioned “part time” towards best-practice balanced hours programs thatdiffer in significant ways.24
Participants in the Connection have adopted many of PAR’s best practices recommendations fromits Model Balanced Hours Policy (available at www.attorneyretention.org). PAR’s recommendations
recognize that, for reduced hours programs to be effective, they have to allow for professional
advancement and provide checks on schedule creep. As indicated in the best practice below, careful
implementation and monitoring to prevent stigma are key.
Best Practice: The law firm members of the Connection pledge to adopt the core components of abalanced-hours policy. These are:
(1) A written policy that provides for proportional pay (e.g., 80% pay for 80% hours),
proportional bonuses, and full or proportional benefits.
(2) A promotion track that is at least proportional (e.g. someone who works an 80%
schedule for four or five years would take a year longer to become eligible forpartnership) and a proven track record of promoting part-time attorneys to partner.
(3) Consistent communication within the firm that flexibility is available to anyone who
can make the case for a flexible arrangement that will enable delivery of timely andeffective client service—and that such lawyers can be successful at the firm.
(4) A detailed business case developed and disseminated through the firm to documentthat flexibility without stigma is a business-based program that helps the firm attract
and retain talent and better serve clients.
(5) A mechanism to ensure that balanced-hours lawyers have a proportional share ofchallenging work and access to business development opportunities.
(6) A coordinator who provides an initial point of contact for attorneys who are
considering a flexible schedule, coaches lawyers working balanced hours, monitorsand controls for schedule creep, and acts as an ombudsman who seeks a long-term
resolution in cases of persistent schedule creep.
(7) Mechanisms to track, and hold accountable, if appropriate, practice group leadersand other partners for a persistent pattern of regretted losses among diverse attorneys,
including those on balanced hours.
(8) Mechanisms to destigmatize parental leave for fathers.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | 

2. Referring Work to Balanced Hours Attorneys
Background. Client support of flexible work arrangements, particularly reduced hours work, is criticalto the success of balanced hours programs. Participants discussed a variety of ways in which clients can
support law firms’ efforts. One is to communicate support for flexible schedules directly to leaders in
the firm: clients can have a tremendous impact by saying to a law firm relationship partner and Chair/
Managing Partner “this (diverse or flex) attorney did great work—the kind that keeps me coming backto this firm.”
Participants concluded that that the single most effective thing clients can do to support flexibility is
to refer work to balanced-hours attorneys.
Best Practice: Pilot program to refer work to attorneys who are working reduced hours. As a further
demonstration of their commitment to diversity and flexibility, some members of the Connection haveagreed to participate in a one-year pilot. Each participating law firm Connection chair will recommend
several balanced-hour attorneys; each participating Connection general counsel will refer suitable
work to two attorneys on flexible schedules to the extent possible, consistent with business needs andpreferred provider programs. Connection members participating in the pilot, after one year, will work
together to publicize success stories, both within individual firms and to the world at large—or will
work to improve the pilot.

3. Clients Need to Signal Support for Flexible Work
Background: The importance of diversity to companies and to the legal profession is well-known;
Connection general counsel stressed the importance of flexible work as a means to ensure continuity ofservice and to aid in increasing law firm diversity. Connection members stressed law departments canhave a big influence on their outside counsel by signaling and communicating that flexibility without
penalty is important to them.
Best Practices: In-house members of the Connection will clearly signal their support for work-lifebalance for outside counsel.
(1) Signaling support in written communications. Connection general counsel will add to their RFPs,
engagement letters, and/or outside counsel guidelines, language that signals that they seek to workwith qualified reduced-hours attorneys and will seek, wherever possible, to support attorneys’ need forwork-life balance.
(2) Signaling support in day-to-day interactions. In face-to-face communications, Connection members
will consistently communicate that they expect law firms to offer flexibility without penalty as partof their commitment to diversity. In day-to-day interactions, Connection members will consistently
communicate: a) their willingness to respect outside counsel’s need for work-life balance wheneverpossible, b) that “being available” means that a lawyer is available when the client needs him or her—
not that the lawyer guarantees 24-7 availability, and c) that outside counsel should feel free to suggest
a teleconference instead of in-person meetings, both to control costs and to aid work-life balance.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | 

4. Ensuring that Cost Controls do not Compromise Flexibility
Background: Clients often attempt to control costs by suggesting that law firms use only a specificnumber of attorneys on a given matter, e.g., one partner and one associate. This widespread practice
can limit law firms’ ability to offer high-quality assignments to reduced-hours attorneys.
Best Practice: Connection law departments will avoid approaches to controlling costs that undercut
law firms’ ability to offer flexibility without penalty. Connection law departments will be thoughtful
about using head count as a cost control lever. Alternative ways to control costs include setting abudget, using blended average hourly rates, asking a law firm how it intends to staff a project, or setting
personnel limits by FTEs (full-time equivalents) rather than the number of attorneys (head count).

5. Effective Implementation In-House
Background: In most law departments, many lawyers interact with outside counsel on a daily basis andhave the ability to affect outside counsel’s schedules. For this reason, all the lawyers in law departments
need to be aware of the general counsel’s commitment to diversity and flexibility to ensure effective andconsistent support for outside counsel seeking work/life balance consistent with client needs.
Best Practice: Connection law departments will take steps to implement their commitment to diversity
and flexibility, including:(1) Leadership from the top. Connection general counsel will clearly state their expectationthat all lawyers in their departments will support outside counsel’s need for work-lifebalance, consistent with business needs. Such statements are particularly effective atmeetings where both in-house and outside counsel are present, e.g., a department’s
annual meeting for outside counsel.
(2) Training and communication in house. In view of their departments’ need to control
costs and their commitment to diversity and flexibility:• Connection general counsel will include, in law department trainings andcommunication, information explaining why support of flexible schedules andwork-life balance for outside counsel is important to control costs, to ensure
continuity of outside counsel, and to support diversity. The information should
include suggestions for how outside counsel’s schedules can be supported.
• Connection general counsel will communicate to their departments that,absent a concrete deadline or specific business need, it is inappropriate for inhouse lawyers to wait to give outside counsel an assignment at the last minute,e.g., at 5 p.m. on Friday.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | 

6. Better Business Communications
Background: Connection participants spent considerable time discussing the need for better business
communications.
Best Practices: Both inside and outside counsel need to implement a series of steps to improve business
communication.
(1) Connection general counsel will institute a policy that assignments to outside counsel
should be accompanied by a specific deadline to prevent law firms from treating all
assignments as needing immediate turnaround.
(2) If an in-house lawyer does not specify a deadline, outside counsel will ask when thedeadline is, instead of assuming it is needed as soon as possible. Outside counsel’srequest for clarification will be viewed as a component of excellent service.
(3) Many of the deadlines communicated by in-house lawyers stem from pressures fromtheir in-house clients and supervisors. Connection general counsel will encourage
in-house lawyers’ clients and supervisors, to set real deadlines.
(4) Connection general counsel want to support flexible schedules—but cannot do so ifthey do not know about them. They therefore encourage outside counsel to be open
about their schedules—they consider this part of effective business communication.
That said, they respect the privacy right of every attorney to decide if and when to
discuss this matter with clients.
(5) Connection general counsel will set up channels of communication to enable
outside counsel to provide feedback about whether lawyers in their departments
are supporting flexibility and work-life balance, consistent with business needs.
Promising approaches include:•

An annual meeting between the general counsel or designee andthe managing or relationship partner, at which the general counsel
asks whether the department has met its goals of supporting
diversity and flexibility.

•

For legal departments that conduct periodic surveys of law firms,
questions about whether their departments have met the goal of
supporting diversity and flexibility will be included.

(6) Connection general counsel who track whether outside counsel is assigning mattersto diverse attorneys will also track whether matters are being assigned to flex- andpart-time attorneys.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | 

7. Walking the Talk
Background: Concern was expressed at the meetings about a perceived disconnect between words andaction, such that law firms hear clients say that they are committed to diversity but do not necessarily
see clients awarding or withdrawing work as a result of specific law firms’ progress or lack of progress
toward diversity goals. A key sticking point is that general counsel who cease to work with a law firm
because of its failure to make progress on diversity typically remain discreet about their decision out ofprofessional courtesy for the firm involved. Another source of confusion arises when law firms that feelthey have made significant progress on diversity are not awarded work they believe they are eminently
qualified to do. In response to this concern, general counsel pointed out that often the firm in question
is being measured against other firms that also have made progress on diversity and also are wellqualified. Thus when a law firm is not awarded work, it should not conclude that its diversity efforts
have gone un-noticed: it may well not have been in the pool of finalists were it not for its diversity
efforts. All in all, general counsel pointed out that progress on diversity does not guarantee that any
particular firm will be awarded any particular piece of work, but that lack of progress on diversity
does have consequences, even if the general counsel chooses, out of respect and the desire to preservebusiness relationships, to remain discreet.
Best Practice: Connection general counsel commit to having a direct conversation with the Chair,
Managing Partner or relationship partner of a law firm when they decide to move work away from thefirm due to lack of progress in retaining talented, diverse attorneys through flexible work arrangements
and meaningful career paths—and to tell a firm when its progress toward diversity and flexibility goals
tips the balance in its favor.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | Conclusion
PAR would like to thank members for their thoughtful, candid, and committed participation in theConnection. Now, it is time to widen the circle. The initial members of the Connection were chosen
based on their ability to aid in the development of best practices. Connection members now seek towiden the circle to include additional general counsel and law firm leaders interested in joining with
the Connection founders to commit to best practices to achieve diversity and flexibility. If you areinterested in learning more about the Connection, please contact PAR at www.attorneyretention.org.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | 10

Connection Members
As of the date of this report, the following members of PAR’s Diversity and Flexibility Connection
endorse and will take steps to implement the foregoing best practices.
Catherine A. Lamboley,
Senior Vice President, General Counsel &Corporate Secretary (retired),
Shell Oil Company
Jeffrey J. Gearhart,
Executive Vice President and General Counsel,
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Michele Coleman Mayes,
Senior Vice President & General Counsel, Allstate
Insurance Company

Thomas Milch,
Chair, Arnold & Porter LLP
Kent Gardiner,
Chairman, Crowell & Moring, LLP
Michael Nannes,
Chairman/Firmwide Managing Partner,
Dickstein Shapiro LLP

Teri Plummer McClure,
Senior Vice President of Legal Compliance andPublic Affairs, General Counsel & Secretary,
United Parcel Service
Roderick A. Palmore,
Executive Vice President,
General Counsel & Secretary,
General Mills Inc.
James Potter,
Senior Vice President,
General Counsel & Secretary,
Del Monte Foods Company
Thomas L. Sager,
Senior Vice President & General Counsel,
DuPont Company
Douglas G. Scrivner,
General Counsel,
Secretary & Compliance Officer,
Accenture
Laura Stein,
Senior Vice President & General Counsel,
The Clorox Company
Danette Wineberg,
Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary,
The Timberland Company

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Lee Miller,
Joint Chief Executive Officer,
DLA Piper
Steven Lowenthal,
Chairman, Farella Braun + Martel LLP

Gordon Davidson,
Chairman, Fenwick & West LLP
Steven B. Pfeiffer,
Chair, Fulbright & Jaworski LLP
Patrick Dunican,
Chairman & Managing Director,
Gibbons P.C.
Keith Wetmore,
Chair, Morrison & Foerster LLP
Robert Riley,
Chairman, Schiff Hardin LLP
Thomas Cole,
Chair of the Executive Committee,
Sidley Austin LLP
Elliott Portnoy,
Chairman, Sonnenschein Nath& Rosenthal LLPDiversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | 11

ENDNOTES
1.“Balanced hours” programs, unlike traditional part-time programs, allow attorneys to work individually-tailored, reduced
schedules that are designed to meet the firm’s business needs while maintaining the attorney’s ability to work and to develop
professionally without stigma. Balanced hours programs involve active management of workloads in proportion to reduced
hours, emphasize client service, and promote the values of the firm.
2. Participants were asked not to discuss fees or alternative billing arrangements, and those topics came up only
tangentially.
3. Keith Cunningham, Father Time, 53 Stan. L. Rev. 967, 970.
4. American Association of Corporate Counsel, The ACC Value Challenge: Reconnecting Legal Costs to
Their Value, available at http://www.acc.com/valuechallenge/resources/upload/VC-Docket-Brochure.pdf.
5. Project for Attorney Retention, The Business Case for a Balanced Hours Program for Attorneys (2007), available at http://
www.pardc.org/LawFirm/PAR_BusinessCase_8-23-07.pdf.
6. American Association of Corporate Counsel, supra note 4.
7. Williams, Joan C. and Cynthia Thomas Calvert, Balanced Hours: Effective Part-Time Policies for Washington Firms (2000),
available at http://www.pardc.org/Publications/BalancedHours.shtml.
8. Id.
9. See, e.g., Stephanie Francis Ward, The Ultimate Time-Money Trade-Off, ABA Journal (Feb. 2007) (84% of associates
responding to online survey said they would be willing to earn less money in exchange for fewer billable hours), available
at http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/the_ultimate_time_money_trade_off1/; see also “Less Money, Fewer Hours” Say
Many Summer Associates, Law Students Building a Better Legal Profession, Dec. 4, 2007 (citing American Lawyer Summer
Associate survey), available at http://refirmation.wordpress.com/2007/12/04/less-money-fewer-hours-say-many-summerassociates/.
10. Barbara Downs, U.S. Census Bureau, Fertility of American Women: June 2002, P20-548, at 3 (October 2003), available
at http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/p20-548.pdf (visited July 1, 2006) (stating that, in 2002, 17.9% of women aged
40 to 44 had never had children).
11. U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey: 2006 March Supplement, Data generated by Mary C. Still for theCenter for WorkLife Law, using DataFerrett, URL:http://dataferrett.census.gov/TheDataWeb/index.html (Files generated
25 April 2006).
12. See, e.g., Mona Harrington and Helen Hsi, Women Lawyers and Obstacles to Leadership: A Report of MIT Workplace
Center Surveys on Comparative Career Decisions and Attrition Rates of Women and Men in Massachusetts Law Firms (MITWorkplace Center, Spring 2007) at 18.
13. Janet E. Gans Epner, Visible Invisibility: Women of Color in Law Firms (ABA Commission on Women in the Profession,2006), at 34 (“I am single and I have to do everything for myself. I work primarily with white men who are married. They
view my marital status as a benefit; it allows me to work without feeling bad about neglecting anyone. What they don’t
understand is that I don’t have the opportunity to form close relationships, and that’s hard.”)14. Id. at 33.

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention

Diversity and Flexibility Connection: Best Practices | 12

15. National Association of Law Placement, Minority Women Still Underrepresented in Law Firm Partnership
Ranks — Change in Diversity of Law Firm Leadership Very Slow Overall (Nov. 1, 2007), available at http://
www.nalp.org/minoritywomenstillunderrepresented (reporting that in 2007, 18.34% of partners at major law firms were
women); National Association of Law Placement, Presence of Women and Attorneys of Color Continues
to Rise at Large Law Firms (Feb. 3, 1999), available at http://www.nalp.org/1999presenceofwomenattorneysofcolor2(reporting that in 1998, 14.55% of partners at major law firms were women).
16. National Association of Law Placement, Jobs for New Law Graduates – Trends from 1991-2001 (NALP
Bulletin, August 2002), available at http://www.nalp.org/2002augjobsfornewlawgrads (reporting that between 1991
and 2001, 42% or more of new hires were female at law firms of more than 100 attorneys); National Association of
Law Placement, Jobs for New Law Graduates – Trends from 1991-2001 (NALP Bulletin, July 2005), available at
http://www.nalp.org/2005juljobsfornewlawgraduates (reporting that between 1994 and 2004, 42% or more of new hires
were female at law firms of more than 100 attorneys; in 2004, 50.2% of new hires at such firms were female).
17. National Association of Law Placement, Minority Women Still Underrepresented in Law Firm Partnership
RANKS, supra note 15 (reporting that in 2007, minorities account for 18.07% of associates, and minority women for10.07% of associates).
18. Epner, Visible Invisibility, supra note 13, at 30.
19. Calvert, Cynthia Thomas, Linda Bray Chanow, and Linda Marks, Reduced Hours, Full Success: Part-Time Partners in
U.S. Law Firms (Project for Attorney Retention, Sept. 2009), available at www.pardc.org/Publications/Part-TimePartner.
pdf, at 25.
20. Id. at 25-27.
21. Epner, Visible Invisibility, supra note 13, at xii.
22. Id.
23. See Sheel Pandya, Long-Term Care Trends; Racial and Ethnic Differences Among Older Adults in Long-Term Care Service
Use (AARP Public Policy Institute, June 2005), available at http://www.aarp.org/research/longtermcare/trends/fs119_ltc.
html.
24. See Williams & Calvert, Balanced Hours, supra note 7. See also Williams, Joan C. and Cynthia Thomas Calvert,
Solving the Part-Time Puzzle: The Law Firm’s Guide to Balanced Hours (NALP 2004).

Copyright 2009 The Project for Attorney Retention