"Are Senior Lawyers Ruining The Profession?" No, But This Isn't Helping, Either.
Thirteen years ago today, I graduated from law school. I became a lawyer 13 years ago tomorrow. (Thank you, diploma privilege.) Combined with the fact that I was an older student, nine years out of undergrad when I started law school, now I am firmly middle aged and mid-career.
I think that means I’m neither the target audience nor, well, the target, when people write derisively (or admiringly) about millennials or Boomers. (Generation X is perpetually forgotten anyway.)
Still, a few days ago, a link to this piece in the State Bar of Wisconsin’s Inside Track (as reprinted from a section blog) caught my eye—“Senior Lawyers: Are We Really Ruining The Profession?” The piece purported to be responding to “Dear Senior Lawyers—You’re Ruining the Profession,” an entry on a law blog out of Queensland, Australia.
Like any good Gen Xer, I saw the Inside Track link on social media, and clicked, hoping to read lively debate, perhaps a wise rebuke at ageism in the profession, or perhaps some introspection about how people toward the end of their careers can help uplift the next generation. After all, I know I wouldn’t be where I am if not for some great mentoring and support from my senior colleagues, some of whom are winding down and some of whom continue to practice at a high level.
What I saw was none of that. While I respect the dialogue and am sure the author is writing from a place of good faith, instead we got bland apologia for so-called “old fashioned” values:
As senior lawyers, we have apparently lost sight of the needs of new lawyers and younger associates by our antiquated attitudes about the profession and our need to place commitment to the profession above self-interest.
Perhaps the example we may set by dressing as a professional when at work, by always showing deference to the court, by being polite to the court personnel, by being respectful when we contact opposing counsel, and by being patient with less-than-cooperative clients is not an admired quality or even a necessity in today’s legal field.
This was it? This was what the author suggested senior lawyers had to contribute to the profession? Putting on a tie and saying “please” and “thank you?” and not cussing out the bailiff?
And, the Inside Track piece did not respond to what, in my mind, were the legitimate concerns articulated by the Australian blogger. The Tips for Lawyers entry didn’t mention punctuality, or dress, or being polite to court staff (as being outdated, or otherwise). Rather, it posed some questions that may seem familiar to many junior lawyers—why did my boss write off all my time on a project but not discuss it with me? Why does the partnership track look impossible for me when it was easy for you? Why do senior lawyers say things like “you needed real-world experience” and “new grads just don’t seem equipped to be lawyers?” without backing that up or doing anything to help me get that experience and equipment?
I’m not a junior lawyer nor a young person anymore, but I doubt many young associates really care all that much about how senior lawyers dress, or think it bad or even unusual that they address court reporters and clerks with courtesy. Defense of those behaviors seemed to be a non-sequitur, as nobody was complaining about them in the first place.
The repeated use of “professionalism” and “civility” seemingly to mean this superficially polite and mannerly behavior sure got my hackles up. I wrote about this before.
A lot of bad things have come out of the mouths and pens of people wearing suits and using genteel language. I’ve been fired, while pregnant, and told “you’re brilliant, but maybe you should go back to schoolteaching, there is going to be a shortage soon” by a man in a suit. The guy who winked at me in court from opposing counsel’s table, the guy who got caught staring at my backside in courthouse hallway, the guy who told me to take notes and fetch coffee while the “real lawyers” worked (and he said “please”), and many of the people who have called me “young lady” and are not my parents, were wearing suits.
And I am a middle aged married white woman, a partner in my firm, with all of the privilege that entails. I’ve had it relatively easy. Too often, “professionalism” is code for things like “you should smile more” or “I’m not a racist, but” or “I don’t care if you’re LGBTQ+ but why do you have to flaunt it?” (or far worse that I am not going to print here) directed at people engaging in their normal everyday lives. It has nothing to do with quality of work or value to the organization.
If young lawyers are feeling like seniors are ruining the profession, it’s almost certainly not because seniors value “support of and service to the profession” or “commitment to the public good” or “upholding the honor of the profession.” Most of us do, though it may not look the same way for everyone.
If junior lawyers feel unsupported by seniors, it’s because “respect your elders” is not mentoring. It’s because “you need to pay your dues the way we paid our dues” doesn’t work when the way “we paid our dues” has resulted in high rates of substance abuse, nonexistent work-life balance, and the feeling that you’ve sold your soul at the altar of the billable hour. It’s because “reverence to civility and the past practices of collegiality” leave a lot of people behind, or feeling like they can’t speak out firmly and forcefully against maltreatment or injustice or even call out that guy staring at their backside in the courthouse hallway, for fear of damage to their career and reputation. It’s because “professionalism” can serve to gatekeep damn good lawyers out of the profession entirely, simply because they may not look or talk quite like those in charge.
The Inside Track article was a missed opportunity to address those concerns, and instead it seemed to reinforce the stereotypes it purported to be rebuking. I doubt it was the author’s intent, but painting generational differences in terms of outward presentation and check-box principles does seem incredibly out of touch and counter-productive. The piece does a disservice to the many excellent older lawyers out there who are doing their all to make this profession better.
You know what? Most of the senior lawyers I see as role models can clean up for court or clients, but otherwise might be wearing graphic T’s and flip flops. But more importantly, while they know their stuff inside and out, they do not hoard knowledge, or credit. They continue to learn as they teach. They are not threatened by younger people who may look or sound different, or have a different way of doing things (though they do know when to gently guide and when to intercede, when it matters). They want the younger generation to do better and have it better than they did, and not do things simply because that’s the way they’ve always been done.
But also? This isn’t really about age, either. If I am lucky, I have far more years ahead in my law career than the 13 I do behind me. But I know, even as I hold myself out as someone with particular knowledge about law practices and best practices, that I will never know everything. I hope I continue to learn from those who have come up before me, but also from my younger colleagues. And I hope that if I’m ever accused of “ruining the profession”— tomorrow, 13 years from now, 31 years from now; because I become obnoxious to the associates under my supervision, or because I say something out of line on this blog or elsewhere, or any other reason—I react with a little more self-awareness and self-reflection.
