|
|
In brief, women lawyers today have it better, but it's far from just, a bias study shows.
TAMPA - When Josephine Stafford joined a leading Tampa law firm in 1952, she was shunted onto a career track not likely to win her promotion to full partner.
``I was put to work on property law,'' Stafford recalls. ``The four men hired with me were paired with trial attorneys.''
In more recent years the legal profession has struggled to eliminate gender bias. But according to a new American Bar Association study, there's still a long way to go.
The ABA study shows women still lag men, particularly in salary, promotions and judicial appointments. It also shows that tougher economic times have hurt women lawyers disproportionately to men.
``Neither the sheer number of female law student graduates, nor the passage of time, nor even the elevation of individual women to positions of prominence has dramatically enhanced opportunities for women partners, law professors or judges,'' said Chicago lawyer Laurel Bellows, who chaired the study.
``A heightened awareness of gender discrimination did not eliminate it,'' Bellows added. ``In fact, in some quarters it increased resentment toward women.''
Closer to home, the Hillsborough County Bar Association's Gender Racial Ethnic Bias Committee is continuing work on a video to be used to sensitize lawyers to the subtleties of bias.
``The [1993] Florida Bar study really shook some people up,'' said Tampa lawyer Mary Scriven, who said she hopes the ABA study does the same. ``It takes a long time to turn around people's value systems.''
The good news in the ABA study is that more law firms are acting to stop sexual harassment in the workplace, women are making advances as corporate counsel and flexible schedules and family leave are available to more attorneys.
Stafford, 74 and working as an assistant Tampa city attorney, said the changes have been dramatic since she entered the profession.
``Today, women have it better. They can become judges, they can become partners, they can do trial work. So I don't know what they are griping about,'' she said.
The ABA study, which mirrors the findings of a similar 1993 Florida Bar study, shows women in the profession do have plenty to gripe about.
Among the findings: -- Women make up 23 percent of all lawyers yet hold only 13 percent of the partnerships in law firms.
-- New female law school graduates start off at the same salary level as the male graduates but quickly begin falling behind. A Colorado study found that after three years, men made an average of $7,000 more a year. After 20 years, the gap grew to between $20,000 to and $40,000.
-- Women represent 44 percent of all law students but received only 31 percent of the federal judicial appointments under President Clinton. President Bush appointed women just 19 percent of the time, and President Reagan's nominations ran at 8 percent.
-- News and Bar journal articles frequently cite an ``exodus'' of women from the legal profession, fueling the perception that women are not dedicated to their jobs. In fact, there is little difference in the number of male and female attorneys leaving the profession.
-- More than half the women responding to a 1993 National Law Journal study said they had experienced sexual harassment on the job, but few reported it.
The study did present some good news. About 73 percent of firms that responded to a questionnaire had written policies against sexual harassment, up from 38 percent four years earlier.
Also, women unhappy with their chances of making partner in a private firm are finding success as corporate counsel, the ABA study found. These women in turn farm out work to other women in private practice.
And after the Family and Medical Leave Act became law in 1993, the number of firms with parental leave policies jumped from 32 to 54 percent. Unfortunately, the study said, both male and female lawyers have shown hesitation to take parental leave or work flexible schedules for fear of being perceived as uncommitted to their jobs.
The report found that women have suffered disproportionately from a decline in profits in the legal profession. A 1995 study of eight large New York law firms showed that the promotion rate for men had dropped from 21 percent among those who graduated from law school prior to 1981 to 17 percent for the more recent graduates. Among women, the same rates dropped from 15 percent to just 5 percent.
Ellen Freidin, a Miami lawyer who co-chaired the 1993 Florida Bar study of gender bias, said the results of the new ABA study are not surprising.
``There has been a lot of progress, but I think we've fallen backward in the last few years,'' said Freidin, who blames economic factors for undercutting women's progress. ``The practice of law is fast becoming a very difficult business.''
Tampa lawyer Lynn Cole agreed that economics is a key factor. But Cole also blamed recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that undercut affirmative action laws.
``I've sensed almost a palpable sigh of relief among some people,'' Cole said. ``The Supreme Court tends to lead the country in attitudes.''
The ABA study, which came eight years after the national Bar's last look at the issue, could give new momentum to the fight for equal standing in the legal profession.
Currently, the federal judiciary of the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit is studying gender bias in federal courtrooms throughout Florida and Georgia.
|
|
TALLAHASSEE - Democratic lawmakers angrily criticized a group of researchers Tuesday over a study that concluded state agencies did not discriminate against women and minorities in awarding contracts.
Some lawmakers, including the legislative black caucus, fear the study will be used by opponents of the state's minority-business assistance program to alter or kill the program.
The study, conducted by professors of Florida State University's College of Business, found the state spent $196 million last year with about 500 companies owned by women and minorities.
In almost all areas, the state had achieved its goals for hiring minority-owned companies, the researchers concluded.
Democratic members of the House Commerce Committee, who have long championed the minority-assistance program, questioned the researchers' motives, the cost of the $400,000 study and the method used to determine whether discrimination existed.
Rep. Beryl Roberts-Burke, D-Miami, suggested the FSU administration interfered with the research because the university failed to meet its goal for hiring minorities.
And Committee Chairman Fred Lippman, D-Hollywood, indicated the researchers relied on information from sources who had brought legal action against other minority-assistance programs.
Melvin Stith, dean of the Florida State University College of Business, said the study simply analyzed information supplied by the state according to U.S. Supreme Court guidelines on how to measure discrimination.
``We did what we thought was correct and we're going to stick to that,'' Stith said. ``The messenger's always attacked.''
Rep. Jerry Melvin, R-Fort Walton Beach, defended the researchers, saying they were being criticized for following the Legislature's directions. ``We're trying to put these people on the spot for something we did,'' Melvin said.
The researchers blamed bureaucratic red tape and stringent guidelines for making the state program virtually meaningless for most minority-owned companies.
Only 2,300 of roughly 300,000 Florida businesses owned by women or minorities qualified for the state program.
|
|
Yes, a new study concludes.
In fact, the review by Florida State University says state purchasing managers have been so successful in meeting minority contracting goals that lawmakers should scrap them altogether.
In their place, researchers recommend the state adopt a program to assist small and disadvantaged businesses, without setting goals based on race or gender.
Those conclusions have set off shock waves at the Capitol.
A black lawmaker who fears a regression to the discriminatory practices of the past is denouncing the findings as flawed. A statewide contractors association that has challenged minority set-asides is cheering them as overdue.
Meanwhile, state bureaucrats are scrambling to determine if the study's numbers can be trusted. And a House panel is planning hearings in January.
The study by FSU's College of Business arrives in a political climate in which affirmative action programs are coming under scrutiny nationwide.
It has potentially far-reaching policy implications, since lawmakers are supposed to use the study to make changes to the state's minority goals program next spring.
TRYING TO FIX PAST ILLS
Ten years ago, lawmakers passed an act to help minorities win state contracts, finding ``a systematic pattern of past and continuing racial discrimination.''
A 1990 review concluded ``clear evidence of disparities'' in the awarding of contracts still existed.
As a result, lawmakers set lofty goals for the percentage of contracts minorities were to receive, ranging from 21 percent for construction to 50.5 percent for contractual services.
But the landscape was dramatically altered by a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said states could only adopt race-based remedies if they found qualified, willing, and able minority contractors were excluded from public work.
It's a key point. FSU researchers say the state's goals were set relative to an estimate of 192,000 minority firms in Florida. But in fact, by 1994 when their study ended, only a tiny fraction - 2,231 - were certified for the minority goals program.
Researchers say they're the firms that truly meet the definition of being qualified, willing and able to do the work.
CONCLUSIONS DEBATED
The result: Eager to comply with lawmakers' goals, agencies and universities overused the certified firms to the extent that researchers found no discrimination in awarding contracts to blacks, Asians, Hispanics, American Indians or women.
That conclusion outrages Rep. Alzo Reddick, a black Democrat from Orlando and key supporter of the minority contracting goals. He can't fathom how anyone could conclude minority and white-owned businesses are treated the same.
``I am disgusted at what I think is extremely shoddy scholarship,'' Reddick said.
But praise came from Rick Watson of Associated Builders and Contractors of Florida, which represents 60,000 construction workers. The mostly-white group has challenged minority set-asides, saying contracts should go to the most qualified low bidder.
``We thought there was some problems with the program, largely caused by the unrealistically high goals,'' he said. ``If the purpose is to nurture and develop small businesses, we certainly haven't done that.''
Indeed, the FSU study says the state should instead focus on helping both minorities and whites create and grow struggling small businesses. Researchers stand by their numbers, and warn the state could face a legal challenge to its minority goals program if the report is ignored.
|
|
TALLAHASSEE - There are now hard numbers to back up what women have always known: On average, they pay more to get their clothes cleaned and their hair cut than men.
A survey of cleaners and haircutters in Hillsborough and Pinellas counties shows that women on average pay almost $5 more to get their hair cut and $1.50 more to have their men's-style shirts laundered.
Having those shirts dry-cleaned, which is more expensive for everybody, is as much as $2.25 more costly for women.
The survey, conducted by the Florida Public Interest Research Group (FPIRG) comes just a week before the first hearings in the state Legislature on a bill that would allow consumers to seek settlements on gender-based price differences.
The measure (HB 797) would allow consumers to file complaints with the state's consumer services division against businesses that set different prices for men and women for the same goods or services. It's scheduled to be heard in the House Commerce Committee Wednesday.
``The whole question of raising the consciousness of individuals is involved in a bill such as this,'' said House Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Lippman, D-Hollywood, and one of the bill's sponsors. ``It's just not singularly related to whether a shirt costs more to launder.''
Molly Marostica, FPIRG's Tampa Bay campaign director, said the organization surveyed 11 haircutters and 18 dry cleaners by telephone seeking price quotes. She said the survey team members told the cleaners and cutters that they wanted the same service for men and women, whether it be laundering a basic cotton shirt or getting a simple haircut.
The group found cleaners charged men between 85 cents and $1.69 to have their shirts laundered, while women paid between $1.20 and $3.55. Three businesses charged the same for both types of shirts.
Marostica said the most common reason given for the price differences is that the woman's shirt wouldn't fit on the forms cleaners use to launder and press the shirts, and because women's shirts button from the left and would be damaged if they weren't finished by hand.
Dry cleaning costs, which average $1.40 to $3.65 for a man's shirt, cost women between $2 and $5.30 per garment. Four of the businesses surveyed had no price differences.
With haircutters, FPIRG found only three of 11 salons had the same price for men and women. One Clearwater business, Edie's, charged $14 more for the women's cut at $25 than the men's $11 cut.
|
|
TALLAHASSEE - An effort to prohibit businesses from charging women more than men for haircuts, dry cleaning, alterations and other comparable services was rejected Wednesday by the House Commerce Committee.
``I think people understand the issue, but there is an enormous amount of fear that the business community has drummed up on this bill that it's going to create all kinds of problems for business owners,'' said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Davie, who co-sponsored the bill with Rep. Alex Villalobos, R-Miami.
``In this climate, any whisper of that kind of thing makes members a little bit nervous.''
The legislation was defeated by a 14-9 vote. Schultz said the bill died because many lawmakers who supported it on the committee were absent.
Schultz said she's confident the legislation can be revived in the next committee meeting, but it's extremely rare for a defeated bill to gain new life.
Rep. Al Lawson, D-Tallahassee, spoke against the bill, saying he feared hairstylists and barbers would be required to charge equal rates for haircuts for men and women.
That would be unfair since cutting women's hair usually takes more time and effort, Lawson said.
``I feel this is an intrusion on the free enterprise system in Florida,'' Lawson said.
But Villalobos said Lawson and many other lawmakers misunderstood the effects of the legislation. He said it only would force business owners to justify prices based on gender.
``We're not trying to set any prices,'' he said.
The bill was opposed by retailers, who worried they might be asked to prove that men's and women's products such as clothing, shoes and toiletries are different enough to warrant charging different prices, even if they didn't produce the item themselves.
The lawmakers say that in Florida, women pay an average of $6.48 more to get their hair cut, $2 more to get their shirts laundered and pressed, and nearly $20 more to get their suits tailored.
Schultz said it's unfair to expect consumers to correct the problem by taking their business elsewhere, saying that was the same weak solution proposed when blacks were denied services and public accommodations.