downloading the PDF - Robson Hall Faculty of Law

Students questioned whether they should accept the
corporate legal culture as it is currently constituted.
Do we really need to learn to play golf and talk sports
at the water cooler, or is that accepting a patriarchal
culture that operates to exclude women, and
therefore should be changed rather than lived with?
While previous generations may have had no
choice but to “play the game,” those entering the
profession today may seek new opportunities to
diversify the legal social culture.
Certainly, if a critical mass of new graduates can
effect change in the area of work-life balance, are
they not also capable of rejecting the trappings of a
male-dominated culture?
Students challenged the assumption that sexist
behaviour from clients or colleagues could or
should be addressed simply by using humour. For
us in this new generation, co-workers holding maleonly
poker games or male-only golf days, where
business is inevitably discussed and connections
made, is not funny to us. Sexual harassment is never
funny. On the latter point, our panelists adamantly
agreed and offered their advice for addressing the
serious problem of sexual harassment. However,
students in the room questioned the notions that all
sexual harassment is blatant and that young female
lawyers are always able to talk to their firm when
instances of sexual harassment occur. Certainly,
we no longer have the work culture of previous
decades where a pat on the bum was excusable and
senior personnel could get away with requesting
sexual favours from those junior to them.
However, sexual harassment also manifests itself in
insidious ways that students in the room recognized
must be dealt with in order for substantive equality
to flourish in all sectors of the legal profession.
Additionally, students brought forward the problem
of power imbalances – is it really so simple to go
to the firm or employer with a complaint about
someone several years senior to you when you are
just a summer or articling student with a permanent
position at the firm on the line?
Another notion critiqued by students related to pay
structure. Students pointed to what they see as pay
inequity. While the panelists again asserted that
pay is related to how much you bill: if you are not
working (say, if you are on maternity leave), you are
not billing, and therefore do not get paid. For the
new generation of law students, however, payment
based solely on billing creates a structural inequality
that discriminates against women as child-bearers
and primary care-givers. Women who need time
off for maternity leave and child-rearing obligations
93 ROBSON HALL ALUMNI REPORT