A former partner at LeClairRyan, Michele Burke Craddock, is suing her old firm for gender-based discrimination under the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 and the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and for alleged retaliation. The complaint — the second filed by Craddock alleging similar actions (the original suit was voluntarily withdrawn last year) — details a secretive system of compensation and credit that hides behind a veneer of transparency.

The ABA Journal reports the firm’s compensation and origination credit was decided by former firm chair Gary LeClair, and Craddock alleges that despite hitting her revenue and hours targets she was paid almost half of what male attorneys were paid as a result of back-office deals and the unequal application of the compensation criteria:

“Although the criteria [for partner compensation] appear to provide a transparent process, the application of the policy is cloaked in secrecy,” the suit says. “As in any organization, however, information leaks out revealing subjective application of firm compensation policy, including unreported back-office deals favoring the firm’s male shareholders, including the subjective origination credits practice.”

However, “secrecy” and “back-office deals” are tricks that keep women as f*cked over today as they were when they used to get coffee for the boys… just with a nicer desk. This is a big part of the reason that fair pay advocates have been pushing for real transparency (and the hidden benefit to the Sony leak is that Hollywood’s unequal pay dirty little secret is no longer a secret), and law firms have historically struggled on this issue.

Some shops champion a lockstep method, but the more and more senior an attorney gets, the more discretion can get added to the formula. Other places value their reputation as a black box, where only senior firm leadership really knows what goes into compensation, and rainmakers — or those able to negotiate themselves a better deal — are rewarded for their kills richly. But regardless of the language of neutrality (targets, goals, benchmarks, etc.) that policies may be cloaked in, these standards aren’t applied in a vacuum and are rarely a neutral proposition. Bringing in $20 million in revenue and only being credited with a fraction of that because Old Man Partner plays golf with the GC, earning the lion’s share of the origination credit, may seem neutral on paper. But understand it may be women who bear the brunt of that policy, not something you’d want to put in your PR materials — especially not when you claim to value a diverse office.

The complaint goes on:

Originating lawyers decide which lawyers work on their matters, a self-selection practice that “perpetuates the male shareholders’ ability to reward other male attorneys,” the suit says. Male originating attorneys also bill at higher rates, while working attorneys bill at lower rates. “Often, the lowest rates are assigned to female attorneys,” the suit says.

Which means that the attorneys with the lowest rates — alleged to be female — have to work more hours in order to make their collections targets… which, in turn, leaves less time for originating their own book of business, billed out at a higher rate. See, you can’t fool me — this is exactly how cycles work, ensuring a constant underclass of attorneys.

All of this is compounded when-old fashioned stereotypes become an integral part of the scheme:

Justification for work referrals “has included stereotyped concerns over a male attorney’s need to support a family,” the suit says. “However, the stereotype did not apply to plaintiff when she was the breadwinner in her family.”

The firm made a statement to American Lawyer, denying the allegations:

In an emailed statement, LeClairRyan partner and chief legal officer Bruce Matson said that Craddock’s suit is groundless. “We are proud of the opportunities that women have at the firm, which has been noted by national organizations,” wrote Matson, noting that legal newswire Law360 listed LeClairRyan among its top 100 firms for women.

Of course, at this point in the litigation process outside observers are not in a position to comment on the veracity of the allegations. Perhaps everything really was on the up and up at LeClairRyan, and this lawsuit may prove just that, but it is still encouraging to see someone trying to pull back the curtain.

Complaint Alleges Gender Discrimination at LeClairRyan [American Lawyer]

Suit claims secretive ‘back-office deals’ at BigLaw firm favor males in pay and origination credit [ABA Journal]