In summary Meghan was denied partnership for the following reasons. Lack of legal analysis ability in early years, low client satisfaction, for being a feminist, being extremely demanding and for being non-assertive, were reasons given for her partnership denial. The law firm is gender insensitive as evidenced by various situations where women have been given less than they deserve and men have been given far more leeway in mistakes made. The evaluation relies heavily on networking and visibility which may impact some employees.
Without visibility which is gained through handling high profile cases, Meghan would be at a disadvantage that is not of her own making. She was evaluated by partners without direct contact to her. How are people who have not worked directly with a person allowed to evaluate them without any evidence? Meghan also lacked her chance for taking up women issues. This is a very outrageous reason for denying someone a chance. Meghan is a woman and it would only be fair if she concerned herself with issues that pertain to her gender. The low client satisfaction claim also has no basis seeing that Meghan had high ratings with clients. Meghan was accused of being extremely demanding and non-assertive and no evidence was presented of the same. Meghan’s workplace does not clearly like her work and I believe that they should just let her go and grow elsewhere. Meghan has taken on unfair judgment, gender bias and put in too much work for a company that does not deserve her. Meghan’s plan to sue the law firm is well informed and perfectly timed because unlike the firm which lacks evidence for all the things they are accusing her of, Meghan has evidence. Her case is well thought out and she will beat the firm’s defense effectively.