At the MSU Law Review Symposium on "Gender and the Legal Profession's Pipeline to Power," Professor Paula Monopoli (Maryland) is talking about masculine norms in the legal academy. She is focusing today on pay equity, a smaller part of her larger project. On pay equity issue, she makes three points:
Female full professors earn 88% of what male full professors earn. Pay-scale information is not transparent. Even in public institutions, it can be hard to get the information (making it physcially available only in hard copy, behind a circulation desk on another campus; when available, the information is not complete). The norm in legal academia is not to talk about money (we're supposed to be in the field for the love of ideas). Women are less likely to negotiate for themselves. Moving up the "ranks" or getting a salary increase often requires doing a visit, but women may be less likely than men to accept visits.
Benchmarks used to measure performance in legal academy disfavor women. Less credit is given to
good teaching or service to the institution, (both typically associated with women ). There need to be more empirical benchmarks for faculty evaluation.
If scholarship continues to be primary benchmark by which legal academics are measured, we need to change the conditions under which scholarship is produced. Work on gender, family law, inheritance law is devauled by "top" journals. The quantitative expectation for annual scholarly productivity is becoming excessive.
My summary doesn't do justice to Professor Monopoli's larger project, so keep eyes out for her published work.