A law firm’s ability to keep its most experienced attorneys relies less on sheer stamina than on adaptability. For decades, however, legal employers have framed physical and biological challenges—such as menstruation or menopause—as personal shortcomings rather than workplace realities. The consequence is a profession losing skilled workers not because they lack ability, but because the environment fails to adapt to their needs.
An individual’s ability to perform at their best does not depend on functioning under all possible conditions without support. A Gallup survey on women’s health revealed that 42% of working women reported their health has limited their careers over the past five years, while 40% of those in menopause or perimenopause experienced negative effects—ranging from reduced productivity to job abandonment. For legal employers, the cost extends beyond ethical concerns to financial losses.
Consider an attorney in their late 40s or early 50s, someone deeply familiar with a firm’s clients, history, and operational blind spots. If menopausal symptoms, fatigue, cognitive difficulties, or physical discomfort, go unaddressed, the firm does not merely lose an employee. It loses decades of institutional knowledge, mentorship, and client relationships. Replacing that expertise takes years, and even then, a new hire may never achieve the same level of experience. The question is not whether firms can afford flexibility, but whether they can afford the alternative.
The adjustments required are often straightforward and low-cost. The ISO report suggests practical adjustments such as ready access to restrooms, temperature adjustments, greater flexibility in scheduling, and remote participation in meetings when feasible. These measures are not concessions to incompetence but rather the removal of barriers preventing some employees from delivering their best work. A courtroom appearance, an evidentiary hearing, and a client emergency may present very different constraints. But those constraints should prompt a thoughtful discussion about what is workable, rather than an automatic refusal to consider alternatives.
Menopause and menstruation still face workplace stigma
The legal profession has made progress in addressing parental leave, but menstruation and menopause remain taboo subjects. A key issue is assumption: when an employee requests flexibility for back pain or pregnancy, it is treated as a temporary medical condition. When the same request arises for menopause or heavy periods, it is often dismissed as a lack of resilience. The ISO report reframes the issue in terms employers already prioritize: retention and productivity.
Read Also: Lawyers Boost Business With Small Weekly Habits
Education is essential. Managers do not need to become medical experts, but they should understand how symptoms vary, why they matter, and how small changes can help. Many firms already train supervisors on harassment, confidentiality, and professional ethics. Adding a module on menstrual and menopausal health would not be a radical departure. It would simply treat these issues like any other workplace accommodation, as a matter of practical support, not personal judgment.
Endurance isn’t excellence, redesigning legal workspaces
The legal industry has long celebrated endurance as a professional virtue. But endurance is not the same as excellence. An attorney who works through severe cramps or a hot flash is not necessarily less competent; they are simply operating under suboptimal conditions. The goal is not to eliminate every human challenge but to stop exacerbating them through poor design.
The ISO report provides guidance for developing workplace policies and practices, including identifying practical adjustments and supportive mechanisms, but does not specifically recommend auditing existing policies. The ISO notes that these adjustments need not be permanent. Temporary solutions, such as reserving a quiet room for symptom management during peak flow days, can be sufficient. Firms adopting these measures often find that the perceived cost of accommodation is outweighed by retaining employees whose institutional knowledge would otherwise leave.
Low-cost policies prove flexibility pays off
Second, the report encourages firms to test low-cost interventions before expanding them. A Boston boutique litigation practice introduced a “flexible core hours” policy, allowing attorneys to adjust their schedules by one hour daily during symptom flare-ups. The policy required no additional compensation and used existing staffing models. The objective is not to create a one-size-fits-all solution but to signal that such requests are legitimate, not punitive.
The ISO report emphasizes creating a workplace where a person can raise an issue if they choose to do so, knowing their employer has sufficient information to engage in helpful discussions about reasonable changes, but does not specifically suggest framing accommodations as a collective benefit. A New York corporate law firm adopted this approach by installing gender-neutral restrooms with stocked supplies and labeling them as “all-purpose” spaces. The move reduced bathroom access complaints by 60% and eliminated the need for individual employees to justify their requests. The key, the report states, is to treat these policies as part of a broader commitment to workplace equity-one that aligns with the profession’s own values of fairness and competence.
