Biglaw-- is this even legal?

[Anonymous]

Apologies if there is already a thread about this. This week I read that some biglaw clients are saying they will no longer do business with law firms unless the firms guarantee a certain number of women and minorities on their projects. I can't think of any law this violates, but how is it different from someone going to a restaurant and saying I only want a white server? Or going to a hospital and asking for a male doctor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apologies if there is already a thread about this. This week I read that some biglaw clients are saying they will no longer do business with law firms unless the firms guarantee a certain number of women and minorities on their projects. I can't think of any law this violates, but how is it different from someone going to a restaurant and saying I only want a white server? Or going to a hospital and asking for a male doctor?

It's legal. It's a push for diversity that you're seeing in corporate America as well and now corporations are noticing that when they hire lawyers for a deal/litigation, it's an all white mostly male team - so they are asking for diversity; Walmart is big on this and any law firm that has WMT as a client will do what's asked given the amount of billing. And you really don't think you can ask for a male/female dr? You don't think young men ask for male drs. for the turn your head and cough exam? You don't know ANY women who will only allow a female MD to do a pelvic?

[Anonymous]

OP, yes I know it's about diversity. But it still still sounds wrong to me for clients to demand quotas, when employers aren't supposed to use them. What I was thinking of were the days when men would request a male doctor (or whites would request a white doctor) because they assumed a male or white doctor would be more competent. If a man came into the ER today with a broken arm and insisted on seeing a male doctor, or a white doctor, for treatment, would the hospital honor the request?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, yes I know it's about diversity. But it still still sounds wrong to me for clients to demand quotas, when employers aren't supposed to use them. What I was thinking of were the days when men would request a male doctor (or whites would request a white doctor) because they assumed a male or white doctor would be more competent. If a man came into the ER today with a broken arm and insisted on seeing a male doctor, or a white doctor, for treatment, would the hospital honor the request?

Yes, patients can and do refuse to be seen by female doctors or people of color. There was just an article about this in the Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/21/asian-american-doctor-white-nationalist-patients-refused-my-care-over-race/?utm_term=.ca95a07d306f

In your law firm example, though, I don't see even that issue, because I'm not refusing to let an individual white man work on my legal matter. I'm just choosing to hire firms that value the same things my company (and by extension, my shareholders) value. As a private individual I choose to spend my money at women-owned and minority-owned businesses, invest in "socially conscious" funds, etc. -- it's a consumer choice, and companies get to make that same choice. Unless you're arguing that there is a shortage of highly qualified female and POC lawyers -- and you're not arguing that, are you? -- there's no issue here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apologies if there is already a thread about this. This week I read that some biglaw clients are saying they will no longer do business with law firms unless the firms guarantee a certain number of women and minorities on their projects. I can't think of any law this violates, but how is it different from someone going to a restaurant and saying I only want a white server? Or going to a hospital and asking for a male doctor?

It's definitely different. The goal here is inclusion -- you're framing it as exclusion. It's saying, ok, I'll have the white male lawyer, but show me that you also have women and minorities who are working on the project. The end result should be white males on the project along with females and minorities.

[Anonymous]

I work in the industry and have been seeing this more and more and as a woman I love it. Not sure if the old white guys have figured it out yet but hopefully they will and they will start giving women and POC a seat at the table.

[Anonymous]

Yes, but if a white guy is not selected for an important project because the client wants a certain number of women/POC, how is this not race/sex discrimination? Unfortunately the flip side of inclusion is sometimes exclusion.

[Anonymous]

Yes, this is a real trend. Law firms are forced to hire based on skin color, sexual orientation and sex rather than qualifications. Clients are demanding that teams include diversity candidates front and center, regardless of qualifications. It's all about the show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but if a white guy is not selected for an important project because the client wants a certain number of women/POC, how is this not race/sex discrimination? Unfortunately the flip side of inclusion is sometimes exclusion.

because diversity is a value in and off itself.

[Anonymous]

As a big law client ability trumps diversity. We too have to deal with diversity challenges but when you are paying absurd hourly rates you expect the best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I work in the industry and have been seeing this more and more and as a woman I love it. Not sure if the old white guys have figured it out yet but hopefully they will and they will start giving women and POC a seat at the table.

White women have had a seat at the table for many years now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but if a white guy is not selected for an important project because the client wants a certain number of women/POC, how is this not race/sex discrimination? Unfortunately the flip side of inclusion is sometimes exclusion.

because diversity is a value in and off itself.

It's law. The only thing that matters is the result. If a big company wants quotas, let it start with its top jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apologies if there is already a thread about this. This week I read that some biglaw clients are saying they will no longer do business with law firms unless the firms guarantee a certain number of women and minorities on their projects. I can't think of any law this violates, but how is it different from someone going to a restaurant and saying I only want a white server? Or going to a hospital and asking for a male doctor?

It's definitely different. The goal here is inclusion -- you're framing it as exclusion. It's saying, ok, I'll have the white male lawyer, but show me that you also have women and minorities who are working on the project. The end result should be white males on the project along with females and minorities.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but if a white guy is not selected for an important project because the client wants a certain number of women/POC, how is this not race/sex discrimination? Unfortunately the flip side of inclusion is sometimes exclusion.

because diversity is a value in and off itself.

It's law. The only thing that matters is the result. If a big company wants quotas, let it start with its top jobs.

It's law: lawyers are a dime a dozen, and even really excellent lawyers are a common commodity. You can have the highest quality and diversity without your recruiters breaking a sweat.
- A lawyer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, yes I know it's about diversity. But it still still sounds wrong to me for clients to demand quotas, when employers aren't supposed to use them. What I was thinking of were the days when men would request a male doctor (or whites would request a white doctor) because they assumed a male or white doctor would be more competent. If a man came into the ER today with a broken arm and insisted on seeing a male doctor, or a white doctor, for treatment, would the hospital honor the request?

Clients don't demand quotas. There are no contracts where clients specify, like from a menu: "I'll take one African-American, two Asians, two Jews, and a disabled lawyer."

There are diversity goals: "The firm of Hirem, Drainem and Dumpem will staff the XYZ contract with attorneys from a variety of ethnic, gender, racial..."