Reply to Biglaw-- is this even legal?

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "Biglaw-- is this even legal?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is OP again.  I appreciate the thoughtful responses.  Assume a white guy doesn't get a plum assignment on, say, a big WalMart case that he is well suited for because it is staffed to satisfy a client's demand for diversity, and the  white guy's bonus is lower, or he doesn't make partner as a result.  He sues for race or sex discrimination.  What's the law firm's defense?  I don't believe diversity for diversity's sake has been recognized as a Title VII defense.  I'm sure the law firm can come up with other reasons for the decision (as if often the case in race or sex discrimination cases whe there is more than one qualified person for a job), but if the real reason was to satisfy the client's preference,  what is the firm's legal defense?[/quote]

He's not in a protected class, so he can't bring discrimination claim. Part of his prima facie  case has to be that he is in a protected class. [/quote]

Also I'm not even sure a woman or minority could have success with a suit like that.  The client can pretty much hire whoever they want.[/quote]

Yup.  Walmart says they want a diverse legal team because they find that they get better results that way.  Law firm says, we put together a diverse legal team.  It included white men, as well as women and POC.  Just happens that this one white dude didn't get the assignment he wanted?  Boo hoo for him.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics