Speeding Towards Mediocrity
News8Austin: Top law firms not diverse enough, study says
Most of the top law firms in town employ fewer minorities than the state average, a new study reports.Of the 25 biggest firms, three had staffs that were at least 14 percent minority, according to an annual minority hiring report card put out by the local chapter of the Hispanic Bar Association and the Austin Black Lawyers Association.
Copyright ©2004TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin
The link in the quote sends you to a PDF of the report.
Apparently, 14% of lawyers in Texas are minorities. Firms that at least match that percentage are graded 'A'. Firms that reach 6.5% or lower are graded 'F'. The law firms and their grades are:
- A, Locke Liddell - 20.9% of 43 attorneys
- A, Bickerstaff, Heath, Smiley - 16.1% of 31 attorneys
- A+, Andrews Kurth - 15.6% of 32 attorneys
- A, Winstead Sechrest - 14.3% of 42 attorneys
- B, Gray Cary - 13.8% of 29 attorneys
- B, Bracewell & Patterson - 13% of 23 attorneys
- B, Baker Botts - 12.7% of 55 attorneys
- B+, Thompson & Knight - 12.5% of 16 attorneys
- B-, Wilson Sonsini - 12.5% of 24 attorneys
- B-, Haynes and Boone - 12.5% of 24 attorneys
- B, Clark Thomas - 12.4% of 113 attorneys
- B, Brown McCarroll - 12.3% of 106 attorneys
- B, Fulbright & Jaworski - 11.8% of 85 attorneys
- C-, Hughes & Luce - 11.1% of 18 attorneys
- C+, Jenkens & Gilchrist - 10.3% of 29 attorneys
- C, Davis & Wilkerson - 10.3% of 29 attorneys
- C, Strasburger & Price - 10% of 20 attorneys
- D, Jackson Walker - 8.9% of 56 attorneys
- D, Vinson & Elkins - 8.7% of 92 attorneys
- D, McGinnis, Lochkridge - 8.2% of 62 attorneys
- D-, Lloyd, Gosselink - 6.5% of 31 attorneys
- F, Akin Gump - 5.6% of 54 attorneys
- F, Scott, Douglass - 5% of 40 attorneys
- F, Graves, Dougherty - 3.4% of 59 attorneys
- F, DuBois, Bryant - 0% of 18 attorneys
Pluses and minuses are partially dependent on other factors, such as the number of minorities employed as partners and law clerks. Overall, out of 1,131 attorneys employed by these law firms, 10.7% of them are minorities, giving the top tier firms in Austin roughly a grade of 'C'. There are thirty-nine partners and twenty-eight law clerks.
I really dislike these kinds of things.
They assume that the ideal is the average, something any thinking person should view with horror. The ideal should have nothing to do with race, background, gender, religion, etc. The ideal should have everything to do with excellence in capability, performance, and achievement. Any business that takes on the goal of accurately representing some local, state, or national average in demographics is a business that isn't taking its job seriously.
Making a public comparison of business activities is fine. People should be free to do so and discuss the results. But publicly pressuring businesses to change their hiring habits to accommodate more hispanics, blacks, women, gays, or whatever just to boost their numbers to the average tells me they think symbolism is more important than reality.
It exhibits the general tendency these days for pressure groups to want to exert control over private property and collectivize the business process. No one outside of the business knows what's right for the business; even fewer inside the business can discriminate among what is needed, what's wanted, and what would be nice to have. Picking the state bar's average is as arbitrary as picking 15%, 20%, or 50%. It doesn't represent reality; it represents a quick feel-good resolution that looks good in the news and the eyes of benefactors and supporters.
As individuals, we are all different in a variety of ways. I'm willing to grant that your racial makeup can be responsible for some of them. More likely, the social environments you've lived in make a bigger impact. Grandly assuming all or most hispanics are the same and bring the same benefits or experience with them is a racist mindset that ignores individual circumstances and abilities.
If I ever need a lawyer, I'd want the best my money can get from a reputable company that is ethical. It's racial makeup is utterly unimportant.
UPDATE(8/5/2004 12:15pm)
More of this silliness from the Chicago Tribune via Yahoo!: Minority journalists cite lack of diversity
A study released Wednesday by Unity, a coalition of minority journalists, found that 60 out of 574, or roughly 10 percent, of Washington newspaper reporters and editors are non-white, compared with 30.9 percent of the U.S. population."There is no justification for any media company to staff its bureau in Washington, D.C., without people of color," said Ernest Sotomayor, president of Unity and Long Island editor for Newsday.com in New York. Newsday.com is owned by Tribune Co., which also owns the Chicago Tribune.
Mr. Sotomayer, yes, there is justification. The justification is contextual and based on the needs of the media company and the characteristics of the individuals applying for jobs there. There is no imperative moral law that says an institution's or business's labor force reflect some abitrarily chosen racial makeup. I challenge any readers to come up with one.
Carl Leubsdorf, Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News, which has no minority reporters in Washington, said his newspaper's hiring is based on a reporter's qualifications and not skin color, but agreed that diversity is an important component of a newsroom."You should not have a uniform staff, whether it is politically, or by sex, by race, by anything," Leubsdorf said.
Copyright © 2004 Chicago Tribune
Copyright © 2004 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Mr. Leubsdorf is conceding righteous ground with that last sentence. To succeed in life and in business, you do need a uniform staff: a staff uniformly intelligent and capable. It's certainly fine to want a diverse staff from a variety of backgrounds, educations, and such. But calling on all employers in an industry or on all industries to have a diverse staff isn't.