Law Firm Segregation Reminiscent of Jim Crow

At Georgetown University Law Center, I studied Constitutional Law with Father Robert Drinan. Having served paradoxically as both a priest and a Congressman, he was an apt guide through the maze of cases--Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Topeka Board of Education, and the Bakke decision--that underscored the dichotomy between justice and law when race and power clash.

After graduating from law school, I sold my first book to Random House for a six-figure advance, lectured at Vassar and did commentary for NPR. Today I host the video blog, spadeproject.com and write frequently for newspapers. Still, a writer's income is inconsistent, so I've always kept my resume on file with legal placement agencies. Three years ago, a recruiter suggested a staff attorney position at Covington & Burling LLP as a "great opportunity." And it was...to experience the race/power dynamic firsthand.

Staff attorneys are non-partner track lawyers who handle the menial legal tasks--generating binders and attaching "relevant" or "not relevant" codes to thousands of emails, spreadsheets, and any other documents associated with a particular case--that associates shun. While paralegals have their own offices, as many as ten staff attorneys share windowless file rooms. Segregated from other lawyers in the firm, we go uninvited to attorney-only firm functions and are not provided jury duty or maternity leave. The base pay and bonus structure is half that of a 25 year old first year associate's.

Blacks at Covington comprise less than 5% of the Washington office's partners and associates, but make up 30% of its staff attorneys. A peek at the firm's website doesn't reveal this since, unlike all other lawyers there, staff attorneys aren't pictured. Were they, a peculiar pattern would emerge.

In a Legal Times essay, "The Unqualified Myth," Veta T. Richardson, Executive Director of the Minority Corporate Counsel Association wrote, "Law firms claim to have consistent hiring criteria, but their ranks are actually filled with exceptions to the rule. These exceptions are more likely to be white lawyers." Indeed, Covington's black staff attorneys (like its black partners and associates) hail from top law schools like Harvard, Duke and Georgetown while several white associates and partners attended schools like Catholic, Kentucky and Villanova (all ranked well below 50). Taken as a whole, the black staff attorneys' average law school rank is higher than that of white staff attorneys at the firm.

Blacks bought into the notion, stressed by legal literature, ranking systems and law firm recruiting departments, that investing in a top legal education is paramount for those wishing to work at top law firms. It's disheartening to then discover that the black student who borrows $120,000 to attend Georgetown will only earn half that of the white associate who's paid $60,000 to attend the University of Maryland.

Covington began stockpiling its staff attorney ghetto with blacks and other minorities in 2005, shortly after the General Counsel of some of the country's largest companies joined Roderick A. Palmore, Executive Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary of Sara Lee in taking a tougher stance on law firm diversity. Signed by hundreds of General Counsel, this new "Call to Action" states they will retain firms that demonstrate a level of diversity reflective of their employees and customers and end their relationship with firms "whose performance consistently evidences a lack of meaningful interest in being diverse."

Covington has certainly diversified its firm; however, its attorneys are far from equals. The vast majority of Covington's black attorneys do no substantive work, have no control over their case assignments and no opportunity for advancement. This seems to be just the sort of structure the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission warned against in its 2003 "Diversity In Law Firms" report which stated, "In large, national law firms, the most pressing issues have probably shifted from hiring and initial access to problems concerning the terms and conditions of employment, especially promotion to partnership."

Palmore has made clear that in drafting the "Call", his hope was that rather than utilize minority attorneys solely to satisfy a billables requirement, firms would use diversity to advance a firm's culture so that a variety of perspectives influence how a firm functions. It is clear that when true diversity is absent, a dysfunctional work place arises, one in which even purveyors of racial jokes are tolerated.

At a staff meeting to address concerns regarding a colleague's reading aloud a Wikipedia list of racial slurs, the staff attorney manager downplayed the incident then recalled how as a child when his pet monkey got out of its cage, his mother never cared about the why or how. She simply wanted it not to happen. The analogy was ill-advised but the inference clear--rather than rooting out racism in the workplace, he only cared that the offender cease the behavior and the offended desist complaining about it.

One might wonder, "Why do blacks stand for such monkey business?" Because they know that to object, one risks ruining one's career. In the law review article, "Why Are There So Few Black Lawyers in Corporate Law Firms? An Institutional Analysis," authors David Wilkins and Mitu Gulati assert that black lawyers lack mentors who can protect them.

Recently, I contacted the black graduates from my law school class to find out how others were fairing in the legal profession. Many are working in government, a few have been very successful at careers outside the law and some are in-house attorneys. Nearly all who'd had experience in a large firm environment expressed chagrin, citing instance after instance of suspect treatment. Of the few still at firms, I could only find one out of a class of more than 50 blacks who had made partner at a large law firm. How'd he accomplish this? "Sure I worked hard, made myself indispensable, but I'm not going to say I'm the only person who's ever done that. You have to have a Partner willing to be an advocate for you. I had several actually. There was a black partner who was helpful, but my most vocal advocate was a Jewish guy who made sure I stayed on track."

Absent a mentor, it's easy to be derailed. On August 14th, at 10am, I was told that I was being laid off. I received no severance and my computer was switched off at noon. Since then I have been resisting the impulse to question whether Covington's staff attorney policy is unfair to blacks and other minorities. It's a question no black professional wants to confront. We know the eye-rolling and impatient sighs the issue provokes. To protest, one faces reproach and career suicide. Firms know this and bank on everyone's silence.

Conservative columnists like Stuart Taylor Jr. have suggested that minorities aren't bringing discrimination lawsuits against law firms because disparate treatment doesn't exist, but try this logic.

Black attorneys know law firms have the resources to crush an adversary. It is possible that Covington or, more specifically, the partner charged with managing our group were not bias. Perhaps he was simply inept, better equipped for his other firm duties -- planning Friday Happy Hours, organizing the firm's NCAA pool and choosing the band for the office Holiday party. Even he remarked that it took him 17 years to make partner. Unfortunately, blacks don't get to stick around that long. I wish Father Drinan was still alive to help me make sense of this.

Comments

[koaltech]

From an outsiders perspective...while what she is saying has SOME merit...

BUT...her race with respect to her Georgetown degree, and someone else's lesser degree has nothing to do with why she's a staff attorney, and not in the "year" scale/partner track...

She wrote a book, lectured, and blogs...those lesser degreed people went into firm life, and billed their asses off for YEARS...

People who get into those tracks, go straight out of school...into firm life...

Now once you are within those tracks...shit is still stacked against you as a black attorney...but she ain't EVER have a shot at getting into that track...based on the career trajectory that she took...of her own free will.

So I don't think that she's the right person to beat this drum...

Not that the drum isn't worth beating...

[Nommo]

Ms Young, if you all got together and did legal work for all the victims of police violence all over the nation,
the suits alone should finance your own firms. Might be a a little difficult in the beginning but there is no shortage of cases available.

[BronxGOPer]

I think there are several separate issues that you are confronting here. One is possible discrimination in the hiring of associates. Another is the treatment of staff attorneys. A third is a question of the value of a legal education from a top law school.

Just as a bit of background, I graduated from a Top 20 law school in the top third of my class, and have spent my share of time in those document/files rooms as a temporary attorney at a large firm. Temporary attorneys are actually a few steps below staff attorneys.

But I also so spent 2 years working as a legal headhunter in New York City. So that gave me an interesting insight into what these big firms seek in associates. Basically, large firms want credentials. They want top schools, top class rank, and law review. A few lawyers might slip through with lower credentials but only if they have some overriding experience (or a strong connection to a partner). It makes sense; because these firms are selling there attorneys and they want clients to be impressed. I found that smaller elite firms were even bigger sticklers for top schools and grades than the large firms, possibly because they like to bill themselves as just as good as the big firms only smaller.

One thing I noticed, that aside from a few top top schools (such as Harvard, Columbia, etc.) where you rank in your class is more important than how your school ranks. "White Shoe" NYC firms recruit at all the top national law schools, but they also recruit from the lower ranked local schools. I think you are better off being in the top 5% of your class at a 3rd tier law school than being in the middle of your class at a top school like Cornell.

If I had to do it over again, I would probably go to a school with a lesser reputation (with hopefully lower tuition or more grants/scholarships) and where I would hopefully finish with a higher class rank. That"s my advice to prospective law students of every race.

[robXdion]

Maybe this should be sent to Geraldine Ferraro so she can see how "lucky" they are to be black!

[DS199]

"Indeed, Covington's black staff attorneys (like its black partners and associates) hail from top law schools like Harvard, Duke and Georgetown. . ." And how many were admitted to these institutions as a result of special preferences that overlooked LSAT scores and GPAs substantially inferior to those of white admittees?

[JesAClog]

Please. I doubt any of them were admitted with such inferior creds as the scores upon scores of rich whites who are admitted based upon "alumni" connections. This is ridiculous. This country has always had affirmative action--for white males. Anyone who has ever attended a top tier school knows where the real "preferential treatment" goes.

[rememberMartinlking]

Ms. Young if you have something to talk about concerning feelings and treatment you see...TALK ON!!! Don't keep silent because of the feedback you receive. I kept quiet, didn't want to rock the boat and I lost out. But I'm in a better position now. God bless you.

[squawk]

"the black student who borrows $120,000 to attend Georgetown will only earn half that of the white associate who's paid $60,000 to attend the University of Maryland."

There's a big clue in there. You think that you're entitled because you have a degree with a snobby name on it. Give me someone from Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, Illinois, UCLA, Texas, etc. any day and I'll come out on top every time; Ivy Leaguers and Catholic schoolers do nothing but ruin this country.

[sodisenchanted]

Whether ineptitude or outright bias it's just so sad.

We haven't come a long way, baby.

[jvarga]

You said that their staff attorney policy is unfair to blacks and other minorities. However, is it not unfair to anyone who holds that position? Or is it ok for whites/non-minorities to be treated in the manner you described but unfair for blacks and minorities?

I can empathize with the crappy job - high qualifications issue. I'm a post-doctoral fellow at a world famous research institution. I'm not even paid on the federal post doc payscale (which sucks) but below it. After 17 months I got my first raise, 3%. Sadly, the cost of living has been significantly higher for each year I've lived here (DC Metro). Additionally, I'm paid less than a first year technician with a bachelor's degree. Technicians with a MS and a few years experience make about 140% of my pay.

However, as a post-doc I have the same job responsibilities as a staff scientist (the position a post-doc might get promoted to), including the management of multiple technicians. To make it even better, our annual performance appraisals, by design, do not take into account most of our job responsibilities.

Even though there is a racial disparity between typical post docs (white) and typical technicians (asian) here, I don't think it's a symptom of racism. I think it's a symptom of an employer abusing a system (in this case post-docs, in your case staff attorneys) because they can.

[DCLawyer76]

I worked at Covington & Burling in DC during the same time frame as the author. The firm and the partner in charge of staff attorneys and litigation project analysts (a title created by the firm to mark an even lower tier of attorneys--all graduates with admittance to at least one state bar) showed a remarkable disrespect towards all of us in those roles, including those whites such as myself. But its very obvious to all, that there is a disproportionately large percentage of staff attorneys who are black or another minority, within that firm. I always suspected the the firm favored minority applicants in the staff attorney position in order to boost some artificial statistic for the number of minority attorneys in the firm.

Certainly the firm does abuse this level of professional as an earlier post described "because they can." Its true white and minority staff attorneys are treated equally poorly within this firm, but the firm's racism shows when it is recognized that minorities are disproportionately hired in this role. Staff attorneys are only considered "attorneys" at Covington when they are talking minority statistics or sending attorneys to work on the firm's required pro bono rotations.