Another in a series of good reporting, fact-based articles by Rob.
He notes this fact: "Husch Blackwell had 166 equity partners who were white and one who was black." I will editorialize on it for him. This is pretty rampant in huge firms. Last week, I posted a story about various organizations who will make various certifications about the diversity in a firm in exchange for money and give you a gold star or whatever, regardless of whether you actually achieve diversity. Here it is:
https://www.omelvenymyersethics.org...g-recruitment-rooney-rule-mansfield-rule.html
This stuff is just lip service and these certifications are borderline bunco. However, in defense of the firms, diversity is front and center in recruiting, which I have been heavily involved in, and it is extremely tough.
Though Rob has already classified me as a "piece of shit" based on who I am likely vote for in November, I ranted on here years ago about the horrible disparity of education, particularly in cities long before this latest shitstorm, because as an American, I find it appalling and unacceptable (see, e.g.
https://www.hawkeyenation.com/forum...uve-heard-this-year.84412/page-6#post-1750689 and this thread where I tried to describe its impact on football
https://www.hawkeyenation.com/forum...on-based-on-poverty-level.87257/#post-1851570). This Mansfield Rule the law firms have created is the same issue I had with the original Rooney Rule. There is just not much in the pipeline. If you look at the percentage of black males in law school, it is insanely low. Like super crazy low. So the pipeline issue has to be fixed (both in football coaching and law).
Second, law firms compete very heavily with companies for experienced lawyers. The companies have their own diversity initiatives and end up siphoning a lot of the most talented POC coming through the law firm pipeline. I don't know anything about that particular firm, but I would suspect they have had a fair number of partner candidates leave for corporate jobs that can offer equity comp packages, better hours and no business development requirements.
I'm not saying there should be perfectly statistical matching or anything, but 166:1 is simply an unacceptable ratio. Like other issues, there is a lot of complexity at play here, but to my eye, a lot of starts pretty early on in a lot of peoples' lives.