Economy’s effect on diversity

October 7, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
According to the Minority Law Journal’s Minority Experience Study, minorities are feeling the effect of the economy worse than their Caucasian counterparts. The survey asked midlevel associates (third-, fourth-, and fifth-year associates) a series of questions, including whether they were actively seeking other jobs, whether they’d be at their current firm in two years, billable hours, and pay cuts.

According the survey, almost a third of African-American respondents, and nearly a quarter of Hispanic and Asian-American attorneys have high levels of anxiety at their firms about job security. Just over 20 percent of white associates reported high anxiety.

More minorities than whites said their workloads were too light, and minorities posted fewer billable hours than their white counterparts. This was true in last year’s survey, too, but a greater percentage of associates in all ethnic groups said the recession has affected them this year.

According to the survey, it appears black attorneys are having the most trouble with the current economic situation and its impact at firms. African-Americans reported changing practice areas because of the recession the least, were actively looking for another job more than any other group, and were more likely to view the way work is distributed at their firms as less fair than their colleagues.

Billable hours are down for every group, but as usual, the minorities still had fewer hours. You can read more about the survey here.

Also in the article on the study, some feared the economy is pushing firms backward in their diversity efforts and that any strides made over the last few years will be erased. Instead of putting time and resources into recruiting and retaining minority attorneys, firms are trying to find ways to slash costs and focus on keeping the companies profitable.

Are the sentiments the same at Indiana firms? Are minorities more affected and worried about the economy or are all attorneys feeling the same anxiety?
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT