it's not so much that as doing exactly what she and her ilk themselves do. Sadly, we have far too many pols on both sides of the aisle whose "policy positions" can be boiled down to a single word: contrarianism.
Iowa's Brenna Bird among 5 attorneys general warning law firms to end race-based hiring
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
By making AA criteria unlawful to use...that automatically limits the field by eliminating some potential applicants.
Has been my experience.
Again, this may be a lot like voting eligibility.....
Is it more “Wrong” to eliminate some because of who/what they are, or is it more aggredious to eliminate some who are eligible because they can’t “prove” who they are?
Nothing. But that's not what the op is talking about is it. Are we just making up talking points in the middle of the thread that have nothing to do with the topic at hand?
Again, there’s a difference between making race a factor when considering applicants, and hiring based primarily or solely on race.
Imo, the former is a good thing, the latter is not.
I have no idea what their efforts entail, but I’m going to suspect it’s recruitment based. There’s nothing wrong with seeking underrepresented groups to apply to your company. Going to HBC and recruiting at their law schools for instance. Talking to African American groups at law schools. Isn't that what DEI programs do? I really really doubt there’s a quota system at these forms to hire x amount of minorities. Maybe I’m wrong.
I think like most diversity is a good thing. Effectively stating I will never hire Doobi because I don't think he is smart enough because he is a republican, and never giving you or your family a chance at improving themselves. Other Ethnicities have had racism that has set them back socio economically. I am unsure of the best policies to improve this, but its better than effectively restarting racist policies again. So yes Doobi I am okay with these policies and that you can not acknowledge what they are trying to achieve is rather concerning - and showing your are a republican (maga) that seems rather ignorant and dumb. I guess par for the course based on the previous thread.
Look at diversity stats at the top law schools prior to those schools recruiting for diversity. Meritocracy in the US is nearly extinct. Getting into those programs was nearly impossible for most people not from generational wealth (ie: largely rich white people). People of color were nearly excluded from the process.
Having no hiring thought to diversity when hiring IS the goal/ideal. But that won’t work until everyone has a fair shot. For some reason, we have a red contingency in this country determined to make sure that doesn’t happen.
Nailed it on the head Ping. When money and influence becomes the primary way to gain positions, wealth and opportunities - how else does an ethnicity or poor individual ever break through the glass ceiling (generally they don't). Yes you will have a few that do, but the majority of african americans are still in poverty.
Whatever makes you feel better about voting with the white supremacists and American Nazis. You’re such a 1950s racist thinker.
Law firms, particularly big law, have a long history of racial discrimination. It wasn’t until 1979 that the first AA lawyer by big law in Houston (Fulbright & Jaworski k/k/a Norton Rose). I think that engaging in diversity programs to improve minority recruitment and hiring have been, in general, successful.
No, but I’d say white male law firm partners are not exactly an endangered species that need immediate attention.
For being such supporters of capitalism, it sure seems odd the republicans are using government regulations (which they say is bad) to take away the freedoms (which they say is bad) of companies to make them do things that will lose them money (which they say is bad).
Basically every study shows more diverse company/organizations do better than those who are not.
You’re tired of people calling ya’ll racist. Yet here you are pissing on your most sacred ideals… to support something that only benefits white people. There’s literally no other variable to cause you to support something that you’d normally oppose. So stop acting clutching your pearls when we call you on your KKK shit. You know what it is and we know what it is. So stop being sissy betas and just own it.
Basically every study shows more diverse company/organizations do better than those who are not.
You’re tired of people calling ya’ll racist. Yet here you are pissing on your most sacred ideals… to support something that only benefits white people. There’s literally no other variable to cause you to support something that you’d normally oppose. So stop acting clutching your pearls when we call you on your KKK shit. You know what it is and we know what it is. So stop being sissy betas and just own it.
Without AA guidelines, a certain number of qualified applicants may be declared unqualified…for any number of reasons.
Removing the criteria (making AA illegal) us just as confusing as never having to state reasons for rejection.
"Think about it. If you're making all that money off of racism, the last thing you want is for racism to go away," Smith said. "You are going to perpetuate it. You're going to see it where it isn't."
"The major tenet of critical social justice pedagogy is don't ask if racism happened. Ask how it manifests in this situation, which is to say there's racism everywhere," he continued. "And you know the saying, if you're a hammer, then everything's a nail. Well, if you're a critical social justice activist, everything's racist."
www.foxnews.com
"The major tenet of critical social justice pedagogy is don't ask if racism happened. Ask how it manifests in this situation, which is to say there's racism everywhere," he continued. "And you know the saying, if you're a hammer, then everything's a nail. Well, if you're a critical social justice activist, everything's racist."
Former DEI trainer sounds alarm on 'useless' trainings: 'Detrimental... to minorities'
Former diversity trainer Erec Smith issued a stark warning on the future of 'useless' DEI training, arguing it will not 'go away tomorrow' since there is fear surrounding pushback.
Actually, it leans more to the opposite. “Govt regulations” generally support dei initives. The constitution, of course, is a little more murky.
Your general point about diversity is well taken in many contexts, including economics (why I support capitalism) and genetics (why I support pro reproductive policies).
The problem with dei is with its industrialization it has become a caricature of itself. The best dei programs engage your colleagues to tell their personal stories, the worst being in trainers who engage in harangues. Unfortunately, industrialization, like totalitarian revolutions, gets conceived by the intelligentsia and executed by the drill sergeants. Trotsky had some ideas, but Stalin — he had an ice pick."Think about it. If you're making all that money off of racism, the last thing you want is for racism to go away," Smith said. "You are going to perpetuate it. You're going to see it where it isn't."
"The major tenet of critical social justice pedagogy is don't ask if racism happened. Ask how it manifests in this situation, which is to say there's racism everywhere," he continued. "And you know the saying, if you're a hammer, then everything's a nail. Well, if you're a critical social justice activist, everything's racist."
Former DEI trainer sounds alarm on 'useless' trainings: 'Detrimental... to minorities'
Former diversity trainer Erec Smith issued a stark warning on the future of 'useless' DEI training, arguing it will not 'go away tomorrow' since there is fear surrounding pushback.
SCOTUS ruled on college enrollment so how does this apply to hiring? Sure I can be wrong so enlighten..Deplorable:
Brenna Bird of Iowa is among five Republican attorneys general to sign off on a nine-page letter to the 100 largest law firms in the United States, known as the "Am Law 100." The letter warns executives of the firms that they must "refrain from discriminating on the basis of race, whether under the label of 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' or otherwise."
"Differential treatment based on race is not only divisive but illegal … We expect our attorneys to follow the law like everyone else," Bird wrote in a Tuesday social media post.
The letter cites a June U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down affirmative action admissions policies used by Harvard College and the University of North Carolina.
Led by Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, Bird and attorneys general from Arkansas, Kansas and Kentucky argue that the decision extends to private employers.
Their letter raises concerns with diversity programs at law firms, such as requiring diverse candidates when hiring for leadership roles, setting goals for the percentage of employees from underrepresented groups, or sponsoring fellowship programs based on race.
They also criticize diversity training that assigns "fault, blame or bias" to members of a race, or that discusses implicit racism or bias because of race.
POLITICS
Iowa's Brenna Bird among 5 attorneys general warning law firms to end race-based hiring
Katie Akin
Des Moines Register
Iowa has joined four other red states in sending a warning to America's largest law firms: Stop using race-based hiring for employees and contractors or "you will be held accountable."
Brenna Bird of Iowa is among five Republican attorneys general to sign off on a nine-page letter to the 100 largest law firms in the United States, known as the "Am Law 100." The letter warns executives of the firms that they must "refrain from discriminating on the basis of race, whether under the label of 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' or otherwise."
"Differential treatment based on race is not only divisive but illegal … We expect our attorneys to follow the law like everyone else," Bird wrote in a Tuesday social media post.
The letter cites a June U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down affirmative action admissions policies used by Harvard College and the University of North Carolina.
Led by Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, Bird and attorneys general from Arkansas, Kansas and Kentucky argue that the decision extends to private employers.
Their letter raises concerns with diversity programs at law firms, such as requiring diverse candidates when hiring for leadership roles, setting goals for the percentage of employees from underrepresented groups, or sponsoring fellowship programs based on race.
They also criticize diversity training that assigns "fault, blame or bias" to members of a race, or that discusses implicit racism or bias because of race.
Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, who is in a heated race for governor against incumbent Democrat Andy Beshear, dismissed race-based hiring practices as "identity politics" and said at a Wednesday campaign stop, “Kentucky should be a place where everyone can succeed, not just those who were born on third base to check a DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) box.”
Federal law prohibits employers from considering race and other protected characteristics in employment decisions.
However, employers may use diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives to make their workforces less homogeneous and their workplaces more inclusive by casting a wide net for qualified workers from different backgrounds, according to Andrew Turnbull, a labor and employment partner at law firm Morrison & Foerster.
Iowa's Brenna Bird among 5 attorneys general warning law firms to end race-based hiring
The letter criticizes diversity initiatives at major law firms, like requiring diverse candidates, or offering fellowships for certain demographics.www.press-citizen.com
LOL, look at you. Furrow your brow and define pedagogy for us."Think about it. If you're making all that money off of racism, the last thing you want is for racism to go away," Smith said. "You are going to perpetuate it. You're going to see it where it isn't."
"The major tenet of critical social justice pedagogy is don't ask if racism happened. Ask how it manifests in this situation, which is to say there's racism everywhere," he continued. "And you know the saying, if you're a hammer, then everything's a nail. Well, if you're a critical social justice activist, everything's racist."
Former DEI trainer sounds alarm on 'useless' trainings: 'Detrimental... to minorities'
Former diversity trainer Erec Smith issued a stark warning on the future of 'useless' DEI training, arguing it will not 'go away tomorrow' since there is fear surrounding pushback.
I'm not sure either group of AGs have that much interest in threatening private employers about their hiring practices beyond preventing open discrimination. What Bird is doing is political kabuki theater. There is actual work she could be doing for the citizens of Iowa.Uh, I think that’s the dem ag suit after the republicans ag’s win theirs.
Suits have already been filed against two firms, though not by ag’s.
Btw, I love love love your last line as it’s my near universal sentiment toward most politics these days, even if I might not want the same work done as you.
I have jokingly said that in a second Trump Administration John Eastman would be the AG. It's more likely to be Brenna, or someone who threatens actions like this. The person who amplifies to the aggrieved victims like Northern and Abby in the GQP base. She would be Trump's Lavrentiya Beria.
No, it isn’t. And the Court’s ruling on AA clarifies nothing. It muddies the water further. It will allow for “malfeasance” with very little, if any, checks/balances. More folks will be denied access than will be “screwed” by unqualified.
No one will be denied access. Everyone can apply and face the same standards.
So a law firm in Chicago is looking at hiring one of two candidates for their litigation practice group. Their litigation practice group handles primarily cases pending in Cook County, including taking dozens of medical negligence cases to trial before Cook County juries.
Candidate #1: White. Attended University of Wisconsin Law School; undergrad at Notre Dame University. Grew up in rural Wisconsin. Finished in Top 10% of graduating class. Was on the Wisconsin Law School National Moot Court team. Spent a summer clerking for a judge in Madison where he got to see motion practice and a couple of jury trials.
Candidate #2: African-American. Attended University of Minnesota Law School; undergrad at Mankato State. Grew up in the metropolitan Minneapolis area. Finished in Top 20% of graduating class. Spent a summer clerking for a small law firm in Minneapolis, primarily doing research.
Chicago law firm recognizes that a large number of Cook County juries will include a significant number of African-Americans. The law firm believes that African-American jurors in Cook County, in many instances, may respond more favorably to an African-American's representation of a firm client at trial. In making its decision to hire Candidate #2, the law firm uses the applicant's race as not the exclusive factor but one of the factors in the hiring decision. It believes that its clients, as a whole, will benefit from Candidate #2 being part of the litigation practice group.
Did the Chicago law firm engage in illegal discrimination based upon race?
Candidate #1: White. Attended University of Wisconsin Law School; undergrad at Notre Dame University. Grew up in rural Wisconsin. Finished in Top 10% of graduating class. Was on the Wisconsin Law School National Moot Court team. Spent a summer clerking for a judge in Madison where he got to see motion practice and a couple of jury trials.
Candidate #2: African-American. Attended University of Minnesota Law School; undergrad at Mankato State. Grew up in the metropolitan Minneapolis area. Finished in Top 20% of graduating class. Spent a summer clerking for a small law firm in Minneapolis, primarily doing research.
Chicago law firm recognizes that a large number of Cook County juries will include a significant number of African-Americans. The law firm believes that African-American jurors in Cook County, in many instances, may respond more favorably to an African-American's representation of a firm client at trial. In making its decision to hire Candidate #2, the law firm uses the applicant's race as not the exclusive factor but one of the factors in the hiring decision. It believes that its clients, as a whole, will benefit from Candidate #2 being part of the litigation practice group.
Did the Chicago law firm engage in illegal discrimination based upon race?
Which automatically denies many. AA is/was an attempt to “level the playing field” where as “same standards” allow the “Home field advantage” to the privileged. Let’s play “Home/home” or on a neutral field…..ok?
Stanford bragged about only admitting 22 percent of their incoming class being white. Enough is enough
