They'll pay for it. "Diversity" at the top is its own reward.
It's outright racism, is what it is. You're good enough for Wal-Mart only if your skin isn't white.
Wow, three posts so far and nobody has thought to propose killing all the lawyers.
They can hire Chinese lawyers, like their crappy Chinese merchandise.
Boooooo.
Oh, for God's sake. . .will the madness never stop?
Wal-Mart announces that it will no linger sell good manufactured by sweat shops or by children in third world countries!
Wal-Mart announces that it will no linger sell good manufactured by sweat shops or by children in third world countries!
OK. I wrote it three times and every time it's a lie. Sometimes I just get the urge to write something that you won't see announced by companies that are happy to announce something stupid like the subject of this thread.
Would he dare say "Why are there just black males here?" if that were the case?
"I try to include the white male in this," he said, explaining that sometimes "white males fear diversity efforts."
After 30+ years of this cr*p, why wouldn't they?
Firm managers need to become "more cognizant that they have people coming into their environment who are not aspiring to assimilate but to contribute as they are," she said.
So there'll be one set of rules for white guys to make partner, and a different set of rules for women/minorities.
If they demand certain race/gender mixes without regard to merit, they'll get what they deserve: very-highly-paid window dressing. The firms will stuff some warm bodies with the right appearance into the required slots, bill for them, and continue to have the actual work done by the people with ability.
"Wal-Mart's new policy signals a growing determination by corporate legal departments to pressure outside counsel."
It's true. Wal-Mart isn't the only corporation doing this by any means. Law firms have to provide their "diversity" numbers to clients like this on a regular basis. I wonder how many law firms hire for diversity, then stick anybody who can't cut the mustard off in a corner somewhere and basically eat the cost of their salary and benefits in order to hang onto a big client. They probably mark up their bills to said client to recoup any such losses incurred!
Calling Rev. Jackson....calling Rev. Jackson...cleanup in aisle 3
The dumbing down of Wal-Mart. Just part of the cycle downward.
So the world's largest retailer of largely communist chinese goods wants to lower the bar of qualification in the law profession in the name of anti-white male racism/sexism. I, like Michael Savage believe that when the word "diversity" is mentioned, it's time to reach for one's glock.
Walmart is trying to clean up its image. I'm pretty sure they got in big trouble for hiding stuff in discovery in lots of cases. basically, they hired extra sleazy lawyers and paid them by the case. So the lawyers would put the case in a drawer and ignore court orders, etc. They got hit with mucho sanctions. So now they are going the big firm big publicity route.
About fifteen years ago, just about the time that the PC sh#t was starting to hit the fan, I began doing some part-time work as an arbitrator for the NY Stock Exchange. In addition to mediating disputes between brokers and their clients, arbitrators also are called upon to settle cases between member firms and their employees.
New arbitrators had to take a few seminars to further our understanding of these employment cases. One hot topic involved discrimination. There were two ways to "prove" it--direct and indirect. I had no problem with the former. It manifests itself when a minority person (i.e., a Black, Hispanic, or a woman) with a clearly superior record of accomplishment is overlooked for a promotion which is then given to a less deserving White Male. Although often difficult to prove, the concept is understandable.
The indirect method of "proving" prejudice is by throwing statistics at you. That is, if Blacks make up 12% of the general population and only 2% of the law partners, bias is assumed. I had a great deal of difficulty with that concept. I argued with the "instructor" vehemently that aptitude and interest might discourage Blacks from being concert violinists and Whites from being NBA point guards, and absent the overt type of biased behavior previously mentioned, one could not assume that just because the numbers worked out in a particular manner, that improper discrimination was the reason.
I kept my mouth shut long enough to get my little diploma and I did work as an arbitrator for several years. Luckily (for the plaintiff), I never was involved in a statistics-based discrimination suit.
I shop at Walmart and there's lots of women and minorities shopping beside me. This isn't a government action, it's a company that wants their lawyers to reflect their customers. It's a good idea. Hats off to Walmart.
So WalMart is basically saying, give me 3 white guys, a woman and a black guy, and continue to bill me as before.
Di-verse it gets.
What happened to: I want the 5 best attorneys you've got?
They're free to set up artificial quotas if they like. I just hope they don't bitch when they get substandard representation because they were only looking at skin color and reproductive organs instead of SKILL.