Ethnic minority last names affect your application and interview Forum

[lavarman84]

Like, those are pretty moderate statements. I seriously don't understand what you're reacting to, except that you've already decided that any description of possible prejudice someone's encountered can't possibly be valid, and therefore any consideration of has to just be whining.

No. Let's stop making gross and dishonest generalizations. I am picking on one person in this thread. There are plenty of other posters who have voiced experiences that absolutely strike me as prejudice or subconscious bias.

But I felt that one poster was taking things a bit overboard by blaming racism for something that is perfectly explainable via other means.

Law firms are a business. They care about their bottom-line, not what's fair or what their associates' desires are.

I can see where your analogy fails in important areas: A British person likely was born in Britain, speaks in British accent, probably understand the culture and thus can relate to the client.

And there we go. That is the point.

We don't know where anon falls on all those points. We just know that anon is Asian American and speaks fluent English. My point is that the firm could have very valid reasons for doing what they did. You recognize that here with the analogy that I made.

[Hikikomorist]

So do you suggest the poster just shutup and be grateful for the opportunity to work after asian client after asian client, when there's nothing to disqualify them from working on a larger and potentially more interesting domestic client like his/her peers?

And sure, maybe OP HAPPENS to be good at all the work involving asian clients. Or, maybe it's actually because OP is asian just like the asian client. Why would it be unreasonable for OP to suspect its the latter after a continuous trend?

I suggest that the poster do great work on the matters he (or she) has and request to work on the other matters that interests him.

As for the bold, I hope you realize that doesn't necessarily make the firm racist or the firm putting him on those matters racist. There are a lot of good reasons why the firm might do that. It's also very possible that the firm thinks this is both best for the firm and for that poster's career.

Let's not immediately jump to racism because we aren't getting what we want. I don't think a firm placing a British person on matters for British clients would seem suspicious (or unfair).

What are some of those lots of good reasons?

Client preference
Cultural reasons
Personal understanding of certain issues
This niche area fitting that person's skill-set well
That person's shortcomings preventing them from taking on bigger roles
Partner preference
Misunderstanding

Yeah, I noted 1, which would redirect frustration more than resolve it. I assume the poster would be in the best position to judge 2, 3, and 4. For 5, you could limit the sample to smaller clients and see if there is still a disproportionate assignment. Not sure about 6, but I also think it's the most susceptible to occurring in tandem with race-based assumptions. I'm not really sure what you have in mind with 7. I'd be curious to hear more from that poster regarding these raised possibilities.

[lavarman84]

I'm not really sure what you have in mind with 7. I'd be curious to hear more from that poster regarding these raised possibilities.

I mean that the poster might have expressed interest in that at some point, and the firm may not know that the poster is unhappy in his current role.

But yes, I am willing to be open-minded and hear more from the poster. Maybe I am being unfair.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Also, the reasons you've given hiko - for the third time, *can you not see how those reasons might rely on assumptions about race*??

Asked and answered.

No, actually, you've yet to answer this in any substantive way. Saying "they could have valid reasons" is a non-answer. In fact, your whole response to this discussion is pretty disturbing and seems to use "personal responsibility" to dismiss any structural concerns about racism in the legal profession, so I'm not going to respond after this post. But really you're coming across as pretty insensitive to the kinds of things minority associates can't help but have to think about, all due to some fetishism of personal responsibility.

Like, say this anon is actually right. You already said that you couldn't foreclose racism as the explanation. I don't know how else this person is supposed to describe it that would be acceptable to you if, in fact, this is what was going on - which you admitted it could be.

Of course firms are businesses and are concerned about their bottom line. That's not a counter to the suggestion that they treated this anon differently because they were Asian. I'm pretty sure concern about the bottom line has been at the heart of a LOT of racist practices. The point wasn't that the firm gave assignments the anon didn't like; it was what those specific assignments were.

[elendinel]

I mean, sure, but it's not whiny or petulant to think that a very possible explanation is more likely than some other very possible explanation. You make it sound like literally the only reason to assume racism is entitlement, as if there aren't studies and statistics out there that would support the theory that racism could be involved.

I think it's very possible that the poster suffered from client bias and not firm bias, but it should not be considered ridiculous to think the firm could also have made assumptions about what the poster could do/who the client would want to work with, too.

I think it is whiny and petulant to complain about not being given the opportunities you (the OP) wanted and immediately jump to racism as the reason why. Plus, that same poster posted later about the firm trying to harm his (or her) career.

I'm sure that poster isn't the only person in biglaw who feels they're capable of working on bigger matters or isn't content with the matters they're working on. It just struck me as a person looking to justify his lack of satisfaction with his current role in the firm by blaming racism.

Could racism or subconscious bias be the reason why? Sure. But I think it's just also convenient for that poster to blame racism for not getting what he wants.

How do you know the poster "immediately jump[ed] to racism"? Just because it took you a minute to read his/her post, doesn't mean it took him/her a minute to come to the conclusion that racism was involved. And no, it is not reasonable to assume the poster never considered other possibilities, just because the poster didn't catalogue every thought (s)he had on the matter in one post.

You seem to be working under the assumption that racism and unconscious bias are rare, and that every other possibility you mentioned is more likely than racism/bias. The poster must be whiny and petulant to have landed on racism/bias, because they have not written a thesis proving to you that any of the other reasons you think are more likely, couldn't possibly have been the case. It does come off as being fairly defensive. Not because I think it's wrong to think other non-racial possibilities are possible/equally likely, but because you are more invested in assuming the poster is wrong and must be saying "racism" for no reason but his/her ego/entitlement, than in actually trying to figure out why the poster might have landed on "racism" and not those other possibilities you mention.

[lavarman84]

Also, the reasons you've given hiko - for the third time, *can you not see how those reasons might rely on assumptions about race*??

Asked and answered.

No, actually, you've yet to answer this in any substantive way. Saying "they could have valid reasons" is a non-answer. In fact, your whole response to this discussion is pretty disturbing and seems to use "personal responsibility" to dismiss any structural concerns about racism in the legal profession, so I'm not going to respond after this post. But really you're coming across as pretty insensitive to the kinds of things minority associates can't help but have to think about, all due to some fetishism of personal responsibility.

Like, say this anon is actually right. You already said that you couldn't foreclose racism as the explanation. I don't know how else this person is supposed to describe it that would be acceptable to you if, in fact, this is what was going on - which you admitted it could be.

Of course firms are businesses and are concerned about their bottom line. That's not a counter to the suggestion that they treated this anon differently because they were Asian. I'm pretty sure concern about the bottom line has been at the heart of a LOT of racist practices. The point wasn't that the firm gave assignments the anon didn't like; it was what those specific assignments were.

The fact that I readily admitted that racism is a possibility answers the question.

Yes, I can see how some reasons would rely on assumptions about race (even if it didn't rise to the level of racism).

Yet again, Nony, here comes the melodrama. You love to make sweeping generalizations and blow things out of proportion.

But did they treat the Anon differently because he is Asian? If the firm does the same thing with other associates who seem like cultural matches for certain clients, are they really treating Anon any differently?

[lavarman84]

Not because I think it's wrong to think other non-racial possibilities are possible/equally likely, but because you are more invested in assuming the poster is wrong and must be saying "racism" for no reason but his/her ego/entitlement, than in actually trying to figure out why the poster might have landed on "racism" and not those other possibilities you mention.

The poster laid out pretty clearly why he (or she) landed on racism.

[Anonymous User]

I'm that anon.

Aside from being put on tons of smaller Asian clients (which collectively took up a lot of my time), I also noticed at that first firm I was at the dire lack of Asians (or any minorities, period) around me. In fact I was the only minority in my group of over a dozen attorneys. I wasn't at that firm for too long because another opportunity came up, and I took it immediately.

My current firm is indeed more diverse. However, while I'm on our biggest client (which is a very well known American Fortune 100 company - so lawman rest assured my work product is NOT the issue), I'm also on all our Asian clients (again!), and I've had random Asian attorneys brought to my office just so I can say hello to them in Chinese (at a partner's behest).

[zot1]

I don't get it. Anon says "hey now that I think about this stuff, maybe racism could explain x." Then lawman insists one can't "jump" at claiming racism right away. But why can you jump at claiming it's probably not racism right away?

As a 1L we had panels of legal professionals come talk to us about what they did. One time we had a panel of judges. Some student asked about diversity in the judiciary. One judge (of three) said he had hired an African American clerk some years back. He didn't work out too well, and he "made sure never to make the mistake of hiring an African American clerk again." Everyone was so in shock the moderator just moved on to another question. The thing is that the judge didn't even realize what had just happened. To him, the exchange was normal. To maybe almost everyone in the room, it was outrageous.

My point is that racism isn't always the "I hate x group of people!" But also prejudicial thinking of the kind shown by the judge and anon's partners. When anon's partners (possibly) thought "hey we should have our Asian associate in Asian matters", this is a problem for associate because his developmental opportunities could be impacted. And you may say it's for the good of the firm. Maybe. But if anon was born here and has never visited Vietnam or doesn't speak Vietnamese, I fail to see how his placement in a deal with Vietnamese clients could be useful.

You, lawman, also got hunged up on the big deals. That is important because in the legal profession, racism often tends to put minorities in the less prestigious positions. So not ever getting a big deal while everyone else is can in fact be problematic when this is happening just because of your race. If it helps, think about it from a sex perspective. If in a law firm all the guys are in the big deals but only the woman is in the small deals, this could be happening because of he misapprehension that her little lady brain couldn't handle the bigger deals. And if that's the case for her, this might reduce her developmental growth for career advancement.

So yeah bro, it's something to think about. You also don't gotta get so mad about it. It's not like you were the partner who put him in the Asian group.

[lavarman84]

I don't get it. Anon says "hey now that I think about this stuff, maybe racism could explain x." Then lawman insists one can't "jump" at claiming racism right away. But why can you jump at claiming it's probably not racism right away?

As a 1L we had panels of legal professionals come talk to us about what they did. One time we had a panel of judges. Some student asked about diversity in the judiciary. One judge (of three) said he had hired an African American clerk some years back. He didn't work out too well, and he "made sure never to make the mistake of hiring an African American clerk again." Everyone was so in shock the moderator just moved on to another question. The thing is that the judge didn't even realize what had just happened. To him, the exchange was normal. To maybe almost everyone in the room, it was outrageous.

My point is that racism isn't always the "I hate x group of people!" But also prejudicial thinking of the kind shown by the judge and anon's partners. When anon's partners (possibly) thought "hey we should have our Asian associate in Asian matters", this is a problem for associate because his developmental opportunities could be impacted. And you may say it's for the good of the firm. Maybe. But if anon was born here and has never visited Vietnam or doesn't speak Vietnamese, I fail to see how his placement in a deal with Vietnamese clients could be useful.

You, lawman, also got hunged up on the big deals. That is important because in the legal profession, racism often tends to put minorities in the less prestigious positions. So not ever getting a big deal while everyone else is can in fact be problematic when this is happening just because of your race. If it helps, think about it from a sex perspective. If in a law firm all the guys are in the big deals but only the woman is in the small deals, this could be happening because of he misapprehension that her little lady brain couldn't handle the bigger deals. And if that's the case for her, this might reduce her developmental growth for career advancement.

So yeah bro, it's something to think about. You also don't gotta get so mad about it. It's not like you were the partner who put him in the Asian group.

Or maybe I am? Now, my jimmies are very rustled. Anon is about to get a large assignment that is due in 6 hours for his complaints. Hopefully, I have the right Asian American associate that I relegated to the Asian group.

These are fair points. Maybe I'm projecting on that Anon some of the silliness I often see in this forum that follows obsession with prestige.

Regardless, I have a low opinion of biglaw. So I'll rescind my complaints. I'm cool with painting it as racist.

[Anonymous User]

This isn't surprising. I'm mixed Asian and white with an Asian last name. As a first year, this old white rainmaker partner was introduced to me...first thing he asked me was "where are you from?". He didn't ask any of the white first years this question. He also had a reputation for only working with white males. Being Asian hurts more than it helps in law.

I just hope with China's growing influence and the influx of Chinese money, maybe these old white bitches will start respecting Asians more.

[dabigchina]

Counterpoint: as an Asian American who was born overseas who is now a 1L at a T20 and ended up in the top 1/3 of the class, I ended up scooping up quite a few diversity screeners & callbacks as well as a fair number of normal spring OCI interviews (including a vault ranked offer that I've accepted).

Take a look at how many Asian partners are at your firm. Compare with how many Asian associates there are at the firm. Get back to us with your thoughts.

[Anonymous User]

This isn't surprising. I'm mixed Asian and white with an Asian last name. As a first year, this old white rainmaker partner was introduced to me...first thing he asked me was "where are you from?". He didn't ask any of the white first years this question. He also had a reputation for only working with white males. Being Asian hurts more than it helps in law.

I just hope with China's growing influence and the influx of Chinese money, maybe these old white bitches will start respecting Asians more.

"Controversial anon" here. Thank you. I hate being all fixated on race but while we're on TLS and I'm airing this openly as an anon, THESE are the types of "micro aggressions" I've/we've had to deal with in law firms. Being asked where I'm from. Being asked once at an interview whether I'll need visa sponsorship when I mentioned having lived abroad as a kid. Dealing with a boss who makes inappropriate jokes about Asians and their bad English, all the while thinking to myself how he's pretty much making fun of my entire family (but he's a rainmaker so I can't complain to anyone). This partner is also MUCH more responsive to European clients and ignores the Asian clients' emails (and opts to have me deal with them instead).

Fun times.

[Anonymous User]

Comforting thoughts:
A lot of these old white racist partners will be dead within 15 years.
China has all the power and money now, so these old boomers will have to start kissing some Asian ass in some capacity.

[dabigchina]

I wouldn't characterize this as "micro aggressions." I don't give a fuck about "micro aggressions" or whatever. Old white babyboomers can offend me all day long if they don't fuck with my career.

The problem is of course they do fuck with my career. Just take a look at how many asian associates there are vs asian partners. It's like they are trying to build a railroad.

[Anonymous User]

This isn't surprising. I'm mixed Asian and white with an Asian last name. As a first year, this old white rainmaker partner was introduced to me...first thing he asked me was "where are you from?". He didn't ask any of the white first years this question. He also had a reputation for only working with white males. Being Asian hurts more than it helps in law.

I just hope with China's growing influence and the influx of Chinese money, maybe these old white bitches will start respecting Asians more.

"Controversial anon" here. Thank you. I hate being all fixated on race but while we're on TLS and I'm airing this openly as an anon, THESE are the types of "micro aggressions" I've/we've had to deal with in law firms. Being asked where I'm from. Being asked once at an interview whether I'll need visa sponsorship when I mentioned having lived abroad as a kid. Dealing with a boss who makes inappropriate jokes about Asians and their bad English, all the while thinking to myself how he's pretty much making fun of my entire family (but he's a rainmaker so I can't complain to anyone). This partner is also MUCH more responsive to European clients and ignores the Asian clients' emails (and opts to have me deal with them instead).

Fun times.

This partner was such a douchebag. My friend told me that apparently he went to a black associates event and said "This is weird. Now I know what it's like being a minority". He also asked a female associate to bring him water at an event. He's a rainmaker though so he can get away with whatever. He solely worked with white males.

The fact is generally only white males get promoted to partnership, which is comprised mainly of white men. Women and minorities are screwed. Not that they could pay me enough to be partner, but some non whites or women might want to be....

[dabigchina]

Exactly. The firm might believe its putting OP in a position to succeed, while OP cries racism and laments not getting what he wants.

lol just lol

[Genius]

To be fair, though, none of the things you mentioned are mutually exclusive to racial bias by the firm concerning staffing. For example, they can think they're putting him/her in the best position to suceed for reasons tied to stereotypes. I ed at the "bit horrified" part, but I don't think it's completely unreasonable to wonder about such a trend.

I can't foreclose racism being the reason why. I just think it's convenient to blame racism for not getting what you want. There are a lot of people in biglaw who don't get what they want.

I mean, sure, but it's not whiny or petulant to think that a very possible explanation is more likely than some other very possible explanation. You make it sound like literally the only reason to assume racism is entitlement, as if there aren't studies and statistics out there that would support the theory that racism could be involved.

I think it's very possible that the poster suffered from client bias and not firm bias, but it should not be considered ridiculous to think the firm could also have made assumptions about what the poster could do/who the client would want to work with, too.

I think it is whiny and petulant to complain about not being given the opportunities you (the OP) wanted and immediately jump to racism as the reason why. Plus, that same poster posted later about the firm trying to harm his (or her) career.

I'm sure that poster isn't the only person in biglaw who feels they're capable of working on bigger matters or isn't content with the matters they're working on. It just struck me as a person looking to justify his lack of satisfaction with his current role in the firm by blaming racism.

Could racism or subconscious bias be the reason why? Sure. But I think it's just also convenient for that poster to blame racism for not getting what he wants.

holy shit fucker. project much????

[pml87]

I'm that anon.

Aside from being put on tons of smaller Asian clients (which collectively took up a lot of my time), I also noticed at that first firm I was at the dire lack of Asians (or any minorities, period) around me. In fact I was the only minority in my group of over a dozen attorneys. I wasn't at that firm for too long because another opportunity came up, and I took it immediately.

My current firm is indeed more diverse. However, while I'm on our biggest client (which is a very well known American Fortune 100 company - so lawman rest assured my work product is NOT the issue), I'm also on all our Asian clients (again!), and I've had random Asian attorneys brought to my office just so I can say hello to them in Chinese (at a partner's behest).

At the expense of sounding like a "make lemonade out of lemon" cliche, I'd look for way to capitalize on this. Ofc this institutional racism sucks and you might not even identify with the asian community. But what matters is that society chooses to identify you as asian. And we could complain about our situation or we could make it work for us somehow. Embrace your ethnicity. Try to see if you could build lasting relationship with the Asian clients, whose economic success might one day bring you businesses. I have had a surprising amount of trust (that I absolutely do not earn) from clients of my ethnicity simply because I speak that language and know the "dos-and-donts" of my ethnic culture. The other attorneys where I worked are just elated that they don't have to navigate the cultural landmine. I basically have unchecked communication with the clients. Ofc the cons of this approach is that some AA deeply want to assimilate into American culture and would run away from anything that smells Asian.

[Anonymous User]

Counterpoint: as an Asian American who was born overseas who is now a 1L at a T20 and ended up in the top 1/3 of the class, I ended up scooping up quite a few diversity screeners & callbacks as well as a fair number of normal spring OCI interviews (including a vault ranked offer that I've accepted).

Take a look at how many Asian partners are at your firm. Compare with how many Asian associates there are at the firm. Get back to us with your thoughts.

What is wrong with you?

I provided an example to show the aspiring asian american attorneys that it's not all doom and gloom in terms of the hiring process. There are definitely things that we can do, just as there are things that still need to be done in the community, but that doesn't call for simple dismissal of the positive change that is going on. Yeah, leadership still needs to change. Yeah, a lot of the culture needs to change. But at least people nowadays do recognize that there is an issue and people are trying to make a difference so who the fuck are you to just shovel dirt on any form of positivity/efforts available? Rome wasn't built in a day.


Furthermore, the sense of entitlement echoed in some of these anon posters doesn't help the cause either.

Comforting thoughts:
A lot of these old white racist partners will be dead within 15 years.
China has all the power and money now, so these old boomers will have to start kissing some Asian ass in some capacity.

Are you kidding me? This kind of bitterness does nothing but fuel your own self righteousness. Holding the old boomers in contempt helps no one at all, except your own ego. Even if it might be difficult, responding with positivity and confidence/conviction does far more than any kind of whining does.

[brinicolec]

This is one of those "and water is wet" things for me, but based on the discussion that has been sparked ITT, I guess some people DON'T realize that this still happens

[brinicolec]

Counterpoint: as an Asian American who was born overseas who is now a 1L at a T20 and ended up in the top 1/3 of the class, I ended up scooping up quite a few diversity screeners & callbacks as well as a fair number of normal spring OCI interviews (including a vault ranked offer that I've accepted).

Take a look at how many Asian partners are at your firm. Compare with how many Asian associates there are at the firm. Get back to us with your thoughts.

What is wrong with you?

I provided an example to show the aspiring asian american attorneys that it's not all doom and gloom in terms of the hiring process. There are definitely things that we can do, just as there are things that still need to be done in the community, but that doesn't call for simple dismissal of the positive change that is going on. Yeah, leadership still needs to change. Yeah, a lot of the culture needs to change. But at least people nowadays do recognize that there is an issue and people are trying to make a difference so who the fuck are you to just shovel dirt on any form of positivity/efforts available? Rome wasn't built in a day.


Furthermore, the sense of entitlement echoed in some of these anon posters doesn't help the cause either.

Comforting thoughts:
A lot of these old white racist partners will be dead within 15 years.
China has all the power and money now, so these old boomers will have to start kissing some Asian ass in some capacity.

Are you kidding me? This kind of bitterness does nothing but fuel your own self righteousness. Holding the old boomers in contempt helps no one at all, except your own ego. Even if it might be difficult, responding with positivity and confidence/conviction does far more than any kind of whining does.

Sounds like you're saying minorities have a duty to coddle racism/microaggressions --- we don't.

[Anonymous User]

Counterpoint: as an Asian American who was born overseas who is now a 1L at a T20 and ended up in the top 1/3 of the class, I ended up scooping up quite a few diversity screeners & callbacks as well as a fair number of normal spring OCI interviews (including a vault ranked offer that I've accepted).

Take a look at how many Asian partners are at your firm. Compare with how many Asian associates there are at the firm. Get back to us with your thoughts.

What is wrong with you?

I provided an example to show the aspiring asian american attorneys that it's not all doom and gloom in terms of the hiring process. There are definitely things that we can do, just as there are things that still need to be done in the community, but that doesn't call for simple dismissal of the positive change that is going on. Yeah, leadership still needs to change. Yeah, a lot of the culture needs to change. But at least people nowadays do recognize that there is an issue and people are trying to make a difference so who the fuck are you to just shovel dirt on any form of positivity/efforts available? Rome wasn't built in a day.


Furthermore, the sense of entitlement echoed in some of these anon posters doesn't help the cause either.

Comforting thoughts:
A lot of these old white racist partners will be dead within 15 years.
China has all the power and money now, so these old boomers will have to start kissing some Asian ass in some capacity.

Are you kidding me? This kind of bitterness does nothing but fuel your own self righteousness. Holding the old boomers in contempt helps no one at all, except your own ego. Even if it might be difficult, responding with positivity and confidence/conviction does far more than any kind of whining does.

Sounds like you're saying minorities have a duty to coddle racism/microaggressions --- we don't.

No, I'm not. I'm saying that there are things we can do to make the situation better for ourselves and that whining without effort ultimately doesn't help us if the end goal is positive change.

[Npret]

I wouldn't characterize this as "micro aggressions." I don't give a fuck about "micro aggressions" or whatever. Old white babyboomers can offend me all day long if they don't fuck with my career.

The problem is of course they do fuck with my career. Just take a look at how many asian associates there are vs asian partners. It's like they are trying to build a railroad.

You realize almost no one makes partner? Where are your numbers of Asian associates passed over for partner compared to other groups? Making partner is unlikely for everyone.
I'm not disagreeing with the main point about names as discussed in the article but I don't think a random comment about the partner: associate ratio is strong evidence.

[encore1101]

I wouldn't characterize this as "micro aggressions." I don't give a fuck about "micro aggressions" or whatever. Old white babyboomers can offend me all day long if they don't fuck with my career.

The problem is of course they do fuck with my career. Just take a look at how many asian associates there are vs asian partners. It's like they are trying to build a railroad.

You realize almost no one makes partner? Where are your numbers of Asian associates passed over for partner compared to other groups? Making partner is unlikely for everyone.
I'm not disagreeing with the main point about names as discussed in the article but I don't think a random comment about the partner: associate ratio is strong evidence.

dont get me wrong, im not saying this is racism, just offering the evidence you sought

asians comprised 22% of associates but only 7% of partners: http://www.nalp.org/0214research#table1


the drop off could definitely be attributable to other factors, but it could also be attributed to, in some cases, to racism.

im a big proponent of meritocracy. i dont think i should be given a job or position to be the token asian guy, and i think thats the attitude of most people ITT (they want to be evaluated on merits). but just as our last name shouldnt help us, it shouldnt hurt us either.