Is there discrimination against Asians in biglaw Forum

[Anonymous User]

And in my experience, discrimination was even more apparent in in house hiring. As opposed to big law recruiting, in house openings usually only want one person who will directly work with the hiring manager all the time. For my first in house job, despite my credentials (T14, good grades, V5 senior, relevant experience), I only got two offers out of ~30 applications, and both of them are from diverse hiring managers. The applications that resulted in interviews with hiring managers (regardless of whether I ultimately got an offer) were all with diverse hiring managers. Yes, that's right, I did not have a single interview with a straight white man hiring manager.

Interesting. I'm Asian and the majority of the decision-makers for in-house roles I've interviewed with were white men. I've had a fair amount of success with in-house interviews (e.g., offers or been one of the finalists) regardless of the identity of the hiring manager.

I'm not trying to downplay your experience. But perhaps it's more nuanced - maybe it also depends on your geography and practice area. Mine is IP in the New England and Mid-Atlantic regions.

Completely agree that it's more nuanced and practice area dependent. And no I don't think at all that you're downplaying my experience. You are sharing your perspective, and that is the whole point of this discussion (for folks to share different perspectives).

My practice area is one of the "corporate" areas (securities/M&A/commercial etc.) and I'm in New York. My observation is that IP and immigration are probably two practice areas where we have a better chance because people expect to see Asians in these two practice areas. Back in my law firm days people had mistaken me for the IP specialist on multiple occasions. And in my Global Entry interview, when I told the CBP officer I was a lawyer, he asked if I was an immigration lawyer.

[Anonymous User]

I personally agree with the above. As an Asian lawyer with quite a few years of experience, I think discrimination does exist. For me, it was less pronounced in big law recruiting -- every law firm had to hire multiple associates so there were more opportunities; many interviewers were diverse (because the recruiting team, at least at my V5, encouraged diverse lawyers to interview candidates); and interviewers knew that they did not necessarily have to work with you directly even if they hired you. But my observation is that in big law training/career development/mentorship, Asian lawyers are at a distinct disadvantage for the "fit" issues described in the above post, and as a result there's more attrition particularly in the mid-level/senior ranks.

And in my experience, discrimination was even more apparent in in house hiring. As opposed to big law recruiting, in house openings usually only want one person who will directly work with the hiring manager all the time. For my first in house job, despite my credentials (T14, good grades, V5 senior, relevant experience), I only got two offers out of ~30 applications, and both of them are from diverse hiring managers. The applications that resulted in interviews with hiring managers (regardless of whether I ultimately got an offer) were all with diverse hiring managers. Yes, that's right, I did not have a single interview with a straight white man hiring manager.

I started exploring other opportunities this year and, because I was not actively but just casually exploring what's out there, I only applied to ~10 places during the course of this year. While the sample size is much smaller this time, all my interviews were again with diverse hiring managers, despite my directly relevant in house experience at a prominent F500 company.

same for me, the stereotypes against asians (hardworking, competent, will keep head down and not make noise, lack of leadership skills) don't work against you trying to get in the door, they work against you when it comes to climbing up the ladder. That's why you see more asians as associates and fewer asians at the top

+1 right here. Unless you are a Morgan Chu or something, i rarely see asian lawyers as partners/top GCs (even in the Bay Area where there is a large asian american population).

[Anonymous User]

One of the other summers I worked with who is an amazing guy (speaks several languages fluently, did well enough on the LSAT to get into a decent T14) said that he got semi-screwed over during OCI in the States because his English pronunciation isn't 100% native. He said that some interviewers voiced their concerns of his ability to draft documents in English, etc. during his screening interviews. I know this is different than someone who was born and raised in the States, but I think that a lot of students from Asia who have a slight accent might face some discrimination that is difficult to distinguish from a legitimate concern of English ability.

this is really interesting, anybody else have similar experiences?

Definitely not true in my experience, at least in CA. I'm a first gen Asian immigrant. Granted I've been here since I was 13/14, but I still have a very light accent, which is MUCH more pronounced when I'm nervous, ie doing interviews, where I would also mumble a lot and make very stupid grammar mistakes. It was absolutely fine for me to get a shitload of callbacks and offers. Even though my sample size is pretty small, several of my international friends also did well in DC/NY, but they do have very good grades (top 20% at a t14). At least in my personal experience, basically a t14 median targeting CA, I did really really well, definitely better than your average white male t14 median candidate.

[Anonymous User]

And in my experience, discrimination was even more apparent in in house hiring. As opposed to big law recruiting, in house openings usually only want one person who will directly work with the hiring manager all the time. For my first in house job, despite my credentials (T14, good grades, V5 senior, relevant experience), I only got two offers out of ~30 applications, and both of them are from diverse hiring managers. The applications that resulted in interviews with hiring managers (regardless of whether I ultimately got an offer) were all with diverse hiring managers. Yes, that's right, I did not have a single interview with a straight white man hiring manager.

Interesting. I'm Asian and the majority of the decision-makers for in-house roles I've interviewed with were white men. I've had a fair amount of success with in-house interviews (e.g., offers or been one of the finalists) regardless of the identity of the hiring manager.

I'm not trying to downplay your experience. But perhaps it's more nuanced - maybe it also depends on your geography and practice area. Mine is IP in the New England and Mid-Atlantic regions.

Completely agree that it's more nuanced and practice area dependent. And no I don't think at all that you're downplaying my experience. You are sharing your perspective, and that is the whole point of this discussion (for folks to share different perspectives).

My practice area is one of the "corporate" areas (securities/M&A/commercial etc.) and I'm in New York. My observation is that IP and immigration are probably two practice areas where we have a better chance because people expect to see Asians in these two practice areas. Back in my law firm days people had mistaken me for the IP specialist on multiple occasions. And in my Global Entry interview, when I told the CBP officer I was a lawyer, he asked if I was an immigration lawyer.

With your experiences in mind, what practice group would you recommend to someone who's Asian and interested in eventually going in-house?

Something that leads to broader exit options like M&A or Capital Markets? Or something a little more niche like Fund Formation?

[Anonymous User]

And in my experience, discrimination was even more apparent in in house hiring. As opposed to big law recruiting, in house openings usually only want one person who will directly work with the hiring manager all the time. For my first in house job, despite my credentials (T14, good grades, V5 senior, relevant experience), I only got two offers out of ~30 applications, and both of them are from diverse hiring managers. The applications that resulted in interviews with hiring managers (regardless of whether I ultimately got an offer) were all with diverse hiring managers. Yes, that's right, I did not have a single interview with a straight white man hiring manager.

Interesting. I'm Asian and the majority of the decision-makers for in-house roles I've interviewed with were white men. I've had a fair amount of success with in-house interviews (e.g., offers or been one of the finalists) regardless of the identity of the hiring manager.

I'm not trying to downplay your experience. But perhaps it's more nuanced - maybe it also depends on your geography and practice area. Mine is IP in the New England and Mid-Atlantic regions.

Completely agree that it's more nuanced and practice area dependent. And no I don't think at all that you're downplaying my experience. You are sharing your perspective, and that is the whole point of this discussion (for folks to share different perspectives).

My practice area is one of the "corporate" areas (securities/M&A/commercial etc.) and I'm in New York. My observation is that IP and immigration are probably two practice areas where we have a better chance because people expect to see Asians in these two practice areas. Back in my law firm days people had mistaken me for the IP specialist on multiple occasions. And in my Global Entry interview, when I told the CBP officer I was a lawyer, he asked if I was an immigration lawyer.

With your experiences in mind, what practice group would you recommend to someone who's Asian and interested in eventually going in-house?

Something that leads to broader exit options like M&A or Capital Markets? Or something a little more niche like Fund Formation?

I would be very hesitant to recommend a practice area based on race alone. It is true that in my experience something like IP is probably more "Asian-friendly" for lack of a better term, but there are a lot of other things you should consider before race when choosing a practice area. What are the strengths of each practice area at your firm? What are your interests? Are there partners who are willing to mentor you in the practice area? What are your own strengths and weaknesses? Are you more technical (tax, IP, ERISA) or are you better at coordination/project management (M&A/capital markets)? I think these are more important than race when you make a decision like this.

[TheGreatestGunner]

Well, here are some candid thoughts.

Generally, a lower proportion of Asian men go to law school than into other fields. Some of this relates to the value first/second-generation immigrants from Asian countries place on STEM education, how peer groups similarly value STEM degrees over humanities, and how Big Tech, Fin Tech, and Med all offer a better effort/reward ratio. Asians make up 22% of Med school students despite being only 5.4% of the population. They are over-represented in nearly every advanced degree/education program in the United States. Law is not an exception, it is just less drastic there.

Twice as many Asian women take the LSAT compared to men and the legal field in general is much more attractive to Asian women then men, for what I would call gendered reasons. Asian countries are not exactly known for championing gender equality. Because that is not a value. China, Japan, Korea, Thailand, India, Cambodia, Laos, India, and Malaysia -- these cultures do not have any pretenses and it is made very clear from an early age that women are/should be subordinate to men. Enter the US Legal system, where women's rights are "a thing". Legal philosophy also relates to western literature and corresponding ideas of female empowerment, agency, and equality.

Ultimately, the point I am trying to make is that it is not discrimination against Asians which defines their representation, but discrimination by Asians. This should make even more sense when it is understood that Asians have the highest rate of perfect standardized test scores of tracked demographics. If we accept psychometrics as valid it means that a larger relative proportion are excellent at both sciences and arts, and can choose their own path. A smaller proportion are choosing law school. Those that do are mostly women.

So, there is less representation, but this is self-selection. Any serious look at inequity reveals a pretty obvious fact-- Asians are over represented in all areas of higher education. They are under represented in the criminal justice system. There are inequities here and they heavily favor the Asian population of the United States of America.

BigLaw does not have an anti-Asian bias.

[nixy]

What a load of stereotyping bollocks. What proportion of Asian Americans choose to go into law is a completely different issue from whether those Asian Americans who do experience bias in biglaw.

[Anonymous User]

Biglaw probably doesn’t have an anti Asian bias, but the privileges that other groups like blacks get aren’t there for Asians, “white” leadership doesn’t feel guilted into helping Asians like they do with blacks, hence the term “bipoc” (intentionally subordinating the interests of Asians to those of blacks )

[nixy]

Lol. You think that blacks are somehow “privileged” because white leadership feels “guilted” into helping them? When there are even fewer Black partners than Asian American partners despite Blacks making up a much larger proportion of the population?

Some brave anons we have here.

[jhett]

BigLaw does not have an anti-Asian bias.

You realize that your entire argument focuses on Asians before they get to law school, right? So even if your points are valid, it does not support the conclusion.

[Lacepiece23]

Biglaw probably doesn’t have an anti Asian bias, but the privileges that other groups like blacks get aren’t there for Asians, “white” leadership doesn’t feel guilted into helping Asians like they do with blacks, hence the term “bipoc” (intentionally subordinating the interests of Asians to those of blacks )

We have the privilege of white partners using our faces on pitches to appease in house counsel and then not giving us work. Or having white partners scrutinize our work because they go in thinking that we are not up to snuff. Or being excluded from certain social events. Or not being gifted a book of business so that we can make partner.

Yup, all those things that happened to me were fantastic privileges. But great, the firm posted a statement about how they feel bad about George Floyd. That really changed my life in biglaw.

[cisscum]

Lol. You think that blacks are somehow “privileged” because white leadership feels “guilted” into helping them? When there are even fewer Black partners than Asian American partners despite Blacks making up a much larger proportion of the population?

Some brave anons we have here.

Now let's compare average LSAT scores between Asians and blacks especially at top law schools

[Anonymous User]

Lol. You think that blacks are somehow “privileged” because white leadership feels “guilted” into helping them? When there are even fewer Black partners than Asian American partners despite Blacks making up a much larger proportion of the population?

Some brave anons we have here.

Now let's compare average LSAT scores between Asians and blacks especially at top law schools

How nice. This thread has brought out the storm troopers and the institutionalized Fundamental Attribution Error patients together for one lovely debate.

Personally, any identity-based prejudiceis insane to me - in corp biglaw, only thing that matters is if you can do good work on a good timeline.

But of course bias and prejudice exist in biglaw - it is full of humans after all, many of whom are bad.

But also, biglaw is such a chit show and so brutal that of course there are going to be ppl who attribute such brutality to bias/prejudice, instead of the truth that biglaw is just fukked.

[Anonymous User]

We have the privilege of white partners using our faces on pitches to appease in house counsel and then not giving us work.

At least as in-house counsel, I watch and I notice if the people I see on the pitch are not involved in the actual work. Because fuck that noise if they are shoving a minority in my face to get my business without following up on it.

[nixy]

Lol. You think that blacks are somehow “privileged” because white leadership feels “guilted” into helping them? When there are even fewer Black partners than Asian American partners despite Blacks making up a much larger proportion of the population?

Some brave anons we have here.

Now let's compare average LSAT scores between Asians and blacks especially at top law schools

I get that you probably have a vested interest in believing that higher LSAT scores correlate directly with ability to make biglaw partner, but I don’t think there’s any proof of this.

[LBJ's Hair]

think this thread is supposed to be more about discussing the Asian BigLaw experience, less about debating whether it's better than the black BigLaw experience

[Anonymous User]

Yes, there is discrimination against Asians in big law. Yes, there is.

At a first glance, top firms may appear to have a good numbers of Asian partners, but most of them work in Asian offices. If you look at the number of Asian partners actually working in the firms’ US offices, Asians are significantly underrepresented comparing to the percentages of Asian JDs graduated from top law school. I happen to have hls’ admission material from 2007, and class of 2007 had about 9% Asians. Junior partners working in big law US offices are nowhere close to 9% Asians.

Even some supporting staffs discriminate against Asians, not to mention the partners…

[cavalier1138]

This is veering into iffy territory.

Keeping this open for now, but two things:

1. This thread is about Asian attorneys' experiences with discrimination in biglaw. Please keep it on-topic, or we'll have to lock it.

2. The anon feature is not for your spicy-hot takes on model minorities and/or affirmative action.

[Lacepiece23]

I'm not sure how this thread has gone on for this long. It's painfully simple. If you're a minority in biglaw there will be bias/prejudice against you. How much you experience is basically luck.

[notinbiglaw]

Old thread

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=300270

[Anonymous User]

I'm not sure how this thread has gone on for this long. It's painfully simple. If you're a minority in biglaw there will be bias/prejudice against you. How much you experience is basically luck.

I made a similar point above, but again, is this more of a thing in lit or other specialty practices? Because as mentioned, in corp I genuinely would not even think to care about a person's gender/race/other identity. As long as someone is nice, does good work, and has a good attitude, then I care literally about nothing else. I feel like my peers share the same sentiment. Everyone is so underwater in corp right now I don't even know how anyone has time to be a pos racist.

[nixy]

I'm not sure how this thread has gone on for this long. It's painfully simple. If you're a minority in biglaw there will be bias/prejudice against you. How much you experience is basically luck.

I made a similar point above, but again, is this more of a thing in lit or other specialty practices? Because as mentioned, in corp I genuinely would not even think to care about a person's gender/race/other identity. As long as someone is nice, does good work, and has a good attitude, then I care literally about nothing else. I feel like my peers share the same sentiment. Everyone is so underwater in corp right now I don't even know how anyone has time to be a pos racist.

That’s totally fair, but it’s not like bias doesn’t affect assessments of whether someone is nice, does good work, or has a good attitude.

[Pomeranian]

Asian-Americans absolutely face discrimination in the legal profession, and American society in general. While there's probably not brazen anti-Asian discrimination in the profession, you have the "perpetual foreigner" stereotype which casts Asian Americans as "other" in ways that have led to insidious racial microaggressions and harmed Asian-Americans.

[Lacepiece23]

I'm not sure how this thread has gone on for this long. It's painfully simple. If you're a minority in biglaw there will be bias/prejudice against you. How much you experience is basically luck.

I made a similar point above, but again, is this more of a thing in lit or other specialty practices? Because as mentioned, in corp I genuinely would not even think to care about a person's gender/race/other identity. As long as someone is nice, does good work, and has a good attitude, then I care literally about nothing else. I feel like my peers share the same sentiment. Everyone is so underwater in corp right now I don't even know how anyone has time to be a pos racist.

Maybe their day-to-day being a worker bee associate isn’t all that different in corporate or other practice groups. But I can promise you that when it comes to client facing opportunities/catching a windfall with a book of business, they suffer greatly. Partnership numbers bear that out.

Remember, the stereotype isn’t that they aren’t smart, it’s that they aren’t social or have the other intangibles.

[Anonymous User]

Definitely a huge barrier to entry. If you're an Asian male, you basically get reverse affirmative action'ed, so unless you have near-perfect to perfect grades from a T14 with prestigious background/experiences, forget biglaw. And if you've been following current events, you'll see that Americans in general have this.... distaste/general dislike for Asian males. Add on all the negative stereotypes, and basically, the cards are HEAVILY stacked against you (which is why you need near-perfect to perfect grades from an elite school to offset all the prejudged negativity and have at least a shot).

Asian males are like Jews back in the day. The barrier to entry is so high that it's probably better for them to start their own firms and such doing specializations that other firms don't - like the Jews did back in the early 20th century. But they don't have what the Jews did to raise their standing in the American industries they were discriminated against in: in-group favoritism/affinity networking. Asian-Americans in general do not seem too keen on helping each other out.