URM and Big Law Forum

[Doritos]

Does being a URM help significantly when trying to get BigLaw jobs? I know being a URM helps a TON in admissions to LS and I'm wondering if there is a comparable boost in recruiting for big law. I have heard of a decently high % of Howard students getting big law which would suggest there is a big boost. What do you guys think?

I ask because as an AA male I am trying to gauge my chances at big law at different schools and use that as one criteria in selecting which school to attend. Thanks again for your insights guys I don't know what I'd do w/o TLS.

edit: feel free to post your thoughts here, but I did find this topic discussed on a different thread, halfway down(ish) http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2&start=75

[Keile]

Top 10-25% @ most schools, no?
G

[MC Southstar]

Unless there is some equal opportunity law that forces them to have a quota, I doubt they will give you a bump just for kicks. It's a business first and foremost. They might choose you over a white candidate with the exact same stats, but otherwise, one hopes they judge people OBJECTIVELY.

[Kohinoor]

Does being a URM help significantly when trying to get BigLaw jobs? I know being a URM helps a TON in admissions to LS and I'm wondering if there is a comparable boost in recruiting for big law. I have heard of a decently high % of Howard students getting big law which would suggest there is a big boost. What do you guys think?

I ask because as an AA male I am trying to gauge my chances at big law at different schools and use that as one criteria in selecting which school to attend. Thanks again for your insights guys I don't know what I'd do w/o TLS.

edit: feel free to post your thoughts here, but I did find this topic discussed on a different thread, halfway down(ish) http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2&start=75

Nobody knows. If you're genuinely curious, this has been discussed to death in several other threads.

[underdawg]

Unless there is some equal opportunity law that forces them to have a quota, I doubt they will give you a bump just for kicks. It's a business first and foremost. They might choose you over a white candidate with the exact same stats, but otherwise, one hopes they judge people OBJECTIVELY.

ok whitey

why do firms do pro bono if they are for profit

same answer for why they care about diversity

???

profit

[ToTransferOrNot]

Unless there is some equal opportunity law that forces them to have a quota, I doubt they will give you a bump just for kicks. It's a business first and foremost. They might choose you over a white candidate with the exact same stats, but otherwise, one hopes they judge people OBJECTIVELY.

ok whitey

why do firms do pro bono if they are for profit

same answer for why they care about diversity

???

profit

Er, most firms view pro bono as a training opportunity, too. Some firms are forthright about that, some aren't, but if you think firms would dump the money and time in to pro bono that they do just for the social capital it develops...

That said, yes, firms care about diversity. Look at all of the diversity clerkship programs--pretty much the only 1L SA slots available this year.

[Anonymous Loser]

ok whitey

why do firms do pro bono if they are for profit

same answer for why they care about diversity

???

profit

Rule 6.1? The Model Rules of Professional conduct mandate pro bono work, but are silent on diversity.

[nealric]

Unless there is some equal opportunity law that forces them to have a quota, I doubt they will give you a bump just for kicks. It's a business first and foremost. They might choose you over a white candidate with the exact same stats

There are actually certain corporate clients that require a certain percentage of minority staffing on their projects. This is a BIG reason for a lot of biglaw diversity efforts.

[MC Southstar]

Unless there is some equal opportunity law that forces them to have a quota, I doubt they will give you a bump just for kicks. It's a business first and foremost. They might choose you over a white candidate with the exact same stats, but otherwise, one hopes they judge people OBJECTIVELY.

ok whitey

why do firms do pro bono if they are for profit

same answer for why they care about diversity

???

profit

1. I'm not white
2. Ask yourself why any for-profit company might start a philanthropic initiative (for example, McDonald's donates money to house children who need medical treatment... while sending them to hospitals with their products and then serving them the same products in the hospital lobbies)

That's not the say people are universally evil, but sometimes people are just economically rational as opposed to morally. After all, morals are widely subjective, but money is money. Diversity can be important to a business, certainly, either because they need to better represent a demographic/industry or for the same reason a lot of corporations do PR acts of good will (because it is a form of advertising). However, in the end, you're hiring people to work for you, not stand around looking nice for pictures of your company profile. Like I said, I think there could be a minor advantage in being a minority just because of the diversity it offers or it could work against you if your hirer is racist. Either way, what's going to speak most isn't the color of your skin, it's what you're capable of.

There are actually certain corporate clients that require a certain percentage of minority staffing on their projects. This is a BIG reason for a lot of biglaw diversity efforts.

That's good to hear, really. It's better if the clients are forcing them to instead of regulation.

[underdawg]

lol yeah i meant the PR boost. you don't "???? PROFIT" from soul boners

same with diversity. also clients might care about diversity. and being highly ranked at both just tends to attract more candidates so you can be a little pickier, leading to more qualified candidates or whatever. in short, i believe there are many business reasons to suggest that firms do and will continue to hire URM's with lower GPAs than some other candidates. also, you can talk up pro bono all you want and claim things like "pro bono is viewed just as highly as billable" that aren't true. but URM numbers are hard data, and i'm not cynical enough to think firms fudge those

[awesomepossum]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/29/us/29 ... ack&st=cse


there's some good info on the topic here although this was written in '06.

Yet grades, according to many hiring partners and law students, are a significant criterion in hiring decisions, rivaled only by the prestige of the law school in question. For instance, Professor Sander found, “white law school graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.5 or higher are nearly 20 times as likely to be working for a large law firm as are white graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.0 or lower.”

The story for black students appears to be different. Black students, who make up 1 to 2 percent of students with high grades (meaning a grade point average in the top half of the class) make up 8 percent of corporate law firm hires, Professor Sander found. “Blacks are far more likely to be working at large firms than are other new lawyers with similar credentials,” he said.

[MC Southstar]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/29/us/29 ... ack&st=cse


there's some good info on the topic here although this was written in '06.

Yet grades, according to many hiring partners and law students, are a significant criterion in hiring decisions, rivaled only by the prestige of the law school in question. For instance, Professor Sander found, “white law school graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.5 or higher are nearly 20 times as likely to be working for a large law firm as are white graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.0 or lower.”

The story for black students appears to be different. Black students, who make up 1 to 2 percent of students with high grades (meaning a grade point average in the top half of the class) make up 8 percent of corporate law firm hires, Professor Sander found. “Blacks are far more likely to be working at large firms than are other new lawyers with similar credentials,” he said.

Guess you win

I bet I get reverse-racismed out.

[underdawg]

you are jewish or asian

[MC Southstar]

you are jewish or asian

What's the difference?

[underdawg]

iuno, i am just really bored

[Kohinoor]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/29/us/29 ... ack&st=cse


there's some good info on the topic here although this was written in '06.

Yet grades, according to many hiring partners and law students, are a significant criterion in hiring decisions, rivaled only by the prestige of the law school in question. For instance, Professor Sander found, “white law school graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.5 or higher are nearly 20 times as likely to be working for a large law firm as are white graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.0 or lower.”

The story for black students appears to be different. Black students, who make up 1 to 2 percent of students with high grades (meaning a grade point average in the top half of the class) make up 8 percent of corporate law firm hires, Professor Sander found. “Blacks are far more likely to be working at large firms than are other new lawyers with similar credentials,” he said.

I always get a chuckle out of that article.

[kurama20]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/29/us/29 ... ack&st=cse


there's some good info on the topic here although this was written in '06.

Yet grades, according to many hiring partners and law students, are a significant criterion in hiring decisions, rivaled only by the prestige of the law school in question. For instance, Professor Sander found, “white law school graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.5 or higher are nearly 20 times as likely to be working for a large law firm as are white graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.0 or lower.”

The story for black students appears to be different. Black students, who make up 1 to 2 percent of students with high grades (meaning a grade point average in the top half of the class) make up 8 percent of corporate law firm hires, Professor Sander found. “Blacks are far more likely to be working at large firms than are other new lawyers with similar credentials,” he said.

I always get a chuckle out of that article.

Yeah seriously. People on here treat that guy and his study as if he is the authority on URMs, their success/failures in law school/law/firms, and affirmative action. There are dozens more studies from other more authoritative and less biased persons than Sanders, that don't even remotely correlate to what he found in his research. Not to mention the fact that he mainly focuses on the black grads at lower tier law schools and mostly ignores the ones in the top 14 in his study. He also has a tunnel vision approach that defines URM success rates by their class rank, as opposed to how their legal careers actually turn out. Ah Good ole Sanders...

[awesomepossum]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/29/us/29 ... ack&st=cse


there's some good info on the topic here although this was written in '06.

Yet grades, according to many hiring partners and law students, are a significant criterion in hiring decisions, rivaled only by the prestige of the law school in question. For instance, Professor Sander found, “white law school graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.5 or higher are nearly 20 times as likely to be working for a large law firm as are white graduates with G.P.A.’s of 3.0 or lower.”

The story for black students appears to be different. Black students, who make up 1 to 2 percent of students with high grades (meaning a grade point average in the top half of the class) make up 8 percent of corporate law firm hires, Professor Sander found. “Blacks are far more likely to be working at large firms than are other new lawyers with similar credentials,” he said.

I always get a chuckle out of that article.

Yeah seriously. People on here treat that guy and his study as if he is the authority on URMs, their success/failures in law school/law/firms, and affirmative action. There are dozens more studies from other more authoritative and less biased persons than Sanders, that don't even remotely correlate to what he found in his research. Not to mention the fact that he mainly focuses on the black grads at lower tier law schools and mostly ignores the ones in the top 14 in his study. He also has a tunnel vision approach that defines URM success rates by their class rank, as opposed to how their legal careers actually turn out. Ah Good ole Sanders...

I like that study simply because I've read it...which happened only because it was easily available on nytimes.com

If you have better studies I would love to see them.




PS: for some reason what I wrote looked snarky but I'm not trying to be....I would like to see other studies if they're easily available and aren't a few hundred pages in length.

[the fresh prince]

Unless there is some equal opportunity law that forces them to have a quota, I doubt they will give you a bump just for kicks. It's a business first and foremost. They might choose you over a white candidate with the exact same stats, but otherwise, one hopes they judge people OBJECTIVELY.

ok whitey

why do firms do pro bono if they are for profit

same answer for why they care about diversity

???

profit

Er, most firms view pro bono as a training opportunity, too. Some firms are forthright about that, some aren't, but if you think firms would dump the money and time in to pro bono that they do just for the social capital it develops...

That said, yes, firms care about diversity. Look at all of the diversity clerkship programs--pretty much the only 1L SA slots available this year.

Can anyone help point me to these programs? I keep hearing about them but when I search nothing really comes up. I'd appreciate the help.

[ToTransferOrNot]

Generally you're going to get information about them through your school. Wisconsin has a state program, for example, but the students at Marquette and Madison are made aware of the application process via OCS.