Categories:UK

FTSE 100 clients demand diversity

  • Print
  • Comments (8)

Readers' comments (8)

  • Diversity

    When I started reading this article, I was a straight Catholic male. By the time I had finished it, I decided it was time to start holding myself as a Buddhist who is questioning his sexuality. Nobody can prove otherwise.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Warm and Fluffy?

    What has credit crunch got to do with diversity? Accepting and, more importantly, promoting talented people from diverse backgrounds in the profession should require no special funds, equality committees, propaganda and so on.

    Quite apart from the principles of fairness and non-discrimination, law firms need to reflect the larger world if they wish to compete internationally and this needs to be at all levels, not merely at the recruitment of trainees.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Positive discrimination is still discrimination

    In the same way that anyone who is BME and/or female and/or gay had no choice in the matter, I have no choice about being white, male and straight.

    Also, though I am nominally 'middle class' (my parents owned a semi-detached house, and inherited a little money from their own parents), in no sense did I choose that either.

    Equally, nor did being middle class give me any headstart over non-middle class people - I was raised by a couple who valued my (state) education and provided family routine and a stable home life, but these are things that don't cost parents money, just time.

    As such, it is galling to discover that some firms or employers will choose to pick others over me based on reasons other than talent and experience.

    I worked hard to qualify as a lawyer and have worked hard in my jobs since, and while I don't deserve success any more than anyone who is not white, male, middle class or heterosexual, I don't deserve it any less.

    Employers should be encouraged to employ anyone who is up to the job regardless of the candidate's background or sexuality, but positive discrimination is not the right way to push that change.

    But then which fool who is going to stick their neck out to fight discrimination against the straight white male? That's the modern equivalent of sticking up for communists in 1950s America: total career suicide.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Diversity

    I am tired of the same old coded 'this is an attack against the white male' response whenever diversity, particularly cultural (or simply, race!) diversity rears its head.

    The fact is, the UK in terms of BME representation is generally woefully under represented across most of the professional groups. The pleasing fact that FTSE companies and the legal profession are increasingly recognising the commercial and societal benenfits of diversity is to be lauded and not lampooned. Change will take time and in the UK, under the existing legal framework (i.e. non-positive discrimination), be incremental. That may not be a bad thing. Equal treatment is a nice statement - but for many organisations proving it actually happens and having the wherewithall to achieve it, is another thing!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Diversity

    Diversity policy is not implemented in order to encourage any individual of any given denomination into the legal profession.

    It is designed to highlight the effective deployment of Equal Opportunities policies within an organization. This distinction between the two is frequently glossed over and the two are often treated as synonymous; this in turn highlights the real problem with Diversity policy. Its only job is to demand moral transparency of law firms in order to ensure that the 'right people' get employed. This demeans equality far more than it promotes it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Diversity

    I am fed up with all of this bleeding-heart liberal nonsense. In the past, law firms recruited the best lawyers they could. If "minorities" were good enough, they would make it. If they weren't, tough. Stop making excuses for them and stop looking to give them an easy ride all the time. They don't appreciate it and neither do the rest of us. Grow up and join the real world.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Easy ride?

    If law firms always did and do recruit the best for the job, why so much worrying about someone checking on them?

    You have not lived in the real world and are obviously not "tough enough" to face "real competition" if you lose the majority comfort factor you have lived through.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Diversity

    The facts are that the initial recruitment process for trainees is not fair. Not all potential entrants / applications are assessed equally. This means there are fewer experienced minority candidates. Everyone would be happy if the best person for the job got it but this doesn't always happen. Just look at the figures that are made available by firms - unbelievable!! We are constantly reminded that Asian children are at the top of the further education ladder but for some reason this does not translate into partnership in city firms, once these children have been in the profession for a number of years. Why?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (8)