Covington Fires Back at Former Staff Attorney Alleging Discrimination
In a rare case of a big law firm taking an aggressive stand against allegations of discrimination, Covington & Burling responded to Yolanda Young’s EEOC complaint (one of the allegations was that Covington maintained a staff attorney pool as a ghetto for minority attorneys) by noting specifically why she did not meet the standards of a Covington Associate:
Her average grade was only slightly better than a “C,” well below the threshold level for a Covington associate. She did not pass the bar until 1998, three years after her law school graduation. When she applied to Covington for a staff attorney position, her work experience as a lawyer consisted of a series of short-term jobs with temporary staffing agencies reviewing documents as a contract attorney. She has never worked at any firm as an associate and never engaged in the regular practice of law – i.e., she has not represented clients with respect to their legal matters.
Ms. Young responded, “Covington can say what they like now, but they hired me”. She discusses her thoughts further on her blog, On Being A Black Lawyer.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:01 am
From the blog….
http://www.onbeingablacklawyer.com/?p=1306
“Covington admits that derogatory language was used in the office and that staff attorneys are not provided the same benefits and training as other attorneys at the firm and are not included in many firm meetings and events.”
—-
Aside from the derogatory language part, isn’t all of that standard treatment for staff attorneys? Since when do staff attorneys get the same benefits, training and invitations as associates?
So is the moral of the story for firms to not hire minority staff attorneys? Because if firms treat their staff attorneys worse than associates, the treatment will be attributed to racial discrimination?