{"id":3845,"date":"2005-05-16T13:27:32","date_gmt":"2005-05-16T17:27:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2005\/05\/16\/no-yoda-quota\/"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:57:43","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:57:43","slug":"no-yoda-quota","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2005\/05\/16\/no-yoda-quota\/","title":{"rendered":"no yoda quota?"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n


\n

Around here, The Client is King (or Queen).  So, you can imagine how thrilled <\/DIV>
\n
we were to learn that 60 major law firms and 65 bar associations have entered <\/DIV>
\n
into a pact, in response to a “client-driven” initiative, that allows clients to find <\/DIV>
\n
out just who is performing their legal services.   I didn’t know the details, but was <\/DIV>
\n
intrigued.<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

the bees with children
are work-a-holics…
making honey<\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

                              <\/EM>ISSA<\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A><\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
My first guess was that the practical staffing suggestions made by the ABA Task <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
Force on Lawyer Business Ethics in 1996 were being re-affirmed by the New York bar. 
They are contained in Principles in Billing for Legal Services<\/EM><\/A> (and relevant excerpts <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
can be found here<\/FONT><\/A>).  The advice relates to client concerns over “learning curve” issues
<\/FONT>(such as, using newbies who need training and more expertise) or expectations that a 
particular lawyer would be critically involved and continuity of representation maintained.  <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
The <\/FONT><\/SPAN>Statetment intones the obvious:  <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“The touchstones for determining such issues as staffing should <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
be cost-effectiveness and quality of legal service to the client.” <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
[ed. note: yawn]<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
My expectations were low, but I was sure surprised by what I found.  The signatories <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to the pact, led by the New York County Lawyers Association<\/A>, have gone much farther <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in their efforts to give inquisitive clients staffing information — they have agreed that  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
“law firms should not object to requests by their corporate clients [to] report the number <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of hours devoted to the clients’ matters by minority lawyers.”  (<\/FONT>Law.com<\/EM> coverage<\/FONT><\/A>, “Law
Firms Agree to Give Clients Diversity Data on Legal Teams,” May 13, 2005, and 
<\/FONT>The Lawyer\/<\/EM>UK article<\/FONT><\/A>) (via<\/FONT> Lisa Stone at Inside Opinions<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A>,<\/FONT><\/SPAN>)   Now, you’re talking!<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
the market workers
bare-chested…
spring snow falling<\/FONT><\/EM><\/SPAN><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT><\/SPAN> <\/DIV>
\n
\"yodaG\"  Thomas Adcock’s <\/FONT><\/FONT>article<\/FONT><\/A> for <\/FONT>NYLJ<\/EM> mentions that the pact will cover “the composition <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
of <\/FONT><\/SPAN>assigned legal teams by race, gender, ethnicity and sexual preference.” <\/FONT> <\/SPAN>But, if this pact is <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
client-driven, I’m sure the NYLJ<\/EM>  list must be representative, rather than exclusive.  For example, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
if <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT>I <\/EM>were<\/EM> the client of an NYC BigLaw firm, with an important project due this month, I would <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
definitely want to know how many of those 20- and 30- something male associates were members <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of the <\/FONT>Jedi Knights<\/FONT><\/A> Church.   Far too many of these “warriors” have been far <\/FONT><\/FONT>too preoccupied<\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
with a supposed messianic arrival this week.  In the 2002 <\/FONT>UK census<\/FONT><\/A>,<\/FONT> 7 out of every 1000 people<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
listed Jedi as their religion.  Although they are a tiny religious minority, we know the Jedi <\/FONT>must <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
be <\/FONT>among us, too.  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
If any of them worked on my<\/EM> legal team, I’d expect replacements for the forseeable future, plus<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
a discount for all work done in May.  In fact, I really wouldn’t want any of those cultists on my<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
legal team — especially if they are <\/FONT>squabbling amongst themselves<\/FONT> <\/FONT><\/A>over devotion to the First Three<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Books of their Bible vs. The Last Three Books.  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
 \"yodaN\"<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
surprising the worker
in the field…
out-of-season blooms<\/FONT><\/EM><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
But, this whole Diversity Pact thing just might be a publicity stunt — I’m mean, why would law firms <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
have to “agree” to respond more effectively to their clients’ needs?  A red flag for me is the <\/FONT>Diversity <\/FONT><\/A><\/DIV>
\n
Page<\/FONT><\/A> at the law firm of one of the pact’s signers, Kelley Drye & Warren.   How serious could Kelley <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Drye be about responding to clients’ desires, when they proclaim to have recently enacted a <\/FONT>program:<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“to ensure that individuals continue to be recruited, hired, assigned and promoted<\/STRONG> <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
without regard<\/STRONG> to race, religion, color, national origin, citizenship, sex, veteran’s status, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
age, or non-job-related disability of any kind.” [emphasis added]<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
The background of Kelley Drye partner <\/FONT>Robert L. Haig<\/FONT><\/A>, who was a leader in making the Pact a<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
reality, also throws doubt on the seriousness of this Diversity Pact.  No, I don’t mean his being a <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
60ish white guy with a Harvard Law degree.  It’s his client list<\/EM> this worries me:  It’s filled with hard-<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
nosed major companies like Union Carbide, Liberty Mutual, and Pan Am World Airways.  Nobody’s<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
going to convince me that his clients want staffing decisions based on gender, race or sexual <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
preferences, rather than lawyering skills and efficient assignment of resources. Oh, sure, Union <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Carbide wants KDW to lower its hiring standards (and anger reassigned lawyers) so that it will have <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
just the right associate in the bullpen to meet every client’s diversity whim.  Not likely.   <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
the dragonfly, too
works late…
night fishing<\/FONT>
<\/DIV><\/FONT><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
So, this client advocate is going to have to see it to believe it.  Meanwhile, I sure hope all the negative<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
commentary about the Pact doesn’t give the signatories cold feet. (see Kerr at <\/FONT>Volokh<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A>, MacEwan at <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
AdamSmithEsq<\/FONT><\/A><\/EM>, <\/FONT>and <\/FONT>Lawgirl<\/FONT><\/A>.)<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n