the attrition rates for minorities is very high (for many reasons)...that's probably the main factor.
THE RACIAL PARADOX OF THE CORPORATE LAW FIRM RICHARD H. SANDER∗Although nonwhites now account for nearly one-fifth of new attorneys, they still make up less than four percent of the partners at large law firms. Most commentators have blamed some combination of firm discrimination and minority disinterest for this disparity. In this Article, the author uses several new sources of data to explore this phenomenon, finding significant support for the following findings. Each of the major nonwhite groups (Asians, Hispanics and blacks) are as interested during law school in careers with large firms as are whites. Large law firms use very large hiring preferences for blacks, with the result that blacks are overrepresented among firm hires (relative to their numbers amonglaw graduates) and tend to have much lower grades than their white counterparts. The large preferences are plausibly linked to a variety of counterproductive mechanisms that cumulatively produce very high black attrition from firms and consequently low partnership rates. Similar patterns, on a less intense scale, affect Hispanics entering large firms. While many questions are open, the author concludes that aggressive racial preferences at the law school and law firm level tend to undermine in some ways the careers of young attorneys and may, in the end, contribute to the continuing white dominance of large-firm partnerships.
The appropriateness of Perpetua would probably depend on the tone of the writing. When I used it, I (half playfully) thought the extra space made the words sort of resonate.
Not exactly a Sander troll. He writes interesting and provocative material that's hard to ignore when discussing race/affirmative action in law school.Also... his paper addresses the exact topic of this post.
This topic is addressed at considerable length in a recent Law Review article by Richard Sander (UCLA Law Prof)It can be found here: http://www.law.ucla.edu/sander/NorthCarolina/sander.pdfHere's the abstract: QuoteTHE RACIAL PARADOX OF THE CORPORATE LAW FIRM RICHARD H. SANDER∗Although nonwhites now account for nearly one-fifth of new attorneys, they still make up less than four percent of the partners at large law firms. Most commentators have blamed some combination of firm discrimination and minority disinterest for this disparity. In this Article, the author uses several new sources of data to explore this phenomenon, finding significant support for the following findings. Each of the major nonwhite groups (Asians, Hispanics and blacks) are as interested during law school in careers with large firms as are whites. Large law firms use very large hiring preferences for blacks, with the result that blacks are overrepresented among firm hires (relative to their numbers amonglaw graduates) and tend to have much lower grades than their white counterparts. The large preferences are plausibly linked to a variety of counterproductive mechanisms that cumulatively produce very high black attrition from firms and consequently low partnership rates. Similar patterns, on a less intense scale, affect Hispanics entering large firms. While many questions are open, the author concludes that aggressive racial preferences at the law school and law firm level tend to undermine in some ways the careers of young attorneys and may, in the end, contribute to the continuing white dominance of large-firm partnerships.
Quote from: rekopter on May 30, 2007, 12:43:57 AMThis topic is addressed at considerable length in a recent Law Review article by Richard Sander (UCLA Law Prof)It can be found here: http://www.law.ucla.edu/sander/NorthCarolina/sander.pdfHere's the abstract: QuoteTHE RACIAL PARADOX OF THE CORPORATE LAW FIRM RICHARD H. SANDER∗Although nonwhites now account for nearly one-fifth of new attorneys, they still make up less than four percent of the partners at large law firms. Most commentators have blamed some combination of firm discrimination and minority disinterest for this disparity. In this Article, the author uses several new sources of data to explore this phenomenon, finding significant support for the following findings. Each of the major nonwhite groups (Asians, Hispanics and blacks) are as interested during law school in careers with large firms as are whites. Large law firms use very large hiring preferences for blacks, with the result that blacks are overrepresented among firm hires (relative to their numbers amonglaw graduates) and tend to have much lower grades than their white counterparts. The large preferences are plausibly linked to a variety of counterproductive mechanisms that cumulatively produce very high black attrition from firms and consequently low partnership rates. Similar patterns, on a less intense scale, affect Hispanics entering large firms. While many questions are open, the author concludes that aggressive racial preferences at the law school and law firm level tend to undermine in some ways the careers of young attorneys and may, in the end, contribute to the continuing white dominance of large-firm partnerships.So basically, TCR is that AA is to blame. The playing field has been leveled at almost every point (ugrad, grad, oci), and the PC crowd just wants more.
Discussion
Resources
