-
OBABL Links & Resources
Feb
24
Yolanda Young v. Covington & Burling LLP
Filed Under • Stand Up!
Make no mistake about it, people. THIS. IS. A. GREAT. COUNTRY!
For $120 you can pick up a stone and try to slay Goliath have your day in court.
Read Yolanda Young v. Covington here, but be patient; it’s long–37 pages for the actual complaint and 63 pages of corroborating emails, evaluations, etc.
Here’s an excerpt:
Plaintiff was hired by Covington in February 2005. In January 2006, Plaintiff was awarded a top bonus of $9,000. During her annual review she was told that her work was excellent, that associates and partners enjoyed working with her, and that her diligence and efficiency made her extremely valuable. In March 2006, after being subjected to months of discriminatory and harassing treatment, plaintiff complained about, among other things, being referred to as a dog and later a monkey; being subjected to white staff attorneys’ constant use of racial slurs; having her white colleagues conceal case information from their black case team members; and being systematically discriminated against as a member of the staff attorney group. Immediately thereafter, Covington management set out on a campaign to discredit Plaintiff. At a staff meeting, a partner said that Plaintiff had overreacted in reporting the use of racial slurs. As punishment, Plaintiff was reassigned to an office with no minorities. Covington management further retaliated against Plaintiff by subjecting her to increased, unwarranted scrutiny, falsely accusing her of overbilling and commanding her to work off the clock. In February 2007, Plaintiff was given a low bonus of $5,000. Plaintiff was told that she was being targeted for firing. In fact, Plaintiff was terminated on August 14, 2007. When Plaintiff learned that Covington rehired laid off staff attorneys with less seniority and lower billable hours than Plaintiff, she reapplied for her staff attorney position. Covington did not rehire Plaintiff. Subsequently, Plaintiff was contacted by a placement agency hired by Covington to recruit additional staff attorneys. Covington still refuses to rehire Plaintiff.
Comments
65 Responses to “Yolanda Young v. Covington & Burling LLP”
Leave a Reply
Good for you Yolanda!!! I’ll be following . . .although reading the complaint in intervals!
You go girl!
It’s amazing that law firms think they can get away with everything. I am glad you are speaking up!
I very seriously doubt anybody at a top law firm would use racial slurs against someone, especially against another attorney at the firm.
Wasn’t this Eric Holder’s firm? Why didn’t the coward stand up for his people?
What color were you when they hired you?
I’ll get the word out
go for it girl! everyone has to stand up for what is right!
Sorry that Feb 25, 5:10pm doubts. S/He should spend some time as a minority in these types of firms. I did and lots went on that I found hard to believe, yet it was still happening. I have encountered some of the most ignorant entitled individuals I have ever met in the highest positions at the “best” firms.
I experienced racial discrimination at my old firm before leaving to clerk. It happens, but is oftentimes, it is way too risky to speak out against, quite frankly.
I’m not sure what is more shocking, the fact that things such as this happen in America or the fact that people refuse to believe that they happen. Fight for what you believe in!
Are you kidding me
Liar. Get another fucking job.
The European’s time is up and they don’t know how to act. You shut em down, Queen!
Before you all cheer her on, yall should read her complaint.
This is obviously bullshit. Anyone who’s set foot in a law firm (especially a fairly liberal one like Covington) knows “constant use of racial slurs” would never happen. One racial slur would probably be enough to get someone-especially a staff attorney–fired.
Business plan for minority lawyer:
Step 1: Get hired by a big law firm
Step 2: Find something, somewhere that “discriminates” against you
Step 3: Get laid off or fired
Step 4: Sue for discrimination
Step 5: Collect $$$ when case settles
Step 6: Repeat as necessary or retire
What color were you when they accepted you into law school over white candidates with higher scores?
blah blah blah, they didn’t give me the same bonus and they fired me, ergo, they’re racist…
Thanks for standing up for all of us!
It’s interesting that people find it hard that this sort of thing would happen at a major firm when some of the comments are ignorant as hell. Coincidence? I don’t think so. Honestly, the only people that would EVER find this blog are attorneys. Similarly, the only people that would be so defensive as to write some of these BS comments may be the same jackasses at Covington….
doesn’t sound legit.
So far we have a complaint, which is not much to judge a lawsuit on.
I am curious, though: If environment is hostile (”white attorneys’ constant use of racial slurs”), why try to be rehired? Plenty of BigLaw in the sea.
Please read her complaint prior to forming your opinion, and you just may conclude that this woman is unreasonable, out of touch with reality, and certainly lacks the basic logic skills to be hired as a real associate or partner. For example, she notes that only 5% of attorneys at Covington are black. She also notes that less than 5% of licensed lawyers are black. The logical conclusion of this is that Covington’s numbers actually do a good job reflecting the level of diversity that exists in the legal profession (even if we’d all like it to be higher). Then she makes the insane logical jump that because 30% of Covington’s staff attorneys are black, “One must conclude that Covington deliberately set out to hire five times the national average of black and minority attorneys…” What???? There is no logical connection here, nor any proof or reason that Covington would try to rig the racial composition of its staff attorneys.
Then she goes into a random rant about how staff attorneys are denied certain benefits, pay, mentoring and programs that associate attorneys receive. OF COURSE this happens! What on earth do you expect? That’s the purpose of staff attorneys - they are temporary, expendable labor. That’s why the defendant wanted the work. She went through a temp agency to get this job and said she wanted side work while she pursued other jobs. Yet she wants every perk of a full time attorney?! If your average staff attorney were qualified enough, they would be getting hired as associate attorneys. There’s a reason they aren’t getting hired for those jobs.
There isn’t room here to innumerate the number of ridiculous claims and whines that Yolanda makes about being a staff attorney at Covington. She essentially sounds like a lunatic who is resentful that she’s being treated like all temps are treated even though she knew she was taking a job AS A TEMP THROUGH A TEMP AGENCY!!
In the beginning of her complaint she refers to how blacks are more likely to be friends with blacks, leading people to refer people of their own race to jobs they hear about. Then she whines throughout her complaint that the white employees didn’t hang out with the black employees in their social hours after work. Seriously?! This is not a reason to sue a law firm. And as her complaint suggestions, all ethnic groups are more likely to spend social time with members of their own ethnicity, which is a totally separate issues from law firm life.
Please read her complaint before jumping on board. It reads like an immature child whining about normal workplace complaints with no proof that anything is connected to race. And she seems to have no understanding of the entire purpose of STAFF attorneys versus associate attorneys at law firms.
I was once an investigator for the CCRB in NYC (police oversight agency) back in the day before law school. I am black and somewhat familiar with the life of poor, uneducated black folk. One day me and a white colleague interviewed a complainant about an incident he’d had with the police. He detailed his entire evening including how he had gone to the corner store that night around 11 p.m. to get some potato chips for his 5 year old who was hungry. After the interview my colleague completely discredited his testimony. Her basis? He had to be making the story up because, she asked, what parent would go to the store to get their kid potato chips when they were hungry.
The moral of this story: if you have no idea what it’s like to live in the shoes of the person you are judging, I suggest you shut up.
I was once an investigator for the CCRB in NYC (police oversight agency) back in the day before law school. I am black and somewhat familiar with the life of poor, uneducated black folk. One day me and a white colleague interviewed a complainant about an incident he’d had with the police. He detailed his entire evening including how he had gone to the corner store that night around 11 p.m. to get some potato chips for his 5 year old who was hungry. After the interview my colleague completely discredited his testimony. Her basis? He had to be making the story up because, she asked, what parent would go to the store to get their kid potato chips when they were hungry.
I would like to tell you that even I, a highly educated black person who did not grow up in the ghetto, have been known to feed my toddler chips when he is hungry, especially now that I work in a big firm and have little time to prepare nutritious meals.
The moral of this story: if you have no idea what it’s like to live in the shoes of the person you are judging, I suggest you shut up.
She was obviously setting up this lawsuit from day 1 — forwarding emails from her cov.com address to her personal address. It should be criminal. This woman gives hard working black people a bad name.
I think she was also assaulted by a lacrosse team at Duke.
Must be Covington partners descending upon the blog. Pretty pathetic. Please spend your time drumming up business instead. Thanks. Happy Yolanda is standing up for herself if she feels wronged.
How can any of you possibly know what happened? This could just as easily be BS as accurate. The fact that you jump to conclusions shows your own biases, nothing more.
I do find it funny though that she is still complaining about Covington (apparently a pack of racists, at least according to her) not hiring her back. Sounds like sour grapes over other people getting hired, but then again that’s just me.
Obviously, no one can prove or disprove that she was the subject of racial slurs; or that her bonus, transfer, and firing were the result of racial animus.
But, regardless of whether some of these commenters are Covington partners, they have a point when it comes to the statistical implications in the Complaint. Young cites, as evidence of racial discrimination, that black attorneys are six times more likely to be hired as staff attorneys. In addition, black attorneys at the firm come from, on average, higher ranked schools than their white counterparts.
The obvious retort is that most law schools use some sort of affirmative action during law school admissions (and thus accept URM applicants with relatively lower traditional admissions criteria (grades, lsat, etc.), but not when distributing law school grades. First year grades (from a competitive school) are probably the biggest indicator of what firm will hire a law student. Top 10% at Villanova may be a lot more desirable than the bottom 25% at Duke. Finally, grades and school seem to matter a lot less in partnership, where your ability to deliver clients and experience in the field take precedent.
Young may have been treated unfairly, but there is no way that she can make the claims she wants from the evidence she presents.
If you want to be hired as an associate rather than as a staff attorney, try not graduating at the bottom of your class.
Uh, hello, they called her a f monkey guys! How can you not say this is racist. I would call it racism if I was on the jury.
I know a lot of Covington “staff” attorneys. What they are not telling you is that for the most part C&B does not use contract attorneys. Instead they hire Staff attorneys with better perks then contracts. I am not saying Yolanda was not discriminated against. I am saying C&B likes to hire you for 6-12 months and then let you go and bring in new Staff attorneys the next time around. I am not sure this is about race it may be about “class” (ie. Only 1% of Staff attorneys get the bump to associate.)
Again, John, that is assuming that it’s true. If it is, it probably is racist . . . but then again, it’s also possible to misunderstand a comment that came out wrong.
It’s also possible that she’s flat-out lying because she’s pissed about getting fired.
Nice fairy tale (i.e., Complaint)
No way this happens in a large firm like Covington, gets complained about, and then not only is allowed to continue, but the complainer is retaliated against.
Those who have worked in a big law firm like Covington would tell you that. Perhaps more subtle discrimination (assignments, client contact, etc.) but not this open and flagrant.
Two words - Race Card
If I were to say, a monkey can do this project, that doesn’t make me racist. If I then give it to a staff attorney (b/c an attorney needs to do it), that doesn’t convert the statement into a racist statement.
If this place was so awful, why does she want to go back there?
Good for you, Yolanda. Covington is getting what it deserves. Give it to them full blast!!Let them know that they don’t rule the world and there will be consequences and repercussions for those who try.
After reading the complaint and the Exhibits, I’m still agnostic about what really happened here. Both my BigLaw firms were plantations, and I’m generally sympathetic to thoughtful claims of racial discrimination.
Claims that are interesting:
- Covington purposely inflates its minority attorney numbers by hiring black staff attorneys.
- Covington fudges its QC heuristics.
- Davies apparently didn’t paper up his response to Plaintiff’s complaints and instead tried (weakly) to diffuse.
Claims that are not interesting:
- People hang out with people who look like them.
- Girls can be bitchy.
- Supervising associates have favorites.
Claims that are ridiculous:
- A decent review means they can’t fire me.
- They refused to move me to a new office upon my demand. Then they did move me to a new office, which was retaliation.
- Reporting a rumor that a drunk partner said there will be layoffs = targeted racial discrimination.
- I suffered horrific racial discrimination at Covington which caused me medical harm. I then wanted Covington to rehire me.
Final thought: If you’re going to go this route and file pro se, nix the subject-verb agreement problems and other grammatical issues. Also strike the shoddy logic.
That’s my impression as well. There’s some stuff in the complaint that may have merit, some which is junk, and some which is ridic. I think it’s premature to dismiss this outright. Also, if I were a client, I’d probably have some serious issues regarding the QC rates given to me. We’ll see how it shakes out.
I am a former Black attorney who worked at Covington and I have worked with both Pat Davies and Steve Anthony. Based on my experience I would be surprised if any of this is true. It is true that Blacks face obstacles that Whites do not face due to subtle views of race that manifest themselves in people’s actions. It is true that staff attorneys are treated like second class citizens, but that is the nature of being a staff or contract attorney at any firm: if you got Bs or Cs at a second tier law school, you are assigned work that is different from those associates that got As at a law school like Yale or Columbia and may have clerked on the federal court. You know that going into it. All of this being said, it is highly unlikely that individuals would commit blatantly racist offenses. Also, a complaint is just that, a complaint. I think it prudent to wait to see the response to the complaint and how the matter flushes out before jumping on the band wagon. By the way, I do race work now and have devoted my career to fighting against racism.
Isn’t a Complaint meant to contain a short and plain statement putting the defendant on notice??? It seems to be far too long.
As soon as I read in the complaint that “Covington and its partners conspiring to create a staff attorney group comprised largely of minorities then purposely setting out to discriminate against the staff attorney group,” I thought this complaint looked like the rantings of someone either very desperate or paranoid and out of touch with reality. While I am appalled to hear how the white staff attorney’s read racial slurs from wikipedia aloud in the office, all the other claims have no merit. Hardly any temps get hired by firms with full benefits these days, whether they are staff attorneys, word processors or secretaries. She should consider herself lucky she got two bonuses out of Covington.
Davies should definitely have spoken to the white staff attorneys who were part of the racial slur problem, given them a warning and replaced them if they persisted in this behavior. If plaintiff can prove these complaints weren’t taken seriously and has witnesses to back this up, then she has a chance at getting some money out of Covington. I don’t believe the “monkey story” from Davies’ mouth is absolutely proof of a racial slur directed against the plaintiff, nor do I think a court will agree with her.
What’s that cliche about how only a fool represents him/herself? If you’re going to continue with this lawsuit, you should get a lawyer, even if you have to go through the DC Civil Rights or some kind of DC employment board.
Lastly, once someone files a discrimination lawsuit against a law firm, whether it’s for racial or sexual harassment, I have heard they get put on a searchable “list” and are often subsequently blacklisted and won’t likely be hired by other law firms. This is very unfortunate, because our judicial system is supposed to work for us instead of against us, but many employers would rather not take a chance on hiring someone whom they feel might become a potential “troublemaker” down the road, the candidate who has been treated wrongly often is not hired.
So, there has to be a very strong case, with witnesses willing to testify on your behalf, and it has to potentially be worth a lot of money to make your former job and your principles worth fighting for, if it means you may not be able to find work later on.
Lastly, Covington rarely rehires anyone. I was fired by Covington in 2005 and I also initially tried to get my job back (not as a staff attorney). They paid me a nice severance under the circumstances. I decided that rather than continuing to fight to get back into a firm that was downright hostile to me to begin with (mostly though the personnel manager), I looked for and found another job. I’m much happier for it. I didn’t go through what Yolanda did, but I was a full time employee there.
Covington did not fight my unemployment when I said it was from lack of work, nor will they say they fired you when people call for references, so at least these things were pluses.
staff attorney positions rarely lead to associate jobs, and to take the job with that thinking surely will lead to disappointment.
if you look at wikipedia, the definiton of
Staff Attorney= Contract Attorney with benefits.
the minority hiring part is an interesting theory though. does adding minority staff attorneys lead to better reporting numbers, or are only associates and partners counted?
I don’t whether the complaints are true are not, but I wanted to respond to some statements.
- Just because a lawyer works at a big firm doesn’t mean they have been magically transformed into a person with perfect etiquette. At an interview I once had a partner at a top 20 firm pick earwax out of his ear and flick it. So I think inappropriate things happen in firms all the time.
- Sometimes employers are stuck between a rock and a hard place, if they fire the employee that allegedly made the slur, they might get sued. If they don’t fire the person, they might get sued. Sometimes, they see it as better risk management to try to diffuse the situation. Maybe they moved her to do this, thinking since the problems would stop, she wouldn’t sue.
- Whether the claim is true or not, she made a huge mistake filing pro se.
Yolanda Young is sharing her experiences on this blog from her perspective as a black lawyer. Many of you whites do not understand this perspective, nor do you want to understand.
Regardless of how she wrote or filed her complaint, Ms. Young’s cause of action and allegations regarding her tenure at Covington will be decided in a court of law–if it isn’t settled first.
The name of her blog is “On Being A Black Lawyer”. Don’t you whites have enough places to go and bitch about blacks? Think you’re so smart? You are the race of people who have been running this stinking country from its inception and ran it into the ground. No wonder you cannot relate to her claims of exploitation by those in power.
This is my first time visiting her blog but I read her columns and she is touching on some very valid points.
I think the black fist means this isn’t a ‘white’ blog, duh. If you want white pick up the newspaper or turn on the TV. We don’t care what you think nor do we want to hear what you have to say, whitey. Get lost.
Yolanda, keep your head up. Stand on your principles and fight for what’s right. You are in my thoughts and prayers.
Still here.
I think Ms. Young just wants publicity for her book career, which is exactly what we are all feeding into by writing comments and forwarding emails about this. I hope Covington does not settle just so that this can all be flushed out.
“We don’t care what you think nor do we want to hear what you have to say, whitey. Get lost.” -PJ
Are you cool with PJ speaking for you Yolanda?
Congrats on bringing a lot of traffic to your site. Very good marketing ploy. The alleged facts are suspect as to whether they’ll pass the initial pleadings, but you certainly have gotten some cheap publicity. Hopefully your site will take off and you won’t find yourself having to ask a partner whether you’ll be promoted from staff attorney to associate (a proposition which itself is ridiculous). If not, good luck on the book that you’ll probably write accompanying this story. Also, I liked paragraph 72…the associate left “the Covington.”
Ms. Young, I came to your site after reading about your case to wish you luck and urge you to stay strong. But after looking at some of the other comments here I almost hope you’re not reading them. It does not surprise me that there are lots of ignorant people in the world, but what DOES surprise me is the number of my fellow lawyers who are always reflexively eager to defend the status quo. It boggles my mind, actually, that someone could get through law school and subsequent work as a lawyer and STILL think that they are doing some sort of favor to either themselves or their clients by reflexively attacking anyone who challenges their view of the world. I suppose they think that by saying this is a “marketing ploy” and etc. they think they are exhibiting some sort of sophistication about how the world works, but they ought to be embarrassed to be so proud and confident about having such a tiny & fearful view of the world.
The reason most of the vile, uninformed commentary is here is that readers of the blog “Above the Law” were linked to this page. Not all ATL readers are so putrid (I’m one after all), but many are just overpaid frat boys in suits - it’s pretty standard commentary for that blog.
The boundaries of this case are pretty, pretty clear. The question is,
“When you are a top tier law firm and have almost no black attorneys in your partnership track, but a large number of black attorneys with fine credentials in your document review pool, highly disproportionate not only to their representation in the legal community, but also their representation within the national demographic, is there sufficient evidence to get to the jury on the issue of whether this environment is the direct result of a pattern and practice of discrimination against those finely credentialed black attorneys?”
R. Mullen – There are a couple of problems with your question, the most significant of which is the phrase “fine credentials.” The question really is: “Are there black attorneys with equal credentials who are being denied equal opportunity?”
Ms. Young -
I’m curious about your qualifications. Would you please disclose your law school GPA, journal, clerkship, etc.?
Thanks.
Greetings, Yolanda:
I am about 1/4 through your complaint but I wanted to share some observations with you and other black attorneys here.
First, it is not surprising or unbelievable that these incidents occurred. I admire that you spoke out about it and raised questions about their system while you were a part of it, we could use more of that. Unfortunately, it seems like the blacks who can best navigate or silently suffer racism are the ones who ’succeed’ (not the best choice of words) in these environments.
Had you been simply a contract attorney/doc reviewer they would have cut you early in the game without worry of any recourse because you would not have been their employee. Which makes me wonder about the future viability of their glorified doc reviewer a/k/a staff attorney program. My guess is they will blame the economy but gladly allow temp agencies to do their dirty work for them in the future….
With that said, I do wonder about your motives with filing your suit in the manner you did. I don’t mean this so much as a criticism as an observation.
It often read more like someone venting and/or an exposé instead of a wronged plaintiff laying out a recoverable claim. If your intent was the latter, you would have served yourself better had you: proofed your complaint for errors and had another attorney review it beforehand; streamlined your allegations; and found an attorney friend who could have filed this on your behalf (even if you actually wrote it yourself).
But perhaps your goal was to use it as a public vehicle to expose the corrupt and discriminatory practices of Covington and other major law firms who have set up legal sweatshops and made unconscionable profit at the client’s expense.
Either way, it looks like the legal bubble has finally burst. Good luck to you.
I will not comment on the merits of the lawsuit. I have seen this go either way. What i will say is this: if you “doubt” or are “sure” that blatant racism does not take place in large firms, just take a look at the posts on 2/25 by Mike at 9:07 and Joe at 9:17. More than likely, these comments were posted by attorneys at firms. I lived through my stint as an associate at a large law firm and some subtle and blatant racist incidents along the way. It happens. No, Mike, i did not leave, sue and collect $$$ - in fact i remain in contact with most of the attorneys as colleagues at the bar. I wouldn’t trade my time and experience there for anything. And, I would like to think that i “educated” some of my colleagues about the talents of some lawyers of color (especially those who curiously viewed me as some affirmative action baby who was probably less qualified than other applicants to law school when i was accepted - admissions to 3 bars later: give me a break). I believe that one can be successful no matter the obstacles placed in one’s path. Take a look at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. That being said, always fight for what you believe in.
Thanks for the feedback. I was hoping someone would notice…I specifically wrote “fine” credentials, because we’re talking about Covington & Burling. We all know that “equal” isn’t good enough, because firms at that level use the language of “superiority.” What I hope will happen is that the minority attorneys will be able to re-write the script here. We now have a critical mass of attorneys of color who graduated from the top 20 law schools, so equivalence should no longer be at issue. This is a post-civil rights shift, to an economic rights argument. Civil rights is based upon a negative presumption of inequality. Once we get towards the assumption of excellence, the burden subtly shifts to show how the firm triages associates with *fine* credentials. How can an associate be great for one purpose, but not measure up for another. Maybe there’s a logic here, but it needs explained. Why is a credentialed attorney good enough to review critical client documents to support a legal argument, (particularly if she is an experienced attorney and already in the firm doing doc reviews), but suddenly not good enough to remain at that level. it’s a different discussion from “good enough.” Maybe, the word “excellent” or the phrase “top level” would work better, but basically I want to remove “equality,” rather than having the burden be on the Plaintiff to show “equivalence,”–at least in terms of the legal presumptions. We need to start taking “equal” as a given and move on to the argument that blacks with BETTER credentials,–i.e. “fine” or “top level” credentials are being hired for positions deemed “inferior” by the firm. Maybe there’s a better way to do it, but I think the idea is sound. Now, this may lead to not winning these types of cases, but if we can shift the discussion to one in which we “Expect To Win” (sorry, I’m going to plug Carla Harris’ book till I fall down!), then it’s a better way to move forward. This is also the Obama approach, and we know that it is a winning strategy.
Since when is Georgetown 2nd tier. Last I check it was the most highly regarded law school in D.C.
If clients weren’t insisting on diversity, BIGLAW would never hire a black lawyer. That’s a part of their elitist existence.
I’ll leave the learned to ponder the implications of that statement.
Eh…Georgetown *is* 2nd tier, if you’re counting the top 10, top 20 on a national level.
Michigan Law was #5 when I went there, –and now it’s # 9. [ sigh ]But, a LOT of Michigan grads used to go to the “Covingtons,” b/c it’s was known as a corporate-law focused law school. Yale? Nicht so much. Yalies were known as public interest lawyers. Stanford…well, it’s in the 9th Circuit, so… :o))
Top 10 grads are more likely to get a second look because the snob factor remains pretty strong. In fact, double top 10 is probably the rule these days, because competition is so fierce.
But, I can tell you that what passed for brilliance even at Michigan, was as much a curious mix of arrogance and historical entitlement as it was sharp PRACTICAL critical analysis. I can’t tell you how many people were more than willing to take e.g. Scalia’s mad jumps of logic as given. Thank goodness for Prof. Yale Kamisar’s bulls**t-o-meter!
While alumni know that 1) law school is 1 year too long and 2) ranking reflects reality only in a circus side show sense, it is important to note that, after family connections, law school ranking is the main qualifier firms have used for years to make the first cut when looking at prospective associates.
On the other hand, your point is well taken, because it points out the regional component.
For example, out in Cali, Stanford trumps Harvard, Michigan AND Yale. So, it is probably also true that in DC, Georgetown trumps Michigan or Stanford, although I’d be surprised if it trumps Harvard.
If you’re political, then, your best bet (after Harvard) is to go to Georgetown because of the (in)famous clout wielded by its faculty and alumni. These are all caculations that we ought to share with people, so that they either go to the school that will work best for them,–or don’t waste 3 years and $120K for nothing.
R. Mullen:
I am very confused by your “fine” credentials argument. Coming from a good school is not enough to be hired as a partner-track associate at Covington, nor for many of the more prestigious and competitive firms in the country (Williams and Connolly, Munger, Wachtell, etc.).
Not all applicants from top schools are the same. Some get straight A’s, some barely get by at the bottom of the curve. Some are on the Law Review or win Moot Court competitions, and some rarely spend any time on extra-curriculars. A Boston University graduate with straight A’s and a position on the law review will be hired by a top firm instead of a sub median Harvard kid any day.
I agree that more information is needed before we can determine whether the racial disparity is based on legitimate factors or animus. What is the average GPA of the black staff attorneys? How many are in leadership positions on their law schools journal or law review? Etc.
Having a critical mass at top schools is irrelevant. Succeeding at those schools (grades, journal, moot court, etc.) gets you the jobs that Yolanda was denied. Right now, we have no evidence that the staff attorney’s denied positions as associates were “similarly situated” based on the relevant hiring criteria, which is far more than the law school you graduate from.
P.S. Obama graduated in the top 10% of his Harvard class and was the President of the Law Review. Attaching his name to an argument that ignores success at law school (in favor of mere graduation) seems off-point.
I read the entire complaint and all the exhibits. I won’t repeat what was already mentioned, other than to say that I agree with those who have pointed out that Young lacks logic and objectivity and exudes a strange sense of entitlement.
However, I would like to put in my two cents as far the list of ethnic slurs. Perhaps it was not the most appropriate thing to read in the office, but if you look at the list (attached to the complaint), it’s actually quite harmless. It’s just a wikipedia page that lists common ethnic slurs A-Z. It does not specifically target any one minority (and even includes slurs for Caucasians). I don’t see how Young can take the reading of this list as harassment.
I’m pretty sure Young will lose this case and if I were Convington, I’d move for summary judgment based on failure to state a cause of action - even accepting all the facts as Young presents them it still doesn’t add up to racial discrimination.
I hope you take Covington to the cleaners!
It’s the only way they will learn. Law firms need unions. You’re an attorney so you can represent yourself but paralegals have NO ONE. This is Covington’s and many other firm’s standard practice - they “build” a case against you with nonsense, harass you to push you out. In your case, they attempted to make it look like a lay off. Oh, the castle key technique of checking your arrival to accuse you of fraud in billing is standard. They don’t check everyone…just the ones they are working on shoving out.
Good for you. As the economy worsens, the harassment increases. Most people just move on to another firm but in today’s times, it’s not that easy. Good for you! Keep us posted on your case. Watch out…Covington is a huge beast.
More than likely they will set up a Mediation and Jeff will represent the firm, of course. During the Mediation, you state your claims again and then they settle with you with a gag order.
Keep us posted.