Staff Reports
Leading large litigation matters as an attorney can be a real headache, especially when it comes to billing at the end of the month. The author of this article, who seems to have a sarcastic sense of humor, can relate to the struggles of dealing with billing. It’s not easy to calculate the number of hours billed by others and then have to talk to them about it. It can be even worse when you have to call someone up and figure out why their numbers don’t match for the month. But as unpleasant as that conversation can be, imagine having to fill out a survey about the gender and sexuality of your employees because a court forces you to do so. That’s the situation that Coca-Cola found itself in, according to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal.
Coca-Cola’s legal department had sent a letter to outside law firms, stating that 30% of the company’s legal work should be performed by lawyers who are women, LGBTQ+, disabled, or members of racial and ethnic minority groups. The law firms were required to report demographic data to Coke, and if they didn’t meet the guidelines, their fees could be cut. This request reminded the author of a similar demand made by a court in a plaintiffs’ litigation case. In the author’s case, the implied threat was to report the personal characteristics of their employees or risk losing attorney fees. The author argues that these kinds of requests are an invasion of privacy and that a person’s livelihood shouldn’t depend on reporting personal characteristics to meet quotas set by others.
The author also criticizes the lack of verification methods for these surveys and suggests that people could easily provide false information. In the author’s own situation, they threatened to refuse to answer the questions and told the court to “pound sand.” The author believes that these policies violate people’s privacy and reduce them to mere physical characteristics, neglecting their true worth and merit. The author views these policies as a form of determinism and argues that they go against the progress made by previous generations to rid society of racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination. The author agrees with Chief Justice John Roberts’ denouncement of these policies and believes that they take society backward rather than forward.
