What's wrong with this sentence in a recently filed Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law case: "Its law school hires less-qualified people of color and women over White men?" Answer: There's no adjective before "White Men." This is a privilege, and from the vantage-point of equity, some folks may not have the same benefits (i.e., automaticatically being presumed qualified and thereby hired first) when we operate in a job pool that is more competitive. If law school hiring is done in a *competitive* environment, all qualified individuals will have an equal opportunity to secure gainful employment-- regardless of race.
Nevertheless, there may be many reasons why different people are hired. For example, the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School has a "distinguished" female professor with impeccable credentials, but she is a noted racist and receives many complaints. She operates from the perspective that Black students can't learn, when in fact, she may not be the best instructor if all of her Black students consistently perform below average in her class. Hello? If the law school loses money every time a student transfers, yeah, she's the problem.
The idea that universities are hiring "mediocre" faculty is ridiculous. First, there's no such thing as a mediocre Black employee. There is significant data that Black candidates are twice as qualified for the positions for which they apply. Second, how is mediocrity defined and/or measured? Is it a racially charged term, designed to inflame public opinion? Further, how can a job CANDIDATE state that they are a better teacher than someone else? Again, this case operates from the perspective that certain candidates are automatically better than everyone else and thereby entitled to the job simply because of their race.
Of course, this case seeks to set a precedent, that's why they need volunteers with "incriminating evidence."
I'll say the quiet part out loud: legacy admissions are an unnamed target. How? Because diverse faculty and staff have children that receive "privileges" in college admissions.
From here, Law schools must:
1. Review your policies and remove any mention of hiring targets. Ensure your hiring panels are fair, inclusive, and legally justified (e.g., based on a job description). You cannot make decisions to hire all White males, nor all underrepresented candidates.
2. Do better at communicating the credentials of all of your new hires. Don't merely assume that everyone knows you hired the best. Make your introductions count (e.g., This is Mary Poppins, she has a JD from Yale with 15 years of experience at XYZ firm, etc.).
3. Expect some people to assert that ALL women and Black faculty members are not qualified because serving as a professor is not women's work or a "Black job". Ask them: What role should qualified women & Blacks serve in?
