BC Lagging in Legal Profession Diversity

July 13, 2012

The Law Society of BC recently issued a report on diversity in BC’s legal community.

Towards a More Diverse Legal Profession: Better practices, better workplaces, better results finds that in terms of diversity, the legal profession hasn’t kept up with other high-level professional fields in the rest of the province, and notes under-representation of visible minority and Aboriginal lawyers.

According to the Law Society, “In addition to highlighting areas for improvement, the report aims to help give law firms the tools they need to face challenges and build more inclusive workplaces that will help diversity flourish.”

Read highlights or the full report at the LSBC website; see more commentary from the Vancouver Sun and the Legal Feeds blog.

2 thoughts on “BC Lagging in Legal Profession Diversity

  1. Just took a look at the report and I think its recommendations are somewhat flawed. “Eliminating unconscious bias” usually involves substituting a conscious bias in favour of minorities. This affirmative action approach does no favours to visible minority lawyers who are not up to the task, and can foster doubts about the skills of those are, doubts which would not exist if they were allowed simply to succeed on their own merit.

    It’s all very well for the Law Society to create an open and welcoming community for visible minority lawyers, but I hope they’re not moving in the direction of *mandating* diversity, which seems to be the trend in much of society.

  2. “It’s all very well for the Law Society to create an open and welcoming community for visible minority lawyers, but I hope they’re not moving in the direction of *mandating* diversity, which seems to be the trend in much of society.”

    I tend to agree with Mr. Maddock. “Eliminating unconscious bias” is a rather presumptuous statement to my mind. Not everyone perceives minorities in the same way, or even as minorities at all. Anytime you make a proactive effort to encourage the hiring of minorities, you run the risk of encouraging tokenism and favoritism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *