On September 30, 2018, Governor Jerry Brown of California signed Senate Bill (SB) 826, a pioneering law mandating each publicly-held company headquartered in California to have at least one female on its board of directors.
On February 24, 2019, the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA) became effective in the state of New York. GENDA bars discrimination, harassment, and retaliation on the basis of “gender identity or expression,” which is defined as “a person’s actual or perceived gender-related identity, appearance, behavior, expression, or other gender-related characteristic regardless of the sex assigned to that person at birth, including, but not limited to, the status of being transgender.”
Pride—It’s a simple word that, for some, denotes arrogance, hubris, narcissism, or a foolishly and irrationally distorted sense of one’s personal value, importance, or achievement. However, there is a much more insightful, thoughtful, and powerful meaning behind the word that has been the impetus for worldwide commemoration.
As Chief Diversity and Professional Development Officer at Ogletree Deakins, I have seen that law firms specifically, and the legal industry, generally, face external pressures from clients, outside counsel, and diversity groups to maintain diversity initiatives. Recently, some of that pressure has been coming from sources internal to law firms—namely, their own attorneys. As more companies offer their employees attractive leave benefits, law firms are following suit by offering their attorneys robust parental leave benefits. Here are some cutting-edge questions for companies promoting a work-life balance to consider in terms of their parental leave allowances, and trends in the promotion and advancement of women in law, including the Mansfield Rule and how it can positively impact the legal profession.
Meaningful diversity and inclusion efforts in the workplace have evolved from being the right thing to do to being the smart thing to do—and now they are quickly moving toward being the essential thing companies must do to ensure success.
With the 2017-18 National Football League (NFL) regular season and National Basketball Association (NBA) pre-season underway, many spectators are excited to don their favorite players’ jerseys and cheer on their teams. Yet in recent years, many fans also find themselves equally entrenched in controversial debates that have little to do with who wins or loses the game.
All companies should have mechanisms through which employees can voice concerns and feel confident that (a) those concerns will be taken seriously, (b) those concerns will be fairly and promptly investigated, and (c) misconduct, if it is found, will be corrected. However, if unconscious bias infects decision-making when it comes to workplace investigations, employees will feel the system is rigged against them—no matter how well-written a company policy is, no matter how many avenues are given to employees to lodge complaints, and no matter how much a company talks about a culture of accountability. Fortunately, there are a number of steps workplace investigators can take to minimize the chances that this will occur.
Unconscious bias (also called “implicit bias”) has become a trending topic—both in the general media and in the HR world. The topic of unconscious bias is often cited when considering ways companies can improve their diversity and inclusion efforts by recruiting and retaining diverse talent. It’s also critically relevant in the context of conducting workplace investigations because an essential duty of any workplace investigator is to conduct independent, unbiased inquiries about allegations of workplace misconduct.
Employers looking for strong scores on the Corporate Equality Index (CEI) in coming years may have to make some unexpected changes to their health benefit programs.
Around this time of the year, many employers determine and distribute year-end bonuses. While evaluating and rewarding employees based on merit may seem fair, merit-based practices may actually decrease workplace equity if unconscious bias is a factor in bonus decisions.
No doubt walking a difficult line in the wake of the election results, human resources professionals are tasked with cementing their companies’ position as equal opportunity employers. At the same time, some female employees, employees with diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, employees from different countries, and non-U.S. citizens working for U.S.-headquartered companies are feeling intimidated by news reports of hostility in the workplace. Some employees feel silenced and are afraid to take advantage of internal complaint procedures, decreasing the prospect for internal resolution.
On Monday, November 7, 2016, I traveled to Greenville, South Carolina—the birthplace of our firm—to participate in the Greenville Chamber of Commerce’s 2016 ATHENA Organizational Leadership Award ceremony. This award recognizes organizations for their commitment to increasing the positive impact of women’s leadership in the Greenville community.
Recently, Alliance President & CEO Manar Morales spoke with Matt Keen, Managing Shareholder, and Michelle Wimes, Director of Professional Development and Inclusion, at Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. about the work they have done with their firm’s flexibility policy and the creation of two Reduced Hours Advisor positions.
The issue of diversity has expanded from the workplace to the corporate boardroom, with initiatives spearheaded by investors and other stakeholders to address the lack of diversity on corporate boards. These initiatives are likely to lead to pressure on companies to enhance their disclosures about their board members and take steps to diversify their boards.
On August 2, 2016, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency made available a five-page Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) document to accompany an interagency policy statement issued by these agencies and others in the summer of 2015.
