Law School may ban firm from recruiting

Responding to a string of harassment and discrimination accusations made against a national law firm, the Law School has asked recruiters from the firm to postpone a recruiting visit scheduled for this week. Officials from the University's Career Planning and Placement Office are scheduled to meet today with Law students to set up a formal procedure to further investigate whether Baker & McKenzie, the world's largest law firm, is in compliance with the University's non-discrimination policy. The University's non-discrimination policy states that firms recruiting on campus may not discriminate against prospective employees or current employees because of race, sexual orientation or gender. Two lawsuits, filed by former employees of Baker & McKenzie against the firm have caused members of the University's Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Law Students' Association to ask the Law School to ban the firm from recruiting on campus. In 1993, the New York State Division of Human Rights ruled that the firm dismissed attorney Geoffrey Bowers in 1986 after learning he had AIDS. Bowers died in 1987 and his estate was awarded $500,000 by the Human Rights Division. The case is currently under appeal in the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division. Also this month, a San Francisco jury awarded Baker & McKenzie secretary Rena Weeks $7.1 million after finding that the firm failed to stop a partner from harassing her. Law students and LGBLSA representatives Anthony Falzon and Rose Weber met with a sub-committee comprised of faculty and students in July to discuss the Bowers case. Falzon and Weber then filed a formal complaint that was mailed to Baker & McKenzie, according to Falzon. The firm replied in August, giving its position on the Bowers case. "We received a letter in which the firm maintained that it had not discriminated against Bowers," Law School Dean Colin Diver said. "The firm claimed that it would be vindicated on appeal." Upon receiving the letter, which also contained a description of the firm's own non-discrimination policy instituted in 1990, the sub-committee reconvened to resolve the issue. On September 1, the subcommittee members decided not to take action against Baker & McKenzie. Instead, they asked for more information concerning how the firm's non-discrimination policy is carried out and regular updates concerning the appeal, said Associate Law Professor Alan Lerner, who is also the sub-committee chairperson. The information provided by Baker & McKenzie and a description of the Bowers case were also made available to Law students interested in the firm. Several issues regarding the Bowers case affected the sub-committee's decision, according to Lerner. He said the firm was not barred because, among other things, the subcommittee did not have information to show that the firm currently discriminates. "We also learned of other instances when the the firm was aware that certain employees had AIDS and was very supportive," Lerner said. Sub-committee members also said they feel reluctant to penalize Baker & McKenzie while the Bowers case is still under appeal. "Because the case was still on appeal it was possible that the decision would be reversed," Lerner said. Enraged by the outcome of the meeting with the faculty, Falzon and Weber wrote another letter appealing the decision. "In our letter, we said that if action was not taken we would go to the national media [and] picket at the recruiting site," Falzon said. The case has now been handed over to the Career Planning and Placement Committee. After emergency meetings that arose following the Weeks verdict, the committee decided to defer Baker & McKenzie's scheduled on-campus recruiting visit, making it the first university in the country to take action against the firm in this case. "The finding of the jury in the Weeks trial was that there had been an ongoing pattern of discrimination which is contrary to our policy," Lerner said. "There was evidence that other women besides Weeks had been harassed and that the partners were aware of this." For now, Baker & McKenzie is awaiting the Law School's decision. "Whether the accusations are founded or unfounded is beside the point," said firm Recruiting Director Ann Ogburn. "We are just going to wait for the Law School's decision and then we will decide what to do."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.