Author
According to the National Association for Law Placement, Inc.’s (NALP) 2019 report on diversity in U.S. law firms, only about half of one percent of all lawyers in large United States law firms identified as having a disability. While it is important for law firms to address their cultures, provide accommodations, and ensure their workplaces are attractive to diverse candidates, including disabled candidates, law schools play a critical role in the recruitment and interview process for law firms. Law firms conduct outreach through, and engage in on-campus interviews through, law schools. Law schools and their career services offices can leverage their positions to make sure that on-campus interview and recruitment processes are as accessible and inclusive as possible. Law schools can make a difference in the recruitment of disabled candidates and in diversifying the legal profession.
- Make sure the interviews themselves are accessible.
Law schools often coordinate the logistics for the interview processes for any on-campus interviews. Students often deal with inaccessible interview locations, issues with accommodations, logistical mishaps that make accommodations difficult to access or impossible to determine, and more. Of particular concern is that, in many of these processes, students are not permitted to directly contact employers to even request accommodations for these interviews. Schools therefore play a particularly important role in communicating and coordinating these logistics. When schools fail to implement and coordinate accommodations, as well as to ensure that interviews are accessible, disabled applicants are not able to succeed.
One other concern is that many of these interviews may be scheduled closely together and may include few or no breaks in between. For students with anxiety or other disabilities, this style of interviewing may be inaccessible. When interviews are in person, for students with physical disabilities, having little to no time to get from one interview to another, particularly when there is some distance in between the interview sites, may pose a challenge. Accommodations for breaks or priority scheduling may be required for these students.
In the unique time of COVID, many of these interviews are likely taking place remotely. One positive is that this change eliminates potential architectural barriers when dealing with inaccessible interview locations and dealing with those logistics. However, it does raise a number of other issues. Make sure that you are appropriately accommodating students in light of that fact.
Ensure instructions for any video or teleconferencing software use are clear, and that the software is accessible and compliant. Some students may require you to use a different or more accessible software for their interviews. If that is the case, make sure that those logistics are figured out. If that can be avoided, and you are able to use the most accessible software possible for everyone, that is preferred, but that is not always possible.
Make sure that your video or teleconferencing software has a closed captioning functioning and does not block third party captioning software, like Otter, for those who prefer to use those tools. Additionally, be sure to have qualified live captioning available instead of just artificial intelligence captioning for students who require captioning. You do not want your students to be disadvantaged during job interviews and having the proper captioning can make all the difference. Artificial intelligence captioning can often miss words, may turn out nonsense, may feature a lag, likely is missing important tags or information about who is speaking, and often, words disappear too quickly to read them.
If an applicant requires that certain images or screenshares (if applicable) be described, make sure that occurs. Additionally, sometimes employers or others will try to use messaging within videoconferencing software. Depending upon an individual’s disability, these messages may be difficult to read or access while on video calls. That should be kept in mind.
2. Involve disabled students in the planning process.
There are a number of other accessibility issues and considerations, and this list is, by no means, exhaustive. The best way to ensure that you are accommodating everyone is to involve disabled students in the process. Disabled students know best what they need. Making sure that they are involved in planning and logistics, from the beginning, can eliminate accessibility problems later on.
3. Have a clear and communicated accommodations policy and procedure.
Providing accommodations is important, but making sure that students know they can receive accommodations for on-campus interviews and how to receive those accommodations is just as important. It is essentially useless if a law school provides accommodations if no one knows about them or how to access them. Make sure that the availability of accommodations is clearly and conspicuously communicated throughout the process, as well as that you have a clear procedure for requesting those accommodations.
4. Be ready to discuss accommodation options with students, and educate yourself about available accommodations.
Disabled students may not know exactly what they need. These interviews may be students’ first experiences with this type of interview process. Your guidance and suggestions for potential accommodations may be helpful. You should know what questions to ask students to best understand their needs and work out solutions with the student as a collaborative exercise. Connecting your students to resources like the Job Accommodation Network or the National Disabled Law Students Association may also be helpful. Even if you do not personally have all of the answers (which we cannot expect without lived experience), your ability to connect students with disabled professionals who have been through the process is immensely valuable.
5. Keep all postings, applications, and notifications on accessible platforms.
Law schools often use websites or platforms for professional development and employment applications and resources. Make sure those platforms are fully accessible and compliant so that everyone can participate in the process. Accessibility may range from ensuring compliance for blind or low vision students, clarity in language and instruction, user friendliness, and more.
6. Make sure the firms you invite have non-discrimination policies, sign on to the American Bar Association’s “Disability Diversity in the Legal Profession: A Pledge for Change,” include disability in their diversity statements, and take action on their commitments beyond mere words.
As law schools, which essentially help these law firms to staff their associate class and provide large platforms for recruitment, you have leverage to place pressure on law firms to effect positive change, not only to affirm a commitment to disability inclusion but also to take positive strides. Promises and statements mean little without action.
7. Provide clear instructions for participation in the on-campus interview process.
I remember when I participated in my on-campus interview process. It was anxiety-provoking and confusing, particularly when there are emails about “disastrous” consequences for directly reaching out to any one employer. There were so many different instructions sent in so many different emails. It was difficult to keep track. That is not accessible or inclusive for a variety of reasons. Keep yourselves organized, keep your instructions simple and in one place, and do not instill unnecessary panic in those participating in the process through your instructions. These are all ways to exclude and disadvantage disabled students.
8. Establish clear grievance procedures for any issues that arise with interviews or accommodations.
Logistical failures happen. These failures should be avoided at all costs, but sometimes, technical glitches occur, interpreters experience emergencies, and other incidents happen despite one’s best efforts. However, you need to have an established plan in the event that a student’s accommodation(s) is/are not available, and that detailed plan and procedure needs to be communicated to both students and participating employers. That plan should involve as much notice to the student as possible, placing as little stress on the student as possible, and providing as little detail to the employer about the accommodation, disability, or logistical issue as necessary to ensure that discrimination does not disadvantage the candidate.
9. Do not contribute to toxic cultures.
There is typically a lot of competition, specific instruction that seem to involve a number of harsh consequences, an air of prestige, and so many other stressors that can cause unnecessary anxiety throughout the on-campus interview process. These stressors are only compounded by the perceived environments at law firms. Feeding into these cultures not only undercuts interview performance, but it also creates confusion, makes interviews more difficult for disabled students, and so much more. Not only should schools ensure that they are not feeding into these cultures, but they should also be sure that they have mental health and other resources available for those who are feeling anxious, including counseling. Although it is quite fun to see puppies, or encounter free candy or treats, on campus during stressful times, those types of events are not a replacement for essential services like counseling.
10. Do not host firms who require employees to sign arbitration clauses.
Although this issue is one that is typically discussed in the context of sexual harassment, signing an arbitration clause can also prevent an employee who experiences disability discrimination from filing suit or pursuing other action outside of arbitration. Many law schools have, and can, use their leverage to ensure that law firms cease this practice.
—
Although this list is not exhaustive, it contains some concrete ways law schools and career services offices can ensure that the on-campus interview processes that they are sponsoring and facilitating are accessible and inclusive. Law schools can make a difference in prioritizing diversity, equity, and inclusion at law firms, increasing disability representation and disclosure, and changing environments and attitudes in the legal profession.