Diversity

Because of its amorphous nature; making the case for diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging (DEI&B) is sometimes a difficult one — especially in the context of consumer bankruptcy. While larger law firms and corporations have begun to embrace and incorporate DEI&B initiatives, the influence of DEI&B is far more elusive in the consumer bankruptcy context. This panel will discuss the challenges faced by smaller consumer firms regarding DEI&B and, by explaining the “what, why and how” for DEI&B, will propose possible solutions for creating a more inclusive environment.

Sponsored by ABI's Diversity & Inclusion Working Group

For all the efforts around interrupting bias and diversifying the legal profession, recent data shows that diversity continues to be a problem area in the insolvency industry. While the road to a more equitable legal profession is a long one, there are practical tools and best practices that individuals and organizations can utilize today to not only increase diversity among their attorney ranks, but also cultivate a culture of belonging within their spaces.

Content begins at 19:26
Beyond discussing issues related to systemic bias, this panel will discuss approaches to challenging the status quo and addressing issues of diversity and inclusion. The panel of experts will provide attendees concrete, actionable knowledge on how to approach creating a welcoming workplace. Attendees will leave the session ready to use this knowledge to jumpstart their own efforts to enhance their workplace diversity, or to contribute to the firm’s existing diversity and inclusion efforts.

This panel will focus on issues regarding gender, race, diversity and belonging, and how to build a resilient workplace.

For two years this group has studied the influence of a judge’s gender on the processing and outcomes in bankruptcy cases. Leveraging several studies in non-bankruptcy cases on whether gender influences judicial decision making, this study has looked at 837 student loan discharge opinions and compared the outcomes of those cases based on the gender of the judge and the gender of the debtor. The results demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the way men and women decide such cases.