8 – 8:30am            Breakfast and Networking
8:30 – 8:35am       Panelist Introductions
8:35 – 9:45am       Panelists Presentations
9:45 – 10:15am     Open Q&A Between Audience and Panelists
10:15 – 10:45am   Coffee and Networking

Panelists Include:

Joseph DeMarco – DeMarco Sciaccotta, LLP
Jacqueline Camacho-Ruiz – JJR Marketing
Me – Labor & Employment Law & Human Resources Counseling
Susan Smith – Sandler Training, Selloquent
Brian Marshall – Alliance For Strategic Advantage

This free forum will be held at 20 South Clark, Chicago, IL on the 14th floor. Please RSVP with Blanca Campos at blanca@sbacil.org, or at (847) 990-7909.

Chicago NAWBO Award to AMS Earth Movers

One of my clients, Julie Savitt, the founder/owner of AMS Earth Movers, won the 2011 Woman Business of the Year award from the National Association of Woman Business Owner (NAWBO) Chicago.  Congratulations Julie!

At the core of Stephanie’s presentation is the below Slideshare/Youtube presentation (click on the link below):

Statistical Analysis as Evidence in Employment Discrimination Litigation

Additionally, there was some good back and forth discussion on my LI Group concerning the importance of statistical analysis.  Instead of summarizing the discussion, I’ve posted it in its entirety below:

Charles Krugel www.charlesakrugel.com • This is great Stephanie! Thanks for posting it.  After watching your presentation, my impression is that statistical analysis may be more important for combatting class action certification than actual disparate impact discrimination.  Am I wrong?

Stephanie R Thomas, Ph.D. • Statistical analysis has a role in class certification, disparate impact and disparate treatment cases. For class certification, statistics can be used to examine commonality and typicality – I have a separate presentation on this (http://www.slideshare.net/TheProactiveEmployer/examining-class-certification-issues-with-statistical-analysis).

For disparate impact claims, I see statistics as having two roles. First, you can statistically examine your employment practices (hiring, promotion, termination, requirements for a given position, etc.) with respect to various protected group definitions proactively to identify any potential problem areas before you get to the litigation stage. Second, in the litigation context, statistics can be used to examine the challenged policy or practice to determine if there is statistical support for the claim of disparate impact.

With respect to disparate treatment claims, statistics can be used to assess whether there is statistical support for the claim. The analysis for disparate treatment is typically more complex than for a claim of disparate impact, because of the need to carefully define comparator groups and similarly situated employee groupings. But statistics can be very useful in assessing the merits of disparate treatment claims.

Charles Krugel www.charlesakrugel.com • Thanks again Stephanie!  The use of statistical analysis in disparate treatment claims is an interesting idea.

The reason that I wonder if statistical analysis is more beneficial at the class action certification stage of litigation, in disparate impact claims, is because that ruling lies with the judge not a jury. Whereas in a disparate treatment claim, the final determination of guilt or innocence is usually made by a jury.

In my opinion, it requires incredible communication skills to get statistical analysis across to a jury in a disparate treatment case. Obviously, on a case-by-case basis, it has to be determined whether and how to get this analysis across to a jury in a such a case.

Conrad from Avvo said,

December 5, 2010 @ 10:26 am

Charles – not every lawyer appreciates the transparency that Avvo has brought to the legal industry, yet this is exactly what consumers want and deserve. This is why we will not remove profiles from Avvo. Our commitment to transparency has made us the number one legal directory in the world.

I’m disappointed to read your recommendation responding to Avvo’s transparency with fabrications. I would strongly caution any lawyer against deliberately and proactively misrepresenting their background anywhere – on a resume, at a cocktail party or on Avvo. The professional ramifications of this highly unethical behavior are severe.

Finally, if you are having trouble accessing your account, emailcustomercare@avvo.com for assistance.

Regards,
Conrad Saam

First, I’d like to thank Conrad and Avvo for responding.  However, they completely miss the point.  They argue that their system provides transparency to consumers.  To an extent, they’re right.  However, to the extent that I, and others, believe that their ratings system is biased against solo and small firms, they’re wrong (to read my arguments concerning this bias just search “Avvo” in the search box on this blog).  Moreover, there’s little transparency to a system that entices attorneys to “claim” their “profile” but doesn’t let them “unclaim” it.

Moreover, Conrad claims that there could be severe ethical ramifications for my suggestion about how to game Avvo by spiking a profile by either deflating it to zero or inflating it to ten.  I also find this contention disingenuous.  If I load my own profile with nonsensical negative information, therefore lowering my score to zero and rendering my rating incredible, how is this an ethical violation?  By making myself look ridiculous on a for profit and biased rating site like Avvo what ethical rules am I violating and how am I jeopardizing my license?  Beats me.

As I’ve said numerous times, I don’t care if my profile is removed (or not) from Avvo.  I just want to “unclaim” my profile.  It’s disingenuous for Avvo to claim transparency when they don’t explain that once you “claim” your profile it’s impossible to “unclaim” it.  Moreover, this isn’t a level playing field for all attorneys and consumers using Avvo to find attorneys.

My advice to Avvo is simple:  Allow attorneys to “unclaim” their profile.  In my mind, whether or not I’m on Avvo is superflous in light of the “claimed” profile indication, and Avvo’s refusal to permit attorneys to “unclaim” the profile.