"We Are An Equal Opportunity Employer": Diversity Doublespeak

Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 61 | Issue 4 Article 4 Fall 9-1-2004 "We Are An Equal Opportunity Employer": Diversity Doublespeak Cheryl L. Wade Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Business Organizations Law Commons, and the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons Recommended Citation Cheryl L. Wade, "We Are An Equal Opportunity Employer": Diversity Doublespeak, 61 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1541 (2004), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol61/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Law Review at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact . "We Are An Equal Opportunity Employer": Diversity Doublespeak Cheryl L. Wade* Abstract There are too few discussions about race and race relations among corporate managersand directors. The rhetoric used in these infrequent discussionsrevolves aroundthe ideaof diversity in the workplace. In recent years, when speaking about employees and race issues, corporateactors have become curiously silent aboutdiscriminationand racism. This Article provides several examples of the rhetorical devices used by corporate spokespersons that ignore persisting problems with discrimination and racism by focusing solely on diversity efforts. Diversity rhetoric allows corporatemanagersto avoid responsibilityforenduringdiscriminationin the workplace. Diversityefforts, without antidiscriminationefforts, increase the likelihood that the company will be engaged in litigating and mediating disputes about discrimination. This Article explores the potential for improving the discourse about race and racism in the corporatesetting in a way that has the potentialto transform racially-toxiccorporatecultures. Table of Contents I. Introduction: Diversity Doublespeak ......................................... 1542 II. Examples of Diversity Doublespeak ........................................... 1547 A. Public Service Electric and Gas Company ........................... 1547 1550 B. Texaco's Proxy Statements .................................................. Ill. Com pliance Doublespeak ........................................................... 1556 IV. Directorial Ignorance Is Directorial Bliss: In re Caremark InternationalInc. Derivative Litigation and Cosmetic 1567 M onitoring ............................................... * Harold F. McNiece Professor of Law, St. John's University School of Law. 1541 1542 61 WASH. & LEE L REV. 1541 (2004) V. Acknowledgment and/or Apology: The Potential To Transform Corporate Cultures ............................................... 1574 V I. C onclusion .................................................................................. 1580 L Introduction: Diversity Doublespeak In January 2004, I attended the Seventh Annual Rainbow/PUSH Wall Street Project Conference in New York City. The mission of the Wall Street Project, founded by Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr., is to assure "equal opportunity for America's underserved consumers, employees and entrepreneurs. Access to capital, industry and technology continues to be the last stage of today's civil rights movement."' Of particular importance to me were two panels entitled "Inclusion Advocates-How Have the Roles of Workforce Diversity Directors, Supplier Diversity Directors and Community Affairs Executives Changed Post 9/11 and Recession?," and "Best Practices: The Steps Multinational Corporations Are Taking to Avoid Diversity Crises." Diversity executives with varying and elaborate titles from several public companies presented on these two panels.2 Each presenter delivered an adulatory portrayal of their companies' diversity efforts. Each presenter used the same words to describe aspirations of racial equity at their firm-"diversity," "access to opportunity," "inclusion."3 As I listened to their presentations, I was reminded of a book about a phenomenon called "doublespeak., 4 The book's subtitle was, "How Government, Business, 1. Letter from Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., President & Founder, Rainbow/PUSH Wall Street Project, to Friends of the Wall Street Project (Jan. 2004) (on file with the Washington and Lee Law Review). 2. The following is a list of some of the presenters, their titles, and the companies they represented: Essie L. Calhoun, Director, Multicultural Marketing, Community Relations and Contributions, Eastman Kodak Company; Shan Carr, Director, Workforce Management, Lockheed Martin; Elizabeth Derby, Director, Global Diversity, Credit Suisse First Boston; Deborah A. Elam, Manager, Global Employer of Choice Initiatives, General Electric; Ana Duarte-McCarthy, Director, Global Workforce Diversity and College Relations Director, Citigroup; Fernando Hernandez, Supplier Diversity, AT&T; Javette Jenkins, Program Director, Global Procurement, IBM; Roderick K. Gillum, Vice President, Corporate Responsibility and Diversity, General Motors Corporation; May Snowden, Vice President, Chief Diversity Officer, Starbucks; and Carlton Yearwood, Vice President, Business Ethics and Diversity, Waste Management, Inc. Program, Seventh Annual Rainbow/PUSH Wall Street Project Conference (2004) (on file with author). 3. In fact, the theme for the 2004 Wall Street Project Conference was "Inclusion-The Key to Economic Empowerment and Growth." Letter from Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., supra note 1. 4. WILLIAM LuTz, DOUBLESPEAK (1989). WE ARE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 1543 Advertisers, and Others Use Language to Deceive You."'5 The author defined "doublespeak" in the following manner: [L]anguage that pretends to communicate but really doesn't. It is language that makes the bad seem good, the negative appear positive, the unpleasant appear attractive or at least tolerable. Doublespeak is language that avoids or shifts responsibility .... It is language that conceals or prevents thought; rather than extending thought, doublespeak limits it .... Basic to doublespeak is incongruitZ, the incongruity between what is said or left unsaid, and what really is. In the three hours and fifteen minutes I spent listening to the presenters on both panels, not one presenter uttered the word "discrimination." None of the panelists spoke of antidiscrimination law and their companies' efforts to monitor compliance with such law. Discrimination, "the D-word," I presumed, was an epithet to be avoided at all costs at gatherings such as these. Implicit in their silence about discrimination and racism was the conclusion that these problems had been resolved within their companies, if they had ever existed at all. Their silence implied that the only remaining issues for corporate managers to address were inclusion of people of color in the wealth generated by public companies, access (...truncated)