I would like to provide a formal review regarding the issue of racism and discrimination at ClientEarth, particularly in light of events following the death of George Floyd in 2020. In the aftermath of this incident, staff requested that the company management issue a statement denouncing racism. However, the management's response was that they were not in a position to make such a statement, citing internal racial issues within the organization. While this may initially seem like an honest acknowledgment of the company’s struggles, it soon became apparent that their silence was driven more by a fear of negative public relations rather than a genuine commitment to addressing these challenges.
Following this, the company’s immediate response was to hastily appoint individuals from diverse backgrounds to the Board, employing the widely criticized tactic of tokenism. This move appeared to be primarily aimed at improving the company’s public image, rather than addressing the underlying issues of racism within the organization.
During my four years at ClientEarth, I observed that there were no lawyers from diverse backgrounds, and I am uncertain whether this has changed since the organization's inception. Additionally, several departments appeared to lack employees from diverse racial or ethnic backgrounds, which I suspect was a deliberate decision.
While the Operations Team was more diverse, the roles within this team were largely supportive in nature, with little to no influence on the organization’s decision-making processes, ethos, or values. This is a common strategy employed by many organizations to create the illusion of diversity without empowering individuals from diverse backgrounds to shape the organization's direction.
It is evident that diversity within the management, Board, and executive leadership is crucial for ensuring that different perspectives are represented and that organizational practices and decisions are subject to scrutiny. However, some organizations, including ClientEarth, seem reluctant to embrace such diversity at senior levels, as it could challenge existing practices and power structures. This reluctance should raise concerns for the public, as well as for donors, partners, board members, and associates of such organizations.
I recall a black colleague sharing that her position at ClientEarth was initially secured due to a supportive manager who was not racist, but once that manager left, her opportunities for career advancement diminished or were effectively blocked. This highlights a deeper issue within the organization regarding the limited opportunities for people from diverse backgrounds to progress.
Additionally, there may be a concerning assumption at ClientEarth that the inclusion of individuals from diverse backgrounds could negatively impact the organization’s success in legal cases, potentially due to the discriminatory atmosphere that exists within the broader legal industry.
Furthermore, committees focused on diversity, inclusion, and equality within organizations often have little power to effect change, as real influence ultimately rests with the top-level management. Based on my experience, I did not observe a genuine willingness from ClientEarth's management to address these issues during my time there.
Another initiative that I found to be problematic was the creation of paid internships for young people from diverse backgrounds. While this may appear to be a positive step toward increasing diversity, in practice, it seemed more like a short-term measure designed to improve the organization’s public image rather than a meaningful attempt to address the structural barriers faced by people from diverse backgrounds and religious beliefs. These interns were often placed in administrative roles, with limited opportunities for advancement, which undermines the initiative’s long-term impact.
Although there were workshops on unconscious bias and other initiatives aimed at addressing diversity, I cannot recall the specific details or lasting effects of these efforts. It is clear, however, that many of these measures were largely symbolic, rather than substantive steps toward meaningful change.
In conclusion, the diversity and anti-racism initiatives at ClientEarth appeared to be more focused on managing the organization’s public image than on addressing the deep-seated racial and discriminatory issues within the company. These initiatives did not lead to meaningful structural change, and I left the organization disheartened by the lack of genuine will to tackle these critical issues from within the leadership.
