When it comes to judges most us would think that it is a pretty selective and privileged group of people in our society where such ugly social injustices like, for example, gender discrimination are none existent. That is why article published in the Massachusetts Lawyers Bias allegations at DIA reveal agency in turmoil just before Christmas is certainly not usual news. Even the beginning of the article is not what most people would expect to hear from a judge
Administrative Judge Kalina K. Vendetti minces no words in describing the Department of Industrial Accidents(DIA), the agency responsible for resolving disputed workers’ compensation claims in Massachusetts. “I’ve never worked for a more f--ked up organization than the Department of Industrial Accidents. ...
We are the court and are the ones who weed out the malingerers and make a difference in whether people can buy food for their family or pay their rent for the month or get medical care while they’re languishing in pain.
Massachusetts Department of Industrial Accidents is a part of the State government - Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development. According to the
web site its mission is
to administer the Commonwealth's Workers' Compensation system. One would expect that the Department own house should be in order before it can effectively to fulfill its mission, but apparently it is not the case. According to the article the most recent problems at the Department began in early 2013 "when judges Vendetti, Cheryl A. Jacques and Cristina Poulter met with the secretary of the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, the DIA’s director and the department’s senior judge to complain that 2012 appointee Michael E. Williams was being paid more than they were. (A fourth judge, Emily J. Novick, who died of cancer in December 2012, had raised similar concerns and intended to be part of the January meeting.)" Newly appointed Williams received $101,510 annual salary -- $10,000 higher than the starting pay of the DIA’s four female complainants who had the identical positions and were doing the same job as women judges. He was also given a coveted Boston parking spot that women judges claim they were never offered.
There is nothing new about pay inequality in legal profession where situation very much reminiscent of situation in corporate management world. There are significantly fewer women judges and top female executives than men. Even the most visible example of the US Supreme Court there are twice as many men on the court than women justices. And this is after unprecedented two women justices nomination during president Obama terms. Numerous scholarly articles on the subject such as, for example,
The gender stratification of income inequality among lawyers and
Men and Women of Elite Law Firms: Reevaluating Kanter's Legacy, provide the statistical data and the conclusions that are quite clear
Our analysis focuses on the changing structural settings, sectoral movements, and levels of class power that form gender specific mobility ladders for individuals in the profession. Each of these factors plays an independent role in the determination of earnings, usually to the advantage of men over women.
According to
statistics from the American Bar Association Commission on Women from most recent 2013 report women enrollment in the law schools and degree awarded in the recent years was around 47%
However, the situation even in law schools administration looks heavily tilted towards man in administrative position (see the graph at the bottom of the illustration) -- women hold only about
21% of dean position while represent almost
46% of the faculty and
66% of assistant dean positions!
It is more striking in the corporate world
as well as in the law firms
Thus, two infrequently asked, much less answered questions posed by the author of
The Gender Stratification of Income Inequality Among Lawyers article
How do women lawyers react to moving closer to the top of the class structure through the practice of law but to still being left behind men in their earnings? And what does it mean that gender discrimination is practiced in a profession that is linked so closely to the value placed in democratic societies on equal treatment?
seems at least partially have been answered -- women do not like and protest discrimination. However, whether their objection will change the situation still remains to be seen.
Meanwhile on August 14, 2013 the judges filed complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (
MCAD). In the defense the secretary of the Labor and Workforce Development office, Joanne F. Goldstein,
responded that Williams — who is black — was being paid more because “we don’t have any black judges. ”
In a different meeting, Goldstein reportedly referred to the DIA bench that comprises of 21 judges who in 2012 had 13,479 cases filed at the DIA according to the
2012 report as
“too pale, stale and male. ”
Meantime, judge Jacques’ participation in the suit has made her the target of retaliation. Two weeks after the judges filed with MCAD the DIA Senior Judge Hernandez announced that he was moving forward with Jacques' removal proceedings based on the complaint filed in May of 2013 by an attorney James N. Ellis Sr. accusing judge Jacques of judicial misconduct. The complaint was on hold since May till end of August until the complaint was filed with MCAD. While the whole issue with the complaint against Jacques is a cloudy matter including the fact the her accuser has his own problem with the BAR and pending disciplinary proceedings
Ellis is the patriarch of a well-known family of Worcester lawyers who have been the subject of disciplinary action by the DIA, Board of Bar Overseers and law enforcement. Ellis currently has a disciplinary proceeding pending against him, according to the BBO’s website.
What is troubling that this is not only alleged retaliation accusations against women judges who objected gender discrimination.
Vendetti, a 2010 appointee assigned to the DIA’s Fall River office, says Goldstein threatened the three judges that if they went public with their allegations, they would not be reappointed at the end of their six-year terms.
It remains to be seen whether results of discovery at MCAD or if the case will be transferred in court will bring more facts related to the hiring to light and what the decision in the case will be. What is obvious that gender discrimination is deeply engrained into social psyche and affects even the judiciary that should be unbiased and fair to all. It is remarkable that people who made a decision to hire judge candidate who is black male not just preferred him because he is black male, but offered him financial incentives. It is no less troubling that a judge who supposed to be impartial in administering justice in "the Commonwealth's Workers' Compensation system" readily accepted obviously unfair action towards his fellow women judges when his personal financial interest was at stake. It seems that Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct should look deeper into the matter and investigate the actions by judge Williams and any other administrative judges who were involved in his hiring. It also probably would be the best for the Massachusetts Governor to replace administrators of the Labor and Workforce Development office, including Joanne F. Goldstein, who were involved in this discriminating hiring process.