Businesses Are Learning That Effective DEI Efforts Require Cultural Change

October 17, 2023

Attorney Trevor Brice was interviewed for this article by Joseph Bednar, BusinessWest.


Shannon Rudder remembers her “bad boss.” And she never wanted to be one.

“What that bad boss did, what stuck out for me, was that everybody had to cater to how he led,” she said, adding that he believed that was how to maintain a bias-free workplace. Unfortunately, that philosophy can be incompatible with an equitable workplace.


“If I’m a single mom, maybe I can meet the deadlines, but I can’t do it in the same exact way as someone who doesn’t have kids, or has kids that are grown, right?” said Rudder, president and CEO of Martin Luther King Jr. Family Services in Springfield. “So in the most rudimentary sense, when you take the -isms and race and all that stuff out of it, that’s equity.”


And it’s a concept many businesses neglect when they talk about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, Rudder explained. They’re focused on a diverse workplace, but neglect to create the sort of culture where everyone is seen for their unique makeup and treated not equally, but equitably.


She cited a cartoon often used to express the point (see below). It pictures three boys trying to watch a ballgame from behind a fence. The first panel has each standing on a single box; though they’re being treated equally, the shortest boy still can’t see the game. The second panel, by moving those boxes around, demonstrates equity — now everyone can clearly see over the fence.

The barriers are different for each member of an organization, Rudder said, and so are the proverbial ‘boxes’ they might need to stand on to do their jobs effectively. (To take it a step further, the cartoon sometimes includes a third panel, labeled ‘liberation,’ with the fence removed completely.)

“The CEO of a nonprofit is not the same as a president or CEO of a Fortune 500 company, but conceptually, we can’t sit in our positions of power and think we know what everyone’s barriers are,” she added. “I’ve got to like actually talk to people to figure out what the barriers are. So it’s about the relationships.”


It’s also about honest discussions about privilege and internalized biases and weaving equity into every corner of the organization — and that’s not something that can be achieved with a one-off professional-development seminar on DEI.


“You’ve got to get to the heart of why there are biases, why folks aren’t being productive working together,” Rudder said. “We’re all socialized very differently. So we need to create environments where folks feel comfortable and they trust each other. You don’t want somebody to feel tokenized; you want to be able to create that authenticity, that trust, so then you can begin to understand what the real barriers are.”


Colleen Holmes understands this concept. As president and CEO of Viability Inc. in Springfield, which provides vocational training, job placement, and other supports for individuals with disabilities, she’s worked with employer partners to help them understand how a workplace can benefit from workers from all backgrounds and all abilities.


“All the services we offer are around folks having the opportunity and support to be able to build their skills and attain things that are important and meaningful to them in their lives,” she told BusinessWest. “Everything we do is very specifically geared toward helping individuals find their pathway to thriving beyond whatever their limits are. And for individuals with disabilities, those limits are considerable.”


But they can be overcome — if an employer is committed to equity.

“We take a whole lot of pride and pleasure in working with folks as the individuals they are. That means that we look at the whole person and not one single aspect of their identity, and that’s what DEI is about,” Holmes explained. “The aspects of our identity are layered and complex, and that’s what makes us interesting people.”


The said the word ‘accommodation’ carries some baggage because people think it’s a one-way street — that the employer has to accommodate the employee, but isn’t going to benefit from that employee beyond checking a DEI box.


“In fact, when employers learn how to think differently in their approaches to getting business objectives met, they have more humanity in their company,” she said, adding that employers who understand this — who are willing to cultivate not only a diverse workforce, but an equitable, inclusive one — have a leg up.

 

Questions Around Diversity

The ‘diversity’ piece of DEI has been the source of much discussion lately, as employers have grappled with whether efforts to build a racially (and in other ways) diverse workplace will run afoul of federal law, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in college admissions this past June.


“They didn’t directly speak to private employers; it only applies to colleges and universities,” said Trevor Brice, an attorney with the Royal Law Firm in Springfield, adding, however, that there could be ripple effects. “I think the implications of the Harvard and North Carolina ruling go more to reverse-discrimination suits, people in majority groups suing over being given unfavorable treatment in relation to minority groups because of affirmative-action or DEI programs.”


To be clear, he added, hiring and firing employees based on their status in protective classes has never been allowed. “What’s almost inevitable is there are going to be challenges to employers based on these cases now.”


Mary Jo Kennedy, partner and chair of the Employment Law practice at Bulkley Richardson in Springfield, agreed that the SCOTUS ruling has no immediate impact on the legal standards that govern private employers’ DEI or affirmative-action programs, noting, like Brice, the existing prohibition against making employment decisions solely based on a person’s protected characteristics, like race or gender.


“But there is the potential that we may see more reverse-discrimination cases,” she added, before listing several steps employers can take to promote diversity within the bounds of the law:

• Avoid considering race as a basis for employment decisions or practices in a way that could be seen as granting race-based preferences;

• Review any DEI policies or programs for compliance with federal and state laws;

• Understand that it’s OK to prioritize diversity and inclusion but not OK to use race- or gender-based quotas;

• Broaden the use of the term ‘diversity,’ understanding that it’s more than just race and gender; and

• Review the company website and other public-facing documents and internal DEI materials for compliance with federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination.


Employers can also protect themselves against reverse-discrimination cases by carefully documenting the reasons behind every hiring and promotion decision. In other words, it makes sense to cast a wide net to promote a diverse applicant base, but make sure there’s a business case for each decision, and “document, document, document,” Brice said.


“Why are you making this decision? Is it solely due to race or other protected characteristics? Then it’s probably not going to stand up to a legal challenge. But high GPA, work history, things like that are fine. So, is this person better-qualified? Just give justification for the decision in case you’re challenged down the road.”


Employment-law firms already see plenty of wrongful-termination cases, he added, and there’s a feeling that the June SCOTUS decision will embolden more of them, even though that ruling applies only to higher education. “More needs to be seen. There hasn’t been a legal challenge yet, so there’s no guidance yet.”

 

Making Meaningful Progress

Monson Savings Bank President Dan Moriarty has been actively been involved in DEI strategy over the past year or so, not only at his own institution, but through his co-leadership of an executive council established by the Massachusetts Bankers Assoc. to promote DEI efforts across member institutions.


“Every individual and every organization is on a different path along the way to being more diverse, equitable, and inclusive in their organization,” he said. “We have a DEI committee here at the bank, and we’re trying to adopt best practices from the Mass Bankers Association for advancing our DEI program.”


That process toward a level playing field begins with understanding the dynamics of DEI and the barriers and biases that hinder it, he noted, adding that he and two other MSB leaders recently attended a seminar at the Healing Racism Institute of Pioneer Valley. “That was phenomenal. Just the awareness and deep understanding was very impactful for me personally and professionally. We all have to do more.”


Adopting some best practices recommended by Mass Bankers, Monson Savings has created a DEI commitment statement, developed and implemented a DEI program that continues to evolve, provided DEI training to board members and employees, identified and monitored key performance metrics, and conducted periodic self-assessments of the program.


In addition, he said, the bank has reviewed numerous documents, including its strategic plan, along with communications, processes, and facilities, to ensure that potential barriers are identified and removed and that DEI expectations are reflected, while also conducting outreach and expanding the bank’s relationships with key community members and organizations.


“We have a long way to go with it, but we’re trying to build something. We want to make meaningful progress — not just check a box, but make a difference,” Moriarty said. “People want to do the right thing, but they have to educate themselves and really make a concerted effort to be able to make the change. It’s not just acknowledging we need more diversity, equity, and inclusion, but we also have to take actual steps to get us to a better place.”


Viability has seen its employer partners — more than 800 of them nationwide — find that better place.


“Some employers are looking to live a philosophy of the organization around diversity, equity, and inclusion because it’s the right thing to do,” Holmes said. “And there is data out there that shows that, if companies have accessible and welcoming environments for individuals with disabilities, consumers are more likely to shop there. And this is something businesses and employers have taken notice of.


“DEI is really a no-brainer,” she added. “But it does require a cultural change within an organization.”

 

The Rest of the Story

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

That’s one of Martin Luther King Jr.’s most popular quotes; just about everyone has heard it. But far fewer, Rudder said, know the rest of the quote, the words King said directly after:

“We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”


“That’s the nutshell of how I approach the work,” she added. “Our corporate counterparts — and I get why they do it — focus on diversity because that’s a tangible way to demonstrate, ‘we’ve got X percentage of women, we’ve got X percentage that identify as able-bodied or people of color,’ all those identities. I get why diversity comes first. But for me, it’s really centered on equity.”

Rudder said she practices ‘culture humility,’ which is a commitment to constant self-evaluation by which people not only learn to understand other cultures, but also critically examine their own — and understand the privileges they enjoy.


“If we’re going to aim to be centered in equity, we have to first understand where our privilege is,” she said. “And that goes back to Dr. King’s quote; we are all mutually interconnected. It’s a journey — it’s not just, ‘let’s do this program, and let’s check the boxes.’ We’ve got to weave this into the very fabric of who we are as an organization, as a corporation.”

September 25, 2025
Starbucks is facing a new wave of litigation, in this instance over its workplace dress code. Employees in California, Colorado, and Illinois allege that the Company’s updated policy forced them to purchase clothing items out-of-pocket without reimbursement, raising questions about employer obligations under state expense reimbursement laws. The Lawsuits On September 17, 2025, employees in Illinois and Colorado filed class-action lawsuits, while workers in California submitted complaints to the State’s Labor and Workforce Development Agency. If the Agency declines to act, those workers intend to pursue their own civil claims. The lawsuits are backed by the union organizing Starbucks workers, and plaintiffs argue that requiring employees to buy specific uniform items without full reimbursement violates the states’ statutes. Under laws in California, Colorado, and Illinois, employers must cover necessary business expenses, which can include uniforms or clothing mandated by a dress code. What the Dress Code Requires The revised policy, implemented in May 2025, requires employees to wear a solid black shirt (short or long sleeves, but not sleeveless or midriff-bearing) underneath their signature green apron. Pants must be khaki, black, or denim, and shoes must be in muted tones such as black, gray, navy, brown, tan, or white. The policy also forbids “theatrical makeup” and visible face tattoos, prohibits nail polish and tongue piercings, and limits workers to one (1) facial piercing. In an effort to offset the change, Starbucks provided two shirts free of charge to each employee. Workers contend this was not enough, since multiple additional items were required to comply with the policy. Court documents show that some employees who failed to follow the dress code were subject to verbal warnings or sent home before starting their shifts. Worker Claims One plaintiff, Shay Mannik, a shift supervisor in Colorado, reported purchasing four black T-shirts, compliant shoes, and jeans to meet the dress code requirements. Despite these costs, Mannik claims they were never reimbursed. “It’s unfair that a billion-dollar company puts this burden on workers already struggling with unpredictable hours and understaffed stores,” Mannik stated through attorneys. Starbucks’ Response Starbucks defended the policy as a way to “deliver a more consistent coffeehouse experience to our customers and provide our partners with simpler and clearer dress code guidance.” The Company emphasized that it issued two free shirts to employees to prepare for the change. Key Considerations for Employers The Starbucks litigation underscores several important lessons for businesses:  Uniform Policies May Trigger Reimbursement Duties. Even when employers provide some clothing, state laws may still require reimbursement if employees must make additional purchases. State Laws Differ. California, Colorado, and Illinois all impose expense reimbursement obligations, but requirements vary, and enforcement can be aggressive. Here in Massachusetts, an employer does not need to pay for or reimburse an employee for general clothing, such as khakis, a black shirt, and black shoes, since these are ordinary items that can be worn outside of work. If the employer requires a specific style, brand, or logo (making the clothing a true uniform) then the employer must provide or reimburse for it and cover the cost of maintenance if special cleaning is needed. The only exception for ordinary clothing is if the cost would reduce the employee’s pay below minimum wage. Policy Rollouts Should Weigh Legal Risks. Employers introducing or revising appearance standards should carefully evaluate potential compliance costs, both financial and reputational. Takeaway The lawsuits against Starbucks will test the boundaries of state reimbursement laws and may influence how courts interpret employer obligations regarding dress codes. For companies, this case highlights the need to review policies proactively and ensure expense reimbursement practices comply with applicable state requirements. At The Royal Law Firm, we advise businesses on preventive compliance and represent employers when disputes arise. Our team’s focus on business defense ensures that policies are both operationally effective and legally sound. The Royal Law Firm LLP is a woman-owned, women-managed corporate law firm certified as a women’s business enterprise with the Massachusetts Supplier Diversity Office, the National Assoc. of Minority and Women Owned Law Firms, and the Women’s Business Enterprise National Council. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.
September 24, 2025
The Royal Law Firm is proud to announce that we have been ranked in the inaugural Chambers Spotlight Massachusetts Guide, which is a prestigious recognition from the internationally renowned legal research company Chambers and Partners! We are honored to be recognized for our exceptional expertise in Labor & Employment law. This ranking reflects our unwavering commitment to delivering top-tier legal counsel to businesses throughout the Commonwealth and beyond. Only 2% of attorneys are ranked by Chambers. The Royal Law Firm is the only Labor & Employment firm ranked in Springfield, MA. This award highlights small and mid-sized firms with a proven record of excellence and partner-level attention to client matters. Chambers Spotlight is a new guide designed to showcase the very best boutique and mid-sized firms across key U.S. legal markets, focusing on firms that combine regional insight, national impact, and client-focused service. About The Royal Law Firm The Royal Law Firm is a New England-based, women-owned law firm that exclusively represents businesses. Our attorneys are known for their aggressive litigation strategy, proactive employment law counseling, and commitment to understanding every client’s unique business model and goals. We are proud to be certified as a Women-Owned Business through state and national organizations including WBENC, NAMWOLF, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Supplier Diversity Office. The Royal Law Firm was founded by Amy Royal in 2008 with a mission to promote diversity in the legal field, serve businesses exclusively, and give back to her hometown community. As a seasoned trial lawyer with over 25 years of civil litigation experience representing companies, Amy specializes in employer-side employment law, business tort defense, labor law, and corporate transactions. She has successfully defended clients in individual and class action cases involving wage and hour issues, discrimination, harassment, FMLA, OSHA, ERISA, and more. Amy also advises on union matters, HR policies, workplace investigations, and affirmative action compliance. Her commercial litigation work spans business torts, unfair competition, and contract disputes, while her transactional practice includes drafting employment agreements, vendor contracts, and regulatory compliance strategies. Our recognition in the Chambers Spotlight Guide reflects the dedication and excellence of our entire team. Thank you to our clients, peers, and community for your continued trust and support. We look forward to continuing to serve you with excellence.