Between Compliance and Commitment: The Law's Contested Role in Advancing Corporate Diversity and Inclusion

Haokun Li

doi:10.54254/2753-7048/2025.LD28936

Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public MediaOpen access

Between Compliance and Commitment: The Law's Contested Role in Advancing Corporate Diversity and Inclusion

Research Article

Open Access

Between Compliance and Commitment: The Law's Contested Role in Advancing Corporate Diversity and Inclusion

Haokun Li ^1*

¹ Beijing 21st Century School

^*Corresponding author: lihaokun10573@outlook.com

Published on 5 November 2025

LNEP Vol.115

ISSN (Print): 2753-7056

ISSN (Online): 2753-7048

ISBN (Print): 978-1-80590-513-4

ISBN (Online): 978-1-80590-514-1

Download Cover

Abstract

In recent decades, workplace diversity and inclusion (D&I) have been high on the agendas of policymakers and businesses, driven by social movements, globalization, and labor market changes. This paper discusses the effects of law on corporate diversity and inclusion management. It will particularly focus on labor law, anti-discrimination law, and disability rights law. The study aims to examine to what extent have D&I legislations helped to safeguard workers from discrimination and encourage employers to create inclusive workplaces. The study adopts a qualitative method through literature review, comparative legal review, and empirical evidence synthesis from existing research and reports regarding employment outcomes, earning gaps, and workplace accommodations across different jurisdictions. The current literature demonstrates that employment and anti-discrimination law have seen measurable advances, i.e., reduced wage gaps, increased employment for disadvantaged groups, and more prevalence of inclusive practices. At the same time, challenges such as hidden discrimination, enforcement difficulties and global variance continue to impede the complete fulfillment of legal rights. The study concludes that the law provides an important foundation for diversity management, but inclusive working in practice requires additional organisational and cultural efforts.

Keywords:

Labor Law, Anti-Discrimination Law, Workplace Diversity, Management of Inclusion

View PDF

References

[1]. Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. American Economic Review, 94(4), 991–1013.

[2]. Quillian, L., Pager, D., Hexel, O., & Midtbøen, A. H. (2017). Meta-analysis of field experiments shows no change in racial discrimination in hiring over time. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(41), 10870–10875.

[3]. Donohue, J. J., & Siegelman, P. (1991). The changing nature of employment discrimination litigation. Stanford Law Review, 43(5), 983–1033.

[4]. Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2017). The gender wage gap: Extent, trends, and explanations. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(3), 789–865.

[5]. Goldin, C. (2014). A grand gender convergence: Its last chapter. American Economic Review, 104(4), 1091–1119.

[6]. Schur, L., Kruse, D., & Blanck, P. (2013). People with disabilities: Sidelined or mainstreamed? Cambridge University Press.

[7]. Foster, D., & Wass, V. (2013). Disability in the labour market: An exploration of concepts of the ideal worker and organisational fit that disadvantage employees with impairments. Sociology, 47(4), 705–721.

[8]. Bertrand, M., Bombardini, M., Fisman, R., & Trebbi, F. (2019). Does meritocracy work? (NBER Working Paper No. 26231). National Bureau of Economic Research.

[9]. Kayess, R., & French, P. (2008). Out of darkness into light? Introducing the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Human Rights Law Review, 8(1), 1–34.

[10]. Acemoglu, D., & Angrist, J. D. (2001). Consequences of employment protection? The case of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Journal of Political Economy, 109(5), 915–957.

[11]. Chung, H. (2018). The flexibility paradox: Why flexible working leads to (self-)exploitation. Policy Press.

[12]. Kalev, A., Dobbin, F., & Kelly, E. (2006). Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 589–617.

[13]. Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2016). Why diversity programs fail. Harvard Business Review, 94(7), 52–60.

[14]. Edelman, L. B. (2016). Working law: Courts, corporations, and symbolic civil rights. University of Chicago Press.

[15]. Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over-represented in precarious leadership positions. British Journal of Management, 16(2), 81–90.

[16]. McCrudden, C. (2011). Two views of subordination: The personal scope of employment discrimination law in Jivraj v Hashwani. Industrial Law Journal, 40(4), 404–422.

[17]. Eurostat. (2021). Gender pay gap statistics. European Commission.

[18]. Fredman, S. (2011). Discrimination law (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

[19]. McCrudden, C. (2001). Thinking about the discrimination directives. European Anti-Discrimination Law Review, 1(1), 17–23.

[20]. Clermont, K. M., & Schwab, S. J. (2004). How employment discrimination plaintiffs fare in federal court. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 1(2), 429–458.

[21]. Equinet. (2018). Equality bodies: Key actors in the enforcement of equality law. European Network of Equality Bodies.

[22]. Galanter, M. (1974). Why the “haves” come out ahead: Speculations on the limits of legal change. Law & Society Review, 9(1), 95–160