Five ways to make access fairer
As a female, non-white, non-Oxbridge, state-school educated barrister, I am in the minority of those at the Bar in any number of ways. In fact, if I had a fiver for each time a client said to me "You don't look like a barrister", I could probably retire from practice altogether.
August 17, 2009 at 08:22 AM
4 minute read
As a female, non-white, non-Oxbridge, state-school educated barrister, I am in the minority of those at the Bar in any number of ways. In fact, if I had a fiver for each time a client said to me "You don't look like a barrister", I could probably retire from practice altogether.
However, one thing I am most definitely – and unfashionably – is middle-class (my father is an engineer, my mother a solicitor). I, like my parents, have entered a very middle-class profession. The recently published report on fair access to the professions criticised the lack of social mobility in the UK, in particular the fact that "access to the professions is becoming the preserve of those from a smaller and smaller part of the social spectrum."
The figures are startling – and the Bar didn't come out of it well: 75% of judges and over 60% of barristers were educated at independent schools. By way of comparison, about 6%-7% of children are educated at independent schools.
The report makes great play of the part that aspiration plays in entry to the professions. And while this may be true, the fact remains that some major practical hurdles lay in wait for any young person from a lower socio-economic group seeking a career as a barrister. You can imagine the helpful careers advisor pointing out:
"Well, if you want to become a barrister you'll have to take a law degree at a respected university (with fees and top-up fees), then undertake the BVC at a cost of nearly £10,000, work for a year as a pupil probably on an income that is far below the cost of living in a major city. You'll also have to shell out £500 for an outfit last fashionable in the 17th century. Oh, and none of the work experience you'll need to do is paid"
Any budding hopes Kevin may have of cross-examining in Court One of the Old Bailey probably wither and die at this point.
Of course, there are some heavily ingrained attitudes and perceptions limiting access to the Bar that will take a long time to change. But I think there are some simple things that could be done immediately to improve things:
Pay travel expenses during mini-pupillages. For those outside London a daily journey in for a week (travelling at peak times) can be enormously expensive. It is simply not just that mini-pupils are left out of pocket in order to gain experience that chambers demand.
Ban nepotistic work experience. Young Tarquin may desperately want to be a barrister, but is it right that he walks into a mini-pupillage at a top set because daddy plays golf with one of the silks? Most chambers have a formal application procedure for mini-pupillages; that should apply to all.
Make all Inn scholarships means tested. The Inns of Court shell out hundreds of thousands of pounds in scholarships, but not all Inns examine whether or not a candidate actually needs the money. The result is there are some scholars with large family incomes who do not actually require the Inn's money to train at the Bar.
Get rid of all Inn scholarships linked to specific Oxbridge colleges. And put the money towards general scholarships instead.
Increase the minimum pupilage award. £833 per month is not a lot to live on, in particular in London.
While the above will not level the playing field, they might go some way to stopping the increase in gradient.
Ayeesha Bhutta is a barrister at Field Court Chambers
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllKMPG Moves to Provide Legal Services in the US—Now All Eyes Are on Its Big Four Peers
International Arbitration: Key Developments of 2024 and Emerging Trends for 2025
4 minute readThe Quiet Revolution: Private Equity’s Calculated Push Into Law Firms
5 minute read'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250