SRA kicks off rethink of minimum trainee wage
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is considering the abolition of the annual minimum wage requirement for trainee solicitors. The SRA board launched a consultation at its meeting yesterday (11 January), with the consultation paper finding there is no clear evidence that setting a minimum salary for trainees fulfils any of the regulatory objectives within the Legal Services Act.
January 12, 2012 at 07:11 AM
2 minute read
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is considering the abolition of the annual minimum wage requirement for trainee solicitors.
The SRA board launched a consultation at its meeting yesterday (11 January), with the consultation paper finding there is no clear evidence that setting a minimum salary for trainees fulfils any of the regulatory objectives within the Legal Services Act.
The minimum wage policy, which dates back to 1982, was designed to protect trainees from being exploited and to encourage high calibre graduates into the profession before the introduction of a national minimum wage.
The current minimum salary levels are £18,590 in central London and £16,650 outside, with the rates frozen in the past two years to reflect the economic downturn. In contrast, the national minimum wage is set at £6.08 per hour for those aged 21 and over.
SRA executive director Samantha Barrass said: "We do not regulate prices, including rate of pay, in any other area of our work. We have compared the practice with other professional regulators and found very few examples where this occurs. It would appear that setting a minimum salary does not address any identified risk to the public interest or the rule of law, nor is it clear that it improves access to the profession."
The consultation states: "It would run contrary to the SRA's objectives to
justify retention of the requirement on the grounds that it might limit access to the profession and make it more difficult for potential entrants who might otherwise meet the standards to enter the profession."
The SRA board is set to reach a decision on whether to remove the minimum salary requirement at its meeting on 16 May this year, after considering the responses to the consultation and conducting a full impact assessment.
The SRA has not reviewed the minimum wage requirement since taking over responsibility for prescribing the compulsory rate from the Law Society in 2007.
The consultation opens on Friday 13 January and will close on Tuesday 10 April 2012.
Click here to view the consultation document.
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
© 2024 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 AllBird & Bird Steers Katjes in Bittersweet Dispute with Lindt & Nestlé Over Vegan Chocolate Patent
Hong Kong Bourse Seeks Feedback on IPO Price Discovery, Takes Steps to Boost Capital Markets Activity
Big Four Japanese Firm Mori Hamada Launches Foreign Joint Law Enterprise, Joins Rebrand Drive
US Wins Trade Dispute with Mexico Over Genetically Modified Corn
Trending Stories
- 1Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 2Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 3'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 4Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
- 5As a New Year Dawns, the Value of Florida’s Revised Mediation Laws Comes Into Greater Focus
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