SRA agrees to scrap minimum trainee salary in favour of £6 per hour
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is set to abolish the minimum wage requirement for trainee solicitors in favour of the national minimum wage of £6.08 per hour. The change, which was voted in today (16 May) by the SRA board, will come into effect from 1 August 2014. After that date, employers will only be required to pay trainees the main rate for employees under the national minimum wage regulations.
May 16, 2012 at 12:24 PM
2 minute read
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is set to abolish the minimum wage requirement for trainee solicitors in favour of the national minimum wage of £6.08 per hour.
The change, which was voted in today (16 May) by the SRA board, will come into effect from 1 August 2014. After that date, employers will only be required to pay trainees the main rate for employees under the national minimum wage regulations.
After a consultation which began in January, the SRA board agreed today (16 May) that setting a minimum salary level for trainees above the national minimum wage was not in the public interest – but in order to minimise the impact, the change will be deferred for two years' time.
The current minimum salary levels for trainees are set at £18,590 in central London and £16,650 outside, with the rates frozen in the past two years to reflect the economic downturn.
The policy, which dates back to 1982, was designed to protect budding lawyers from being exploited and to encourage high calibre graduates into the profession, before the Labour Government's introduction of the national minimum wage in 1998.
SRA executive director Samantha Barrass (pictured) said: "We wish to thank everyone who responded to the consultation, and those who took part in the stakeholder meetings, focus groups, and the online survey for their views and information that were taken into account in reaching this decision.
"This decision was based on an objective consideration of very full and detailed evidence gathered through a variety of sources."
There were 130 responses to the consultation, while around 60 individuals attended nine focus group sessions across four cities, with more than 1,300 individuals responding to the SRA's online survey.
The SRA had not reviewed the minimum wage requirement since taking over responsibility for prescribing the compulsory rate from the Law Society in 2007.
This content has been archived.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 AllWickard AI Partners With Law School to Bring Legal AI Training to Ethiopia
What Firms in Australia Are Doing to Attract and Retain Lawyers in a Competitive Market
7 minute readReport: Toronto Law Students Did Not Breach School's Code of Conduct With Pro-Palestinian Letter
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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