Why is diversity at the Bar still such a problem?
This year's Stars at the Bar line-up highlights the Bar's perennial diversity struggles
August 17, 2017 at 07:03 AM
6 minute read
Earlier this week Legal Week unveiled its Stars at the Bar 2017, which identified 12 up-and-coming juniors at the commercial Bar, selected after some 300 interviews with instructing solicitors, silks and clerks.
As a sample size, 12 is undeniably small. But what is equally undeniable is the relative lack of diversity among the group, which includes only three women.
The issue of diversity at the Bar is clearly far from new – but that does not mean we should stop talking about the problem. Quite the reverse. Until the numbers start to change, the more the issue is discussed in public, the better.
Speaking to some of the female barristers included in this year's Stars at the Bar lineup, as well as others from previous years, the message is clear: they believe there needs to be more open discussion around the challenge of addressing the lack of equal representation at the Bar.
For all the positives they have enjoyed during their careers at the Bar to date – and there are many – the ongoing lack of diversity is something they believe needs to be tackled head on.
The most recent stats from the Bar Standards Board show that despite half of pupils being female in 2016 and 16% black and minority ethnic (BME), only 36.5% of the overall practising Bar is female, and only 12.7% is BME.
While the numbers are marginally up on the previous year, it's little wonder that some of this year's stars describe the progress as "glacial".
Somewhere along the way, talented women and minorities are getting lost and, by and large, the Bar remains white, male and middle class.
Of course, the Bar is far from the only part of the legal profession failing to get to grips with a problem that extends way beyond law – witness the dearth of women made up to partner across many of the UK's largest law firms this year – but it faces a number of unique challenges.
The majority of the British public do not have a clue how it actually works, TV dramas aside, and its elitist perception means it is in serious need of some demystifying in order to appeal to a wider range of recruits.
Senior female barristers are often named as juniors, even by those admiring their work
But fixing it at a recruitment level does not just mean targeting students at an earlier stage of their education, when there is time for them to work on the grades they will need in order to gain entry. More importantly, it means attracting their interest and making them believe that a career at the Bar is achievable regardless of gender, race or background.
It means reducing, or at the very least explaining, the financial risks associated with joining the Bar, and tackling the disparity between the number taking the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) and those actually securing a pupillage.
As many of those spoken to by Legal Week point out, City training contracts look like the gold-plated ticket to a risk-free legal career compared to entry to the self-employed Bar, where competition is greater and earnings less transparent.
But recruitment is only part of the problem. Retention is every bit as much of an issue. The pressure and stress of a career at the commercial Bar, along with a lack of support and leadership training, are highlighted as reasons for women leaving.
To reduce the problem to a lack of paid maternity leave is too simplistic. Indeed, some of those we spoke to highlight the positives of the Bar for childcare purposes: greater flexibility of practice and working hours, for example. As one comments: "No one cares if you're in chambers or at a school play."
Regardless of whether or not they have children, women and BME barristers need mentoring and positive role models to guide them along the way. They also need to be taken seriously. Our research for Stars at the Bar found more senior female barristers are often named as juniors, even by those admiring their work.
They also need the Bar Council to ensure chambers properly crack down on the sexual discrimination and harassment that some experience, in order to encourage women to stay in the profession and fulfil their potential.
A report published last year by the Bar Standards Board found 40% of respondents said they had suffered harassment at the Bar, with slightly more saying they had experienced discrimination. Anecdotally, some believe the true numbers are likely to be higher.
Past suggestions from the Bar Council that there are now only "isolated incidents" of inappropriate behaviour and that "this is being addressed as the older generation makes way for the next and social attitudes change", are not seen by some as a strong enough response to the issue.
Not that it is all bad. On the plus side, there is widespread acknowledgement that things are improving, with many chambers now taking a more progressive and modern approach and clients now more actively involved in choosing who they instruct.
Mandatory unconscious bias training for chambers, particularly for those involved in recruitment and managing pupils, is touted by some as a potential solution, although few go as far as to suggest things have reached a point where quotas are required.
The appointment of Baroness Hale as the first ever female president of the Supreme Court can only help the cause. This new representation at the very top of the profession now needs to be replicated with role models and mentoring at all levels of the Bar.
And, while there is a clearly a long way to go, there is one thing working in the Bar's favour. According to many of those interviewed for this piece, once you're in, there are few careers as genuinely meritocratic as the Bar – clients want the best minds and the best advocates; they really don't care about their gender or skin colour.
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 AllLatAm Moves: DLA Piper Chile, Brazil’s Demarest Build Out Disputes Muscle
Kingsley Napley and Lord Pannick Spearhead Private Schools' Challenge to Government VAT Policy
Spain Loses Appeal as London Court Rejects Claim of Immunity in €101 Million Arbitral Award Enforcement
Jones Day Expands European Footprint with Global Disputes Partner in Madrid
Trending Stories
- 1Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 2The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 3Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 4For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 5As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
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