UK Gender Pay Gap Prompts Two Firms To Review Parent Policies
Ashurst and Hogan Lovells say the gender pay gap debate has helped open discussion on much wider issues.
April 08, 2019 at 04:00 AM
4 minute read
Ashurst and Hogan Lovells are reviewing policies designed to change attitudes and aid women's success in the workplace, following the release of their latest gender pay gap figures.
Ashurst is reviewing its U.K. shared parental leave and global maternity policies, with the aim of increasing the number of men taking part in the U.K. scheme and having a more integrated global maternity programme.
Hogan Lovells is examining the transition arrangements for those returning from parental leave and is considering the potential impact of work allocation.
At Ashurst, only half the men who have taken paternity leave have also engaged in the firm's shared parental leave programme.
Ashurst head of HR for EMEA and U.S. Claire Townshend told Legal Week the firm wants to "prompt an increase" in those taking part in the scheme, and address any concerns people may have about doing so.
She said: "Wider research has shown that men feel if they take part it may impact on their career prospects – we want it to be normalised in the future and need to engage more with our people to encourage that."
The firm is also reviewing its global maternity policy and aims to offer a more standardised approach across its international offices.
Townshend said: "The firm operates across lots of different countries and areas, where there are many different statutory requirements and policies in practice. We think there is a minimum maternity leave period that we should be offering everywhere globally – not everywhere can be exactly the same of course, but we want to improve maternity leave policies where we can."
She added one particular area of focus for an improved offering is in the firm's Asian offices.
Following discussion and with the approval of Ashurst's executive team, the firm hopes to implement changes to the policies by the first quarter of next year.
Townshend said gender pay gap reporting has helped move the firm's conversations forward.
"Gender pay gap reporting has been a tool for great conversations internally – in the legal sector with a higher proportion of partners being male, having a conversation in the public domain is great. As we try to drive this agenda of ensuring equality, it's very helpful," she said.
Ashurst's gender pay gap figures, released this week (April 4), showed a mean partner gender pay of 15.7 percent last year. It was the first time the firm has split out these figures.
Its mean gender pay gap for legal employees improved on the previous year, dropping to 10 percent in 2018 from 16.4 percent, and the mean bonus pay gap also shrank, to 42.1 percent from 62.6 percent.
Hogan Lovells states within its gender pay gap report that it is currently undertaking a review of the "transition arrangements for returnees, as well as considering the potential impact of work allocation".
While the firm declined to give further details, one female partner at the firm said: "It's about communication and understanding what the pressure points are. Lots of our people have flexed their hours to fit around childcare and we have to bear that in mind. Little things can help – like avoiding regular calls that clash with nursery pickups, for example."
She added: "Flexibility is a two-way thing – you need the lawyer to be prepared to be flexible as well – and a lot of that comes down to having a proper, open conversation about what will work."
Last year, Hogan Lovells paid its female partners more on average for the second year running. But when partner figures were combined with employee numbers, the gender pay gap was 12.3 percent in favour of men and the median gap was 27.3 percent.
The firm was one of few to expand its reporting to include ethnicity figures. The mean ethnicity pay gap for combined employees and partners was 46.3 percent, with a median gap of 33.2 percent. For partners, the mean ethnicity pay gap was 12.8 percent.
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
- 1Tuesday Newspaper
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-85
- 3Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 4Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 5Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
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