Trainee minimum abolition ‘will hit women’
Women will be disproportionately affected by the scrapping of the minimum salary for trainees, the Association of Women Solicitors (AWS) said today.
The AWS has added its voice to mounting opposition to the decision taken last week by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. From August 2014, firms may pay trainee solicitors at the national minimum wage of £6.08 an hour - around 40% lower than the current minimum salary.
The Junior Lawyers Division last week branded the decision to deregulate as having ‘effectively slammed the door shut in the faces of those from lower socio-economic groups trying to enter the profession’. Now the AWS has warned that women will be deterred from entering the profession by the reduction of the trainee minimum wage.
AWS chairwoman Joy Van-Cooten and AWS Law Society Council member Sarah Austin said: ‘We are concerned it will discourage able women away from the profession and the result will be a return to a less diverse profession that will reflect practitioners’ means rather than their merit.
‘This can only devalue the professional reputation of solicitors and the public’s perception of the quality of our service.’
They pointed out that women and members of ethnic minorities already make up the majority of trainees who receive the prevailing SRA regulated minimum salary of £16,650 and £18,590 in London.
The SRA has insisted it took all views into account after national roadshows and a survey that attracted 1,300 responses. Board members considered the impact of deregulation on diversity but concluded that a minimum salary was not the best way to attract a wider range of people to the profession.
Comments
HELO!
Do you not see the bigger picture?
The reduction in the minimum wage is just another incremental step towards achieving the ultimate goal of a legal profession owned by privileged white male city boys and run by an army of poorly paid flexible and often part-time FEMALE paralegal/self-secretaries trying to do the job of lawyer. The only positive is that it will be women,possibly ethnic minorities, from the lower socio-economic groups who will be recruited to the mass army of paralegals.
Solicitors too expensive, logical to scrap minimum wage as it is hoped in the short-term that solicitors will do the job for paralegal pay - perhaps female solicitors looking after young children will?
Have you seen the latest quality sisters advert with the camera zooming into a high rise office showing a women, who looks like she is wearing a blue retail uniform, on the computer after dark?
I didn't see a name badge though - which is something! That is the future envisaged - "now open Saturdays".
Female solicitors should identify the bigger picture and fight back. Don't wait for the apathetic male solicitors who have had their head in the sand for years.
Are you a solicitor or a muppet?
Plausible analogy time - again
A plausible analogy may be drawn between this shameful abolition and the wages paid to airline pilots in the USA -about £17,000 / year for trainees. A very responsible job which many strive for and enjoy doing, becomes the excuse to lower salaries and up the exploitation. A documentary film by Michael Moore exposed the fact that the young airline pilots were sharing stories of discontent at their low pay when the plane crashed, killing all on board. All for the preservation of the mighty God, Profit.
This is true. Limitation
This is true. Limitation periods for my clients often expire whilst I spend months complaining to my colleagues about my low pay.
This will only get worse as the pay gets lower.
I think this is horrendous.
I think this is horrendous. As a female law student just finishing my LPC and undertaking interviews and assessments hoping for a trainee job come September I know how hard it is, not least financially to get to this stage. I for one would have thought very carefully about pursuing this career if I was likely to only be paid minimum wage as a trainee. Actually, getting a job in a retail shop might even have appealed more...at least then you get a discount on clothes!
Minimum salary issue
I deplore the decision to abolish the minimum salary. I fought long and hard to retain it when I was on the Council, and the spokesperson for the trainees at that time. For all the reasons that are mentioned by anon, in "Hello". Perhaps except for the argument that it wil impact on women disproportionately. This SRA consists of essentially a cohort of big hitters from City of London law firms. Yes, people who now could manage the training cost will not be able to fund their chosen qualification and will just have to be satisfied with paralegal jobs. But thats OK as they will cost less , and present no threats to a partnership. No demands to be a partner and they will be kept " in their place". it's really shocking. I am surevthatvthe quality of training in law firms will fall too. More firms will take trainees as they will be "affordable" but I am very sure that it is exactly those firms that shouldn't be taking trainees anyway. As a professional trainer on the PSC courses, I hear so many stories of poor supervision, and tuition, and bullying, and much more besides. This will get worse. I dispair of it all; it's so short sighted.
I agree that lowering the
I agree that lowering the wage for trainees will have an adverse effect of equality and diversity within many firms, but I am not so sure that it applies exclusively to women.
Unfortunately, LPC graduates will accept the decrease in pay through lack of options. Most graduates are so dedicated to becoming solicitors that they would rather work for the same wage as a shelf stacker in a supermarket than give up on their career aspirations. Sadly, smaller wages more or less guarantees that low income applicants or those from underprivilaged backgrounds will simply not be able to afford to pursue a legal career, especially when the huge costs of obtaining the qualifications in the first place is considered.
Let not forget either that many firms employ legally qualified staff in paralegal/litigator roles, where the pay is painfully low as well, knowing that they can because the staff want some much needed experience. Those same firms then charge clients and third parties £111.00 per hour and above.
Minimum Wage Affects ALL
Even if at the moment a larger number of women are on the minimum trainee pay level, which may be bad if it's discrimination and not job/lifestyle choice of work area, it is surely just as bad if the removal of the minimum affects men as well, isn't it? This isn't a "women's" issue as such, is it, but one of wealth and privilege regardless of gender yet again trumping equal opportunity in our profession.
Is it also part of the dumbing-down policy to reduce training levels but still allow what we would now see as "non-lawyers" be called "lawyers", the new consumer-focussed customer services "experience". However, if the discrimination cry helps improve minimum pay for all trainees, hey, we're with you!
First we get better grades.....
"First we get better grades then we take their jobs" and then when most of the men have left, the powers that be down grade the job to just another admin job for women - secretary and paralegal/solicitor all rolled into one at a salary less than male solicitors with secretaries once received. The money then goes to another male dominated area outside the law.
Do you really understand what is going on? Scrapping of the minimum wage will affect men and women but is not core issue, it is just part of the transition from the current system to a new system. The vision of the future is retail banking style legal services manned by women wearing smart retail uniforms and name badges managed by a very small number of lawyers on modest middle management salaries. Senior management and the owners of the firms are likely to be male city bankers non-lawyers who will add legal services to their personal portfollio of repossessed residential property on buy-to-lets and farms acquired by them from impoverished farmers.
It is already happening - go to your high street on a saturday. You may see a sandwich board showing a cartoon babe in an office suit with the words above her saying "now open saturdays".
The representation of a lawyer as a cartoon babe speaks volumns.
Wake up before it is too late!
In the same boat
If the future for legal services really is women wearing smart retail uniforms and name badges then at least they have a future in the industry, so in that sense surely this is worse for young men from less advantaged backgrounds.
I completed my GDL and the company I worked for could no longer afford to pay the fees for the LPC. I was then made part-time because of the difficulties the firm was facing. Unfortunately we had to part ways and I was unable to fund the LPC myself. I then moved into cost law and we all know where that is going!
The problem is not the minimum salary, if it will lead to an eventual progression, but the costs of training if it is not funded by an employer. If the profession was truly serious about diversity and bringing in people from all backgrounds then why on earth do they continue to insist on individuals having to pay thousands of pounds for the LPC from their own back pocket. Why not just increase the length of the law degree and give the student the same funding as everyone else i.e. if the student is from a disadvantaged background they will get the normal remissions of fees and funding options etc. that in turn would increase diversity and give fair access to those who are capable academically but not financially.
I agree
with Adam. This is a class issue rather than a men v women issue. Both sexes from modest backgrounds will be prevented from entering the profession at all - wealthy women however will be able to make it provided they have the right contacts. Plus ca change....
As a mature woman who is just
As a mature woman who is just completing her LPC I am horrified by this decision. I wholly agree that this decision will affect women in particular. Having incurred the debts which I have studying for the LLB and now the LPC I am faced with earning less than that if I had never embarked on this journey. As a result I have no intention of attempting to find a training contract and continue my career in the legal profession, instead I plan to go into insurance compliance where my law skills will be appreciated and I will be paid accordingly.
As an Australian-qualified
As an Australian-qualified lawyer living in the UK it might be worth exploring changing the system altogether. The current system in Australia seems to work well as the 'training contract' is a much shorter period of time and can be done along with the LPC equivalent Graduate Diploma and is unpaid!!! This means that for a relatively short time you earn no money but because you are not paid the only competition for training is which firm you go to. Firms are more than happy to have the free labour albeit shortlived but with the constant stream of students no one minds. You still qualify for benefits during this time. The gap in between is therefore very short with many aspiring lawyers supplementing their wages with part time work for only 3-4 months. Most training is completed on the job as a solicitor instead of this limbo paralegal situation. Perhaps if they want to pay peanuts the length of training could be reduced to give people a fighting chance! Something is very wrong, criminal to have qualified people working in support roles not only for them but also for the support staff who can no longer compete.