For two years running, equal opportunities have been the dominant theme of press coverage of the solicitors annual conference.

Last year's President, Martin Mears, used his keynote speech in 1995 to attack the 'racket' of the 'discrimination industry'.

This year, President Tony Girling used his speech to send a different message.

He announced the findings of a Law Society commissioned survey showing that women solicitors at all levels are paid markedly less than comparable male colleagues (see [1996] Gazette, 16 October, 5).

The President said: 'I will not be satisfied until there is parity not just of opportunity between male and female solicitors but parity of earnings.

How can we, as a profession that devotes itself to serving justice, accept anything less?'However, some women solicitors are less than delighted: although the rhetoric emanating from the top at Chancery Lane has changed, they claim that everything else stays the same.

'Martin Mears just had the courage to say what a lot of the others think,' said one.

Indeed, at the local law society presidents and secretaries meeting the day before Mr Girling's speech, a delegate who condemned the Society's meddling in equal opportunities issues was warmly applauded.And, apart from drawing attention to the issue with surveys and sending out guidance, there is little the Society can do about those firms that are determined to carry on discriminating.The Association of Women Solicitors (AWS), -- which welcomes the survey's statistical proof of what it says it has always known anecdotally, -- is aware of the limitations.

It has long been keen to bring to book firms that discriminate against women on maternity leave; the EOC supports this initiative.The AWS has seen many instances of discrimination of the crassest kind.

One example was that of a woman who came back to a firm after maternity leave to find that she had no clients and no desk.

Despite this, -- no one has yet been willing to put herself forward at an industrial tribunal hearing.

'Women are worried about their future career in the law if they cause a big stir,' says AWS chair Alison Parkinson.

And there is no reason to suppose women will be any more willing to go out on a limb over the issue of salaries, she says.The two strongest weapons against discrimination are 'to hit the firms where it hurts in the pocket' and bad publicity, she believes.

No maternity case has gone to a hearing but offending firms have already paid out 'several large amounts' to settle such cases, she says.

The offending firms have been big City firms but they have been spared the ignominy of having their dirty linen aired in public because of confidentiality clauses in the terms of the settlement.But suing, or the threat of doing so, is not the only way of punishing firms financially.

Another option recommended by Ms Parkinson is to 'leave and take your clients with you'.

This advice may contain an element of wishful thinking, but in order to provide solutions to these problems the AWS is setting up a mentoring scheme.

Under this scheme, more experienced women solicitors will make themselves available to advise and support their junior colleagues across a range of issues.Some of the areas where AWS members have indicated they would like to benefit from another's experience include: working in different sizes and types of firms; how working in private practice compares with commerce and industry, the public sector or legal education and training; how to cope as a mature entrant; part-time working; returning to work after a career break; and issues like sexual harassment.Although t he scheme is still at an early stage, there has been considerable interest, says Ms Parkinson.

The only surprise is that the AWS has not done it before.

Mentoring has a proven pedigree.

The Society of Black Lawyers and the African Caribbean and Asian Lawyers Group have both been running schemes for some time.

Jerry Garvey, co-ordinator for the ACA, says the group's scheme works well.

ACA mentors are expected to meet a minimum of two students at least three times during the course of the year.

Advice is restricted to professional issues only.The AWS scheme will be different because of the different problems women face.

For a start, contact is likely to be restricted to talking on the phone.

One of the problems likely to come up is the difficulty of juggling work and home commitments -- something which would be compounded by a mentoring scheme that insisted on face-to-face meetings at regular intervals.

For the same reason, it is likely to be harder for AWS mentors to draw hard and fast distinctions between advising on personal and professional issues.Women respondents have said that they would prefer to be linked up with someone who does not practise locally.

This is one reason why exhortations for women to develop unofficial mentors have floundered.

'It's something that has come up at the Law Society's women lawyer conferences.

People are worried that if they go to someone in their own chambers or firm, they'll subsequently find out that they are the best friend of the person being complained about,' says Ms Parkinson.